[0:30] welcome everybody gonna call the meeting to order we do have a quorum tonight we start with the superintendent reviewing [0:37] the agenda for us so tonight we will start off with the approval of the minutes we have a recognition of mr. [0:44] Chris Holden from a Normandale elementary let them talk more about that little later on we have South View [0:50] middle school we're going to have that award recognized next month we will have hearings for members of the audience we [0:56] have several personnel related and some budget transfers and some certificates [1:03] the board will approve and consent for policies we have policy update for policy 607 608 and and then a public [1:12] discussion regarding revised language for policy 601 and then under action we [1:18] have general obligations school building refunding bonds parameters that John [1:24] Topal report and then policy updates for 606 that'll be there for the board to [1:30] approve and then information we have some staff recognition and upcoming school board news so that will be it for [1:39] all right thank you very much can I get a motion to approve the minutes from the September 16th work session in the [1:45] September 16th regular meeting are there any changes to the minutes all those in [1:52] favor of approving the minutes from September 16th work session in September 16th regular meeting say aye aye any [1:58] opposed motion carried we move on to recognition Chris Holden yes [2:13] so Chris I am not there we go I am NOT one for speaking in French okay but can [2:21] you pronounce that for us please Chris [2:45] and of course Chris with his staff and with his students have made a great [2:51] connection with obviously the country of France with at many different levels to [2:58] mention of the interns that you have working in the program as well as the connections you have with Edina families [3:04] in in France and behind that is your leadership and your motivation and your [3:10] vision for what happens at Normandale every day so when honoring you for that thank you very much [3:16] yeah thank you [Applause] [3:30] next we have hearings from members of the audience we do have a time period at every seven o'clock meeting where we [3:36] welcome comments from the public we request that you keep your comments to three minutes or less if you have [3:43] comments or criticisms regarding an employee a member of our community or [3:48] anybody else we would request that you not make those comments in public in fact they are prohibited and instead if [3:55] you could bring those to the attention of the superintendent that would be great we've got a number of speakers [4:00] tonight so if you hear a prior speaker say exactly what you're going to say perhaps you could shorten what you're [4:06] going to present to the board and with that we oh the other thing is we [4:13] typically do not have board discussion about the comments or questions that are raised during the three minute time [4:18] period with that we will start with Lonnie Scribner welcome and Lonnie is [4:30] one of our retired teachers and former school board members well that saves me some time good evening and thank you for [4:44] taking public comment I'm here to speak strongly against the proposed changes to [4:51] policy 601 as a former member of this school board I'm horrified that this [4:57] policy has apparently been created without any input from administration [5:02] and teachers that it is being brought to discussion without having been properly [5:09] vetted by either the teaching and learning or the policy committee as a [5:14] former gifted resource teacher I fear you may be creating a nightmare for [5:19] building administrators teachers and the very students you want to serve at the [5:25] least I see the policy is unrealistic in its timeframe if these classes are true [5:31] honors classes how are you going to deal with the element of self selection will [5:37] there be sufficient off-ramp off-ramps when students decide they want [5:43] to drop the honors class too much use of off-ramps will overload standard [5:48] sections when there are limited sections to a class it is difficult for students [5:56] to schedule that along with an appropriate level of band choir world [6:02] language and many other electives you may be robbing students of one type of [6:09] choice in order to provide them another choice the descriptions of these courses [6:16] need to be ready by January or February for registration who's going to do that [6:21] the curriculum area that is presently under review has staff members with [6:28] expectations that there will be at least a small budget operating for curriculum [6:35] writing and some capital dollars for capital for materials if you can find [6:44] teachers willing to write these curriculums in this short time frame where will the [6:50] dollars come from to pay them for their time and for the new materials since the [6:59] policy requires that these courses be truly different from the standard level [7:05] that means more materials and more work you added coherence into the definitions [7:13] what you kind of like but that makes the development of these courses even more [7:18] time-consuming because it means that the teachers across the different curriculum areas really should be working together [7:26] the policy requires that teachers of these classes have gifted education [7:31] certification in my experience that is not a common certificate so will [7:38] principals be able to staff these classes as you staff the classes how [7:44] many teachers will have more different classes to teach more preps is more work [7:52] so at worse you may limit student choice overload [7:57] teachers with preparations and actually end up limiting choice and [8:03] differentiation for students as I read the policy many of the parameters are [8:11] items that we should want for all Edina students the repetition of the [8:18] idea that this differentiation cannot take place in standard classrooms I see [8:26] as a slap in the face of many of our excellent staff who do truly differentiate I have provided my full [8:35] comments to all of the board members to save time there are many statements and data in [8:43] the report that will be presented later this evening by board member Garvey that [8:48] report raised more questions in my mind than answers this creditor could you wrap up please [8:54] yes my suggestion is that you postpone these decisions that you look at this [9:00] during regular curriculum review and in the meantime direct administration to [9:06] assess and evaluate the use of differentiation compacted courses and [9:12] the new pathway of embedded honors which may turn out to be the better solutions [9:17] thank you thank you next is Gemma tober so [9:27] we are gonna have a number of speakers so I would ask that people not applause at the end of each speaker Jimmy you're [9:36] up hello my name is Gemma topper and this is my mom jazzy Tober we live in [9:41] Edina we both have dyslexia October is dyslexia Awareness Month and we both [9:47] want to come here to share some information with you all but before I'd [9:53] like to tell you a little bit about my story I attended Concord Elementary [9:58] starting in kindergarten in first grade my mom came to volunteer in a classroom [10:04] listening to kids reading it was then [10:10] that she realized something might not be clicking my mom asked my teacher if she [10:19] thought I might have dyslexia my teacher said no by the end of first grade it was [10:26] clear that something wasn't working I spent the summer before second grade [10:32] with the best orton-gillingham to term is Nelson then second grade is started I [10:39] started and I would be able to get reading help if I scored 40% on my [10:46] second grade math test I got 41 and didn't qualify I also got [10:55] an official dyslexia diagnosis and still [11:03] didn't qualify for a reading help I [11:13] continue to see miss Nelson through second grade and I also started to see a [11:18] therapist because of my anxiety sadness and low self-esteem I was my low [11:31] self-esteem was a lot to handle I love Concord I love my teachers I love my best friends and I miss it all very [11:38] much I wish I didn't have to go to a different school to learn how to read [11:44] and I look forward to being back with my [11:49] school family soon I bet you are saying well that sounds like you can read just [11:55] fine I'm worked very hard after school for for a year and two summers to get [12:03] this level and my parents have spent over fifteen thousand dollars to get me [12:09] here which isn't fair to kids who families who can't afford it thank you [12:27] Texas Josey Tober you don't have to go far to get there so we also wanted to [12:34] share since it's dyslexia Awareness Month we just wanted to share some fun cool facts about dyslexia so with [12:41] dyslexia varies from mild to severe and runs in families one in five people have dyslexia and it is by far the most [12:47] common learning difference a study from Yale found that the number of girls and boys who have dyslexia are about the [12:53] same and dyslexia occurs in people of all backgrounds 50% of the people [12:58] working at NASA have dyslexia they are sought after because of their problem-solving skills and excellent 3d [13:04] and spatial awareness which is great news for Gemma because she wants to be an astronaut when she grows out some of [13:11] the most brilliant minds of our time have been known to have dyslexia Alexander Graham Bell Thomas Edison [13:16] Winston Churchill Benjamin Franklin Mozart John Lennon and our favorite [13:22] dyslexic Albert Einstein some other [13:27] dyslexics with successful careers include Whoopi Goldberg Tom Cruise Tommy Hilfiger Jay Leno Jim Carrey Jennifer [13:33] Aniston Steven Spielberg and Cher and I don't want to miss mentioning several [13:39] Nobel Prize winners most most recently the 2019 Nobel Prize winner in chemistry [13:45] Jacques du Bois chez dyslexic stickily [13:52] have a larger a large spoken vocabulary for their age they tend to be more curious creative and intuitive than [13:58] average dyslexics excel at connecting ideas thinking outside the box and 3d [14:04] thinking they have a strong ability to see the big picture and dyslexia is not [14:09] related to low intelligence dyslexics require extra time and effort for their [14:14] brain to process language information and despite popular belief does dyslexics do not see letters backwards [14:21] and writing letters backwards is something many kids kids do when they are first learning to write research has [14:27] proven that explicit systematic phonics can help rewire the dyslexic brain and help dyslexic kids learn to read [14:36] and last I'd like to tell you the [14:42] dyslexic kids out there you are not done don't quit on yourself every brain [14:49] learns differently you are not alone thank you for listening thank you [15:01] next is Heather teats and after Heather will be Chris Mach West [15:15] welcome a mother of a sixth grader and ninth grader and I've been coming every [15:22] month and we've been talking about AP English data I don't have my little diagrams this month because they're all [15:28] in the presentation that we remember Garvey put together I am here to say we [15:33] still do not have that 2008 through 2011 English AP data I had done a formal data [15:41] request Freedom of Information Act from the administration they said they don't have it I've done a formal request to [15:47] the board to ask the administration to ask the College Board because that is data that is available to us and if [15:52] we're gonna evaluate any curriculum change like not having enriched your [15:58] honors classes in ninth and 10th grade English and using that as our pilot for personalized learning then I would think [16:04] that we would want to look at before data and after data which I've been saying for months okay I'm also we just [16:10] got out of a work session where we talked with the data guy they talked about how you set up and evaluate data [16:15] right and we were talking about like that might be new I'm gonna read a portion of an email I sent to the board [16:21] on June 10th 2016 that I have flipped almost every six months to the current [16:27] board members this was after we'd had the PL consultant in to talk about [16:32] pilots and setting up pilots for PL and one of those would be English language so I said what I didn't get out of last [16:38] night's meeting was what what I was hoping to better understand of how we plan to set up any pilots and how we [16:43] plan to evaluate the effectiveness of any of these programs usually you bring in two consultants because they have [16:49] experienced making the change you were investigating the value of the consultant usually brings to the table is a template slash structure of what [16:55] the major decision points are what the major risks are and how they could be mitigated best practices around how the [17:01] changes could be made and some guidance on how to evaluate the changes you are making to see if they are right for your [17:06] environment when I asked the question last night what have you learned about how to setup the pilots and how to [17:11] evaluate their effectiveness I really didn't get an answer what I heard last night and what the overriding [17:17] Communications have been around personalized learning from the administration is a focus on engagement I understand that student engagement is [17:25] one factor that leads to better academic outcomes but I don't believe it can or should be the primary driver for and/or evaluation [17:32] metric of personalized learning kids be can be engaged by games on the computer [17:37] they can be engaged by reading only books that they want to read they can be engaged by being allowed to work in [17:42] groups with their friends even if the material is not academically appropriate for them none of that insurers or [17:48] equates to them learning and especially does not equate to them being challenged academically part of planning any big [17:55] process change is knowing how you will measure if the change is successful we need to figure out how we will evaluate the effectiveness of any planned program [18:02] changes I would put forth that at least one criteria of success must be academic progress in the past we could have run a [18:09] pilot for the academic year and used the fall and spring map scores to evaluate the growth of those in the pilot versus [18:14] those not or the previous year with the change to only winter map testing we lose the snapshot of what happened in [18:20] that economic year to do those kinds of evaluations so we need to plan in the evaluation criteria and process when [18:26] planning the pilots and changes I would ask that you as members of the board be asking and providing input on how we [18:32] will measure the effectiveness of personalized learning I would ask that at least one criteria be academic progress measured by objective data I [18:39] would ask that we make that success criteria and measurements be explicitly set and monitored for all learners the [18:46] struggling winners the high achieving this historically underrepresented the economically disadvantaged etc so we've [18:53] been talking about this since 2016 we've been talking about using data to evaluate whether these changes are [18:59] effective or not so I'm going to ask one more time our primary pilot for personalized [19:05] learning has been in English 9th and 10th grade putting all kids in one class with same content at the same pace one [19:12] way we'd look at that is tenth grade MCAS scores I think we know those might [19:17] not be what we were hope for the other way is looking at the English AP scores and seeing what has happened to them you [19:24] know the goal of the pilot was to get more kids to take that AP did we achieve that how are we doing in terms of [19:30] percentage of three fours and fives of kids who take it okay we are not doing our governance job if we're not [19:36] evaluating that curriculum change and seeing if it was academically to our students thank you thank you [19:47] after Christmas this sue Sullivan [19:58] welcome thank you my name is Chris Moe [20:04] quest we have two daughters who are juniors ed Edina high school my family's lived in the district for 25 years and [20:11] our children have been part of you down to public schools for the past 15 years beginning when they were two and a half years old [20:17] I'm speaking tonight in support of the policy 601 proposal as a matter of [20:23] choice and options and I would go even further that I don't believe the [20:29] proposal goes far enough in adding choice to the curriculum at Edina high school so that we are truly serving all [20:36] of our students with where they are and what they need we live in a world where [20:42] we're surrounded by choice the old Burger King slogan of have it your way is the norm in nearly every aspect of [20:49] our life what do you want what color what size what options how fast do you want it that's the world that we live in [20:56] except ed Edina high school these are the course catalogues of our neighboring [21:02] districts districts into which an ever-increasing number of Edina [21:07] residents are open and rolling their children these course catalogues have three four five and even six different [21:17] options for students for virtually every course offered here at Edina high school [21:24] most courses have two levels a general course and a flavor of an advanced [21:29] course so in practice what we're saying is that the nine hundred students in my [21:36] daughter's grade fit into one of just two boxes general or advanced to me that [21:45] just doesn't make any logical sense ultimately putting students into one of [21:52] two boxes just can't be good for them for their learning for them to achieve [21:58] their potential whatever that potential may be for their stress levels and [22:03] mental health that I know we talk about more and more every year for their ideas about what they want for their lives for [22:11] recognizing and celebrating their different abilities and for applauding [22:16] their different goals and their different motivations for school as a [22:22] very personal example the current one-size-fits-all approach taken at the high school has not worked for my family [22:30] both of our daughters have truly genuinely enjoyed science in both the [22:36] elementary in the middle school level unfortunately none of the neither of them is proficient at grade level math [22:43] as they were entering Edina high school as freshmen we asked what their science [22:49] options were and we were told they could register for physics or ap physics I [22:56] expressed my concern that if memory serves me physics takes a fair amount of [23:01] math we were told that their options were physics or AP Physics so for their [23:08] freshman year neither of them enrolled in a science course that he done in high school we were told the exact same thing [23:16] their sophomore year two options chemistry or AP chemistry one box or an [23:22] advanced box and they don't fit into either box and neither do a lot of other [23:28] kids so one size fits all Eddy dinah high school except that it doesn't and I [23:36] don't think it has for a long time so I support the proposal with the idea that [23:42] it brings choice and options that are desperately needed and with the hope [23:48] that that choice and those options will be expanded so that we truly serve all [23:53] of our students thank you for the time thank you [23:59] next is sue Sullivan and after sue Sullivan is Maria Luke's hi thanks for [24:09] having me I'm sue Sullivan I have three boys I have a sixth grader at South you [24:16] I have a seventh grader at South you and a sophomore at Edina high school my [24:22] middle child has significant disabilities he's medically fragile he [24:28] is fed by a feeding tube he is nonverbal he has seizures every day he travels in a wheelchair there's a [24:37] lot more but I'm not gonna list it all cuz I don't want to waste my three minutes on that I have never been to a [24:43] school board meeting before but I am the former chair of the Special Education Advisory Council and I am the Southview [24:50] representative this year so what brings [24:56] me to the school board meeting is the budget cuts to special education that [25:01] have been going on now for three years and there's probably more but this is what I've been made of aware of and I [25:11] have some some facts and figures that I just wanted to get on record that [25:17] weren't allowed in the district email that was sent out to all of the special [25:23] education parents that was I wrote an [25:29] email that was supposed to send out to rally the troops to get to this [25:35] strategic plan because a lot of us special education parents don't have time to come here I don't have time to [25:41] come here but I need to be here because our budget just continues to get decimated the last four years the [25:50] population of special education has grown 18 percent this special education [25:55] budget has undergone cutbacks of 300,000 to 400,000 dollars the past three years [26:03] these reductions have impacted staff in the areas of paraprofessional supports [26:08] we lost our assistive technology support for for my son who is nonverbal is essential [26:16] there's no other way he can communicate and that was crushing we have also lost [26:26] an autism and developmental disabilities specialist speech coordinator a speech Assessor the [26:33] 504 coordinator and the Assistant Director of Special Services has her [26:39] position has been cut in half which leads to an overwhelming workload for [26:45] both Cori and Jeff although he probably wouldn't admit it and then also the [26:53] intervention specialists coordinator at the elementary level has been lost as [27:00] well so I'm just here to figure out when [27:06] it's going to end when other programs are going to share the load I know that [27:12] the gifted and talented program has not been cut at least last year there was no [27:18] cuts to it and they have a full-time person I know that the state mandates [27:23] that the school provide all of the supports that are listed in all the IEP [27:30] but the state does not fund those mandates so the general budget has to [27:36] get caught up in that so that's our conundrum and it feels a little bit like [27:42] Lord of the Flies I have two other boys that are in the gifted and talented program and I would gladly give all of [27:48] their services away to get back everything in the special ed budgets [27:54] because these kids need us more than more than you know and I know that the [28:00] the GT services are very important as well but my son can't communicate now [28:06] because we don't have a specialist and the teachers are trying to get creative they're looking online at YouTube videos [28:12] and buying buying devices themselves out of their own pockets okay thank you for [28:19] your your time thank you [Applause] [28:28] after Maria locks will be Lise O'Brian [28:33] my name is Maria Luke so I'm going to Dinah resident with three children in a Dinah Public Schools I wanted to thank [28:40] school board member Amir Garbi for taking the time to write honoring student differences the [28:46] document that he's submitted to the board as part of the discussion around modifying the language of policy 601 [28:52] Amir's paper shows in detail that the choice of honors and enriched courses and secondary grades is popular and [28:59] appreciated this is not a surprise because the student achievement numbers in a Dinah are not normal from a [29:04] statistical standpoint statistically speaking we have a skewed distribution I want to quote some numbers from the 2018 [29:11] GT study 36% of 5th graders in Edina [29:16] post schools a score at the 90th percentile in math math tests 59 percent [29:23] score above the 80th percentile 23% of fifth graders score above the 90th percentile in map reading tests 49 49 % [29:31] score above the 80th percentile I've been attending board meetings and work sessions where speakers state that the [29:37] district does too much for a small group of students that are already successful the numbers above provided that by the [29:43] district's own teaching and learning department make it clear that the amount of students that are well above grade [29:49] level is significant this is not about creating small on economic classes for a few individuals furthermore how is [29:56] providing high quality instruction at different levels benefiting one student at the expense of another how is meeting [30:03] the needs of all learners not a good thing Aamir's paper also stresses the need for honors classes that should be [30:10] high-quality and coherent I attended a work session a few months ago where a senior administration official stated [30:17] that the only difference between enriched classes and regular classes is the students sitting in the seats I took [30:23] this statement to mean that there is no content difference between enriched and regular classes in several previous work [30:29] sessions there were discussions about eliminating enriched courses in middle school because they are not different [30:34] from regular courses if in rich courses are not meeting the needs of advanced learners Edina public [30:40] school should create rigorous honors courses where differences in class curriculum and expectations are [30:45] transparently available for students and families some students will choose the challenge of a harder class even if it [30:51] means more work and potentially a lower grade other students will choose a class that is less challenges because they [30:57] have other commitments that are a priority some students will find themselves in classes that are a bad fit and have to change what's wrong with [31:04] that I attended the August school board session where there was a discussion around the use of embedded honors in [31:10] pre-ap 10 as a Mears document points out the data indicated that many students did not meet their full potential under [31:17] the embedded honors model in pre-ap 10 less than 5% of the 10th grade students [31:23] demonstrated honors level work in contrast approximately 20% of dinah [31:29] juniors earn a 3 4 or 5 in the AP English exam showing a mastery of content above grade level as a mere [31:36] points out these discussions are not new he documents how this discussion has been ongoing since 2012 the paper he [31:43] wrote uses objective data to support its conclusion I hope that board members are data-driven in their decision-making and [31:49] modify policies 601 to better meet the needs of all the dinah students thank you thank you after Lisa Brown will be [32:00] erica austin's right Lise is also a former board member not a teacher though [32:06] I'm not a teacher but I do have letters after my name [32:12] I'm Lisa Bryan I have three children once a graduate from AHS and 2018 I have [32:18] a high schooler in a middle schooler I am here because of hope our children [32:24] came to Edina public schools engaged curious learners loving school and we [32:30] were thrilled when we first started kindergarten first grade in second grade my curious engaged daughter became [32:37] increasingly sad teary and despondent she was decidedly not fine [32:43] parent-teacher conferences we learned that after acknowledging that our daughter had above-average skills and [32:48] above grade level skill that the teacher told us that she did [32:54] not have time to teach our child our family is not alone why did I stay my [33:03] hope is restored in third grade when my child received targeted instruction in math and reading at her level with the teacher did not who did not only have [33:10] the exam for my child and others like her but wasn't had encouraged and supported and fostered her so we stayed [33:18] in middle school my child went to classes and would raise her hand with questions and get responses that we [33:25] might get to that question I'll talk to you later about it that happened continuously another obstacle and [33:33] Domitian a diminishing her curiosity why did we stay our hope was restored we had [33:40] leveled classes in reading in sixth grade in one class in seventh grade one class in eighth grade this was when the [33:47] high school the ninth grade was at the middle school she had an opportunity to take AP government which was a class [33:53] with high standards high rigor an amazing teacher brought discussion home every day so we stayed in high school [34:00] language arts 9 to 10 we began a credit by assessment process in March the previous year before 10th grade we were [34:07] met with a sixteen and I mean sixteen our exam an obstacle after obstacle [34:12] legal letter after legal letter back and forth for seven months before finally [34:19] our daughter was allowed to take a poll almost a month into September she passed [34:25] with an A and got at least I think a four on that test by the way when we met [34:31] with that curriculum review team at the high school my child left saying it feels like they hate us why did we stay [34:39] my hope is restored when I found an English class for my daughter that met her needs and the policy was changed for [34:47] that card it by assessment that no test would be over four hours similar to an AP test I have hoped there I am also not [34:54] alone because for as sue Sullivan mentioned the struggles that we had with [35:00] the system were met every year by people will have kids with special needs with kids with 504 plans every year they [35:08] have to say the same thing over and over again and getting a no from the system I am hopeful today because I've been [35:16] working on this process and having beating my head against the system since 2007 and this is the very first time [35:23] that there is traction for something to move the system I am hopeful today because for every negative experience [35:30] for every spurious obstacle that was placed in the path with every know that [35:36] the system put against us we had an amazing talented teacher who saw that in [35:41] my kid and I know they saw it in others across the board I appreciate them so [35:46] much I here I'm here to support them I am here to say move policy 601 for to [35:52] meet all kids needs other districts do this we can do it too and do not let the [35:59] perfect get in the way of the good for all our students thank you thank you [36:06] after Aaron will be Angela O'Neal welcome Thanks [36:12] hi my name is my name is Erica Astros I'm a diner resident I have three children first of all I'd like to thank [36:19] you Amir for your report that you did I think you did a very thorough and good [36:25] job thank you for your efforts on that I really do appreciate that I actually came here today to give an analogy and a [36:32] little bit different setting and it's regarding differentiation and [36:37] personalized learning I've been a 20 year certified ski instructor and certified both in Europe and in the [36:44] United States and in psia or professional ski instructors of America there are nine different levels [36:50] depending on what your Ski level is and you can move up those levels based on certain metrics as a professional ski [36:58] instructor I've had situations where I've had on a macro level a heterogeneous group of skiers and it's [37:05] very frustrating as an instructor and it's very frustrating even more for this for the students that are in the class [37:10] and here's why you end up with a class and let's say you've got some kids have never been on skis before I called [37:16] never-ever x' and then you have a whole bunch of kids in the middle who are intermediate skiers and you know they're [37:21] perfectly fine they can kind of go up and down the hill on their own and they're you know they're doing that thing and then you've got a few kids that might be racers they ski every day [37:28] they're kind of going on a track maybe they want to go on do something with it anyway when you get a class like that [37:33] you have to go on the bunny hill there's nowhere else you can go because it's unsafe for those never-ever skiers to be [37:40] anywhere else but the bunny hill so here's what it's like for those kids the intermediate kids and the and the [37:46] race or kids when they're on the bunny hill they're bored they don't have anything to do so what I do with the [37:52] racer kids as I'll say take off your skis and go run up and down the bunny hill and get more in shape but that has [37:57] not improved their skiing let's done just making them a little bit stronger the middle level skiers I might say okay [38:03] you go up and go do some free skiing for a while because you're fine you're at like grade level well then I can work [38:09] with the never others to get them to at least to a point where they can get on the hill and get up the mountain okay so [38:15] where we can actually start instruction so my point with this is that it's very [38:23] different as a ski instructor to differentiate when you like this when you've got a heterogeneous situation you [38:30] can't yes you have to differentiate but you're differentiating to the standard of the bunny hell that's what I'm trying [38:36] to get at and so with that said in a [38:42] normal way that ski instructing is is organized is the kids are differentiated [38:48] by first of all by what level that they're in into the different classrooms or the different ski levels so then when [38:55] I go and take a class if I've got never Evers I can teach all those kids and get [39:02] them moved up very very very quickly because I'm not having to worry about all these other kids and I've got a [39:07] group of intermediate kids I can move that group up and I can do a ton of individualized attention personalized [39:14] learning and I'm micro differentiating as opposed to macro differentiating and [39:19] same thing with racers yeah they're gonna pass the test lickety-split no problem they're going to be able to blast ahead of anybody that's there [39:27] because they're talented that area but even a racer can get better and better and better so my point [39:34] is is that if you differentiate by level and you do the personalized learning [39:40] with it micro like micro differentiation and micro personalized learning within [39:47] that unit then you can move every group up everybody goes better it gets up and [39:54] keeps moving up down up up the scale so I just want to say I know it's an analogy but I wanted to talk about it [40:01] this way because it kind of takes it out of the box of no academic you're not done yep and I just want to say that I am in [40:08] support of policy 601 and it's changes and would appreciate that you vote likewise thank you all right thank you [40:15] [Applause] next is Angelo Neel welcome thank you [40:29] hi my name is Angelo Neel and my husband and I live in a diner with our two daughters who are eight and five we are [40:36] a typical Adina family with two well-educated parents with master's degrees who moved to Edina intentionally [40:42] for the schools our oldest daughter is in third grade this year at Concord and our youngest daughter is in kindergarten [40:48] what may seem unusual to you is that my oldest daughter has been a struggling reader she was identified in [40:55] kindergarten as a student who needed additional practice with letter-sound correspondence despite extra help from [41:00] her kindergarten teacher in the classroom she continued to struggle and was significantly behind her peers in [41:06] first grade when most students took off reading my daughter continued to struggle with sounding out basic words [41:12] and had a very difficult time with sight words and spelling words this seemed unusual since she had been read to since [41:20] birth and was surrounded by books and a loving family to support her educational journey what I didn't realize and no [41:26] teacher explained to me is that there is a very common condition called dyslexia that is a that is defined as an [41:34] unexpected difficulty in in learning to read in an individual who has normal to [41:39] above normal intelligence level and is end it affects approximately 20% of the [41:45] population that's one in five people with dyslexia have trouble matching the [41:50] letters they see on the page with the sounds those letters and combination of letters make brain research has [41:56] confirmed that the brains of dyslexic people are wired differently which causes the struggle in reading but [42:01] provides superior capabilities in other areas after my daughter finished first grade I knew we really needed to work [42:08] hard over the summer to make some significant progress and my daughter's reading ability I hired I hired an [42:14] orton-gillingham tutor to work with my daughter twice a week once we started the orton-gillingham tutoring it was amazing it was like light bulbs were [42:22] being turned on for my daughter and and the light was shining exactly where the breakdown was occurring orton-gillingham [42:29] instruction approach is an explicit multi-sensory structured program that has been around since the 1930s an [42:35] example of this type of program is Sande which was introduced into the Adina school [42:41] district three years ago with the reading specialists the district has also moved forward with the sandy essentials classroom program in [42:47] kindergarten and first grade classrooms this year which has been wonderful anyway back to my daughter it was the [42:53] orton-gillingham tutoring see that the reading struggles my daughter was experienced was more than a [42:59] developmental delay which is what her teachers suggested the orton-gillingham treater recommended we have an [43:04] assessment to determine a specific diagnosis to better target her intervention so we did and we found out [43:11] she was dyslexic dyslexia is a language based learning disability kids with dyslexia require instruction in language [43:17] and multi-sensory structures sequential systematic way this is or an [43:23] orton-gillingham Sande method for dis less dyslexia months I wanted to share [43:30] my daughter's story to highlight the struggles that many families are encountering in our district my daughter [43:36] was lucky that we connected with an orton-gillingham tutor and that we were able to start an effective reading [43:41] instruction program by the end of first grade unfortunately that means she lost two years during a critical period in [43:47] reading development and means she is still working on closing the reading gap between herself and her peers the good [43:53] news is that we know how to teach these kids and that the additional the addition of the sandy essentials in our [43:59] K through one classrooms should make a significant improvement in these students journey but we can't stop at [44:05] first grade we need to continue to implement the sandy essentials orton-gillingham based curriculum integrates three through five as well we [44:11] also need to follow the recommendations of the Minnesota Board of Education and implement the letters Training Program letters training as a robust continuing [44:19] education program that is recommended for all K through five teachers and all reading intervention and special [44:25] education teachers the knowledge teachers will gain from this program [44:30] will significantly improve the instruction and knowledge base so that they can more effectively address [44:35] reading struggles in the classroom and so they too can be experts in our schools in providing the most effective [44:40] instruction possible to all of our students mr. Neil could you wrap up please yep we know from science that all kids will be [44:48] better readers and spellers when they are taught using science-based reading strategies taught in the letter program I'm so happy with the work that [44:55] the district is doing and I just want to say thank you thank you that completes [45:08] hearing from members of the audience I want to thank everybody for coming tonight and speaking we do have one [45:14] recognition of staff we have a recognition of Dan Hutchinson who is the general manager for Chartwells we [45:21] received an email that says I'd like to share my deep appreciation for Dan Hutchinson our food service general [45:26] manager from Chartwells Dan is a food planning preparation and customer service superstar thank you Dan next we [45:42] have the consent agenda is there anything that anyone wants removed from the consent agenda could we remove item [45:57] F thank you the paraprofessional super-sub okay so item F is removed it [46:04] will move currently to an action item at the end of consent so anything else to [46:10] remove if not can I get a motion to approve the consent agenda so moved all [46:17] those in favor of approving the consent agenda say aye any opposed motion carried [46:23] next we do have the paraprofessional super-sub action item I think that Sarah [46:29] you wanted to bring a motion to table that until next month I think we do have [46:34] Ryan and Noel come up here and talk about the super sub 4 of an approval [46:42] table okay procedurally we hadn't heard about [46:47] it in HR so I thought we should at least move it to an action item rather than a consent item so I thought if we could [46:52] just get a quick explanation thank you so that I am sorry so I still need a [46:57] motion to approve the pair of professional super-soak so moved all right now we're ready thank you thank [47:12] you so we put I met with Noella as we've had a need at Southview this year we [47:18] have 21 paraprofessionals at Southview this year and we've had a really hard time when they are absent getting those [47:25] positions filled so we pulled up some data and when we put out a call for the [47:31] sub system we only get a sub 40 percent of the time if a paraprofessional is out of the building and many times were able [47:39] to successfully we know some super subs that are often in willing to come to [47:44] Southie and work when we do that our that that's helpful for us because when it actually goes out to the subsystem we [47:51] fifty-three percent of the time we are unfilled so our buildings have a [47:56] premiere or a super sub at the the teacher level and that helps in those instances when teachers are out of the [48:03] building and and unable to get a sub in the system the super subs fill those classes and we can continue on with our [48:10] day with our paraprofessional staffing we don't have that which means that many mornings when we have paraprofessionals [48:17] are unfilled we are left scrambling and shifting staff around to try to meet the needs of students and that puts us in a [48:22] very difficult position with some of our students that have the highest level of need so our hope in having a [48:29] paraprofessional super-sub is that that our building needs our net met every day and we wanted to start the day stressed [48:36] out scrambling around trying to shuffle to make ends meet for all of our students [48:44] any questions all those in favor of approving the paraprofessional super-sub [48:50] say aye aye any opposed motion carried next we moved to [48:56] discussion the first is policy update 607 and 608 Emira great yeah these were [49:05] discussed together with Jeff Jorgensen and our committee meeting talking about changes in in the law or really just [49:13] recognition of some of the laws that also apply added here there are significant updates to the text but [49:19] we've been told a lot of it is is trying to document some of what's already legally binding and also to better [49:26] explain some of the processes we already have the policy 607 is for special [49:32] accommodations and services for students with special needs section 504 and then policy 608 is instructional services [49:38] special education one of the big acknowledgments is the impact that the [49:44] disabilities educational Improvement Act of 2004 has on how we do business which wasn't previously documented and also [49:51] some some definitions that specify who this policy applies to specifically so [49:57] it's worth noting all the additional text that's in there to help clarify [50:03] some of those points we also clarified who the coordinator is whether it be the [50:09] director or the directors designee and what work that coordinator will do and [50:15] just for reference some of the conversation there had to do with whether 504 is when you do review are do [50:22] they have an overarching trajectory for example you're trying to have an eye towards easing off supports for some [50:28] parents want their children more ready for the next level for supports would suddenly end after graduation or not and [50:35] then also the question of should we provide be offering 504 accommodations [50:42] for students who may not show signs of well say signs of needing them in the [50:48] classroom but we get reports from families that they're there holding it together during the school day but are there meltdowns at home and what can we [50:54] do as a system - to try to better respond to the whole student and bring some of those [51:00] accommodations into their school day with a perspective on the students day in life outside of school as well we did [51:09] ask if there's anything we can do to respond to concerns about fidelity with [51:15] regard to accommodations and modifications which isn't a policy change but it's sort of the bigger [51:20] question of how are we serving students and we heard all the things that [51:25] actually he said in different forms as well about some of the great work that's that's ongoing some the great work [51:31] that's new this year for example a bigger emphasis during professional development on what it means to to [51:38] respond to some of the accommodations or the modifications and how teachers can be supportive and really our our [51:43] district office and the system's level support provided to teachers to best meet those needs and what that looks [51:50] like this year kind of a corrective action planning model I think was the phrase you'd used and getting more [51:58] support pushed out to where teachers are as well as more coordination between special education providers and the [52:04] mainstreaming teachers so in all it was a it was a good conversation with really [52:10] just a check-in point because you've had these conversations with various leaders in the district previously and there are more coming up but this was the policy [52:17] check in on that type of work so with both of these is that is the language [52:24] based - based in statute and to make it aligned with actual state statute and [52:31] then my second question is does the language make sure that we are accommodating the the needs of a 504 and [52:39] that they're not just getting you know stuck in a drawer and we're not paying attention to them so I'm just wondering how how the language signs up for the [52:46] statue issue but then also the enforcement issue of actually making the accommodations yeah so I can answer that [52:54] question the the language is obviously brought in alignment with statute it was [52:59] already in a line with statute what we did who has actually add additional definitions and clarifications that made [53:04] it much more understandable from the public's perspective in terms of both how to recognize if [53:10] your student is a knowledgeable student under 504 and also talks about how to access those those services so it's it's [53:18] giving better definitions it gives it gives a solid definition especially under 608 when we talk about special [53:23] education and specialized instruction I would really define what that that instruction looks like how is it [53:30] specialized and then we also again define the populations that are eligible to receive that service there's many [53:36] things that are not in policy which is about implementation of the policy itself that are more in line with the [53:42] 504 manual or with the special education handbook I guess the reason I was asking [53:49] is particularly like on the 504 s how does a parent and their student then [53:55] what steps do they have to go through if accommodations aren't being made whereas [54:01] not not that that doesn't happen to parents with IEP s as well but I was curious if we were gonna have any [54:06] language that would help parents through that process but it sounds like possibly in the handbook we have some more that [54:12] as well yes but the handbook is is much more deliberate in terms of procedural [54:18] elements so then this was a major change from our last revision back in 2016 [54:24] where we had a lot of the procedural elements right in the policy now they're in the 504 manual and 504 manuals much [54:30] much easier to revise because it's not part of policy so procedurally were able to make accommodations and make those [54:36] changes is necessary any other question [54:43] on those policies all right so we next move on to a [54:49] discussion of revised policy 601 Mary you're on lead again great yeah I want [54:57] to start by going down we did this out of work session but going down policies so wants with the changes to clarify [55:03] what's in there and what's not in there because I've heard I've heard some some [55:08] concerned or some excitement about things that are not in there and some concern about things that are lacking that are in there so take a minute to [55:14] run it down it there is a definitional edition about the word coherent we had [55:20] some definitions in there what do we mean when we say academic standards what do we mean when we say curriculum what [55:25] do you mean when we say educational competencies and to that list a fourth one now coherent meaning well organized [55:31] and purposefully designed to facilitate learning and free of academic gaps and needless repetitions and the third area [55:38] is aligned across lessons courses subject areas and grade levels which is something the district has endeavor to [55:45] do at all levels at all times to try to have coherent and comprehensive educational programs I mean that's kind [55:51] of our baseline so I wouldn't say that this is something that's new and it's [55:56] impossible and it rocks the district I think this is actually documenting something we already value just like [56:02] some of those other definitions try to clarify what we mean we use words that have more of a technical meaning that [56:08] might be appreciated especially if they're words that are otherwise used in conversation all right scrolling down [56:15] there are some additions and see there's a big reference to various aspects of of [56:23] a great program that are listed here that actually were created by the district office with regard to overall [56:30] k12 talent development pathways and what great classes should look like and so frankly robbing some of those [56:36] descriptions just to clarify that we're not asking for a class to be created that doesn't involve elements of those [56:42] so nothing would likely be able to contain every element for a given class or subject or at least maybe I'm setting [56:50] a low bar maybe somebody can do it but that's a lot to ask elements of enrichment with the various definitions and explanations of what enrichment is [56:59] Advanced Learning accelerated learning of real-world applications so really just kind of nodding along to some of those elements that are valued in a high [57:06] quality class any any class which we would design with quality and mine all [57:12] right going to the elementary schools the elementary schools really are not affected by this policy with one small [57:18] exception it's what it's doing though is documenting some of the assurances we've had about how we do education with [57:28] regard to advanced academics there's been concern going back years that something was always on the verge of [57:33] being ended are you going to fold the program back in have you decided that advanced academics is is not the way [57:39] we're gonna do business in fact a few years ago that concern came to a head and we first got the assurance that no [57:45] that's that's not on the horizon now and we received that assurance again this year you know it's hard to know what [57:50] horizon is it two years I think it's definitely not on the horizon in two years but in the future you would of course want to do what you think makes [57:58] the most sense for students but by codifying that assurance here it makes any sort of change to it have to go [58:05] through a board have to get a vote for an amendment all right the one exception I mentioned is this the way we do [58:12] advanced academics is with the pullout instructors who are qualified in I want to clarify it wasn't a particular [58:17] qualification that's mentioned but just the idea that there's some sense of qualification which isn't defined here [58:23] it's frankly to be up to the educational leaders what they think is is worth [58:29] somebody holding that position what it what do you look for when you hire somebody what do you look for when you keep them so just a recognition that [58:36] there's some sort of qualification but there was a school a couple years ago that said we'd rather not be doing [58:42] pull-ups and they had some reasons had some reason to his face and so that would be a school that's affected with regard to whether or not advanced [58:47] academics returned to a pullout their how or not that would be that would be [58:52] the school that's affected by this policy all right the secondary schools [58:59] there was a reference to two advanced pathways in math we currently have math [59:06] classes that are tailored to what a child needs more so than any other subject and that's just true nationally it's how math is typically taught [59:12] you get algebra in the grade where you're ready for algebra it might be earlier than some it might be earlier [59:18] than we did 10 years ago but now it's the norm or it might be after you've you've mastered some of the underlying [59:23] topics that's currently how we do it there has been some some concern or talk of is there even a hint of somebody [59:30] saying you know what we can just put seventh graders together and somehow have some learn algebra some learning [59:38] geometry and whatever the deal is in the same room with the value being that the seventh graders are a social cohort and [59:43] they need to see the other that is not something that's been explicitly proposed in our districts so having it codified adhere that these classes are [59:50] separate is really just again documenting the way we do it the way we [59:55] think it's working the assurance is that it's not something that's on the change on the horizon all right and we start [1:00:02] going towards the middle school honors classes so that is a new word honors [1:00:07] class we use typically use enriched in this district and that's where the inconsistencies are when do you get an [1:00:12] enriched class for a subject for example social studies it's only seventh grade [1:00:18] not six not eighth the word honors here may be throwing people off because it's [1:00:24] not to say that there's going to be an additional class in addition to being rich it's really referring to the current procedure which is let students [1:00:31] opt in at certain times so that enriched class is what we're talking about now changing sort of the name and I guess [1:00:39] I'm going to take a pause here to editorialize it's sort of instead of reading down just directly it gets at [1:00:44] this this question of is it really different is there a different pace is [1:00:50] there a different curriculum frankly I'm hearing mixed messages I have some [1:00:55] parents say the middle schools in a diner are awesome if you need enriched they have enriched and it's fits your [1:01:01] need and I have other parents saying that they keep hearing a teacher or a [1:01:07] principal say why do we even have these classes they're not that different the difference is who registers forum they [1:01:14] might make you do something extra maybe a fourth paper at a certain level instead of a third and that's an example [1:01:20] but the I'm hearing conflicting messages about are they that different some are adamant that [1:01:25] something like this isn't necessary because they are radically different and others say we don't even need enriched classes because not that different which [1:01:31] is something we've heard tonight and so trying to throw out a word that doesn't [1:01:36] seem to carry the meaning that maybe it should and so honors is is looking [1:01:43] particularly at something that is very difficult for a teacher to differentiate and that is pace and also what [1:01:49] curriculum you're offering very difficult to differentiate the curriculum are offering so those are the two words that in my mind go to this now [1:01:57] that might not be something that's radically different say for example the ones that are offered seventh grade social studies may not be radically [1:02:03] different in the fall but as you have an eye towards continuous improvement the lens for where should we going how do we [1:02:09] offer this course what should be improved over the next year would be more towards a distinction in curriculum [1:02:16] and pace that's appropriate for the students who who need that sort of an extra challenge would not be appropriate [1:02:23] generally even for students who are competent who are proficient at grade level and who are on a college-bound [1:02:29] track and who need challenging growth okay so that's why we have the no offense to the name honors there it is [1:02:37] it also does say self identify which means students would select with input [1:02:42] from their families of course that registration as we currently have those are for the language arts science and [1:02:48] social studies courses which are the core - math which we've already talked about alright and then you get to the [1:02:54] high school high school does have a lot of choice almost everywhere and it to a point that was brought up tonight it is [1:03:00] largely to options it is saying enriched or the standard in some sciences or it's [1:03:09] the standard versus AP especially in social studies in the later Language [1:03:14] Arts years this isn't trying to add more to that at this point this is saying [1:03:20] that we have typically two choices but not everywhere a couple of places in [1:03:25] particular the ninth and tenth grade language arts where we we'd be are [1:03:31] asking for that course to be created it's one of the eight courses that would be created and that was the the missing [1:03:37] rich for the core class is in middle school and then those two in the high school that brings it up to [1:03:43] seven the eighth is precalculus which we used to have as a district and [1:03:48] precalculus is an interesting thing because it leads for the first time a [1:03:53] long time in some of these math curriculum to a very different level of challenge directly do you want calculus a B or Calculus BC and also you get a [1:04:02] bigger say spread of Ages and see [1:04:07] aptitudes or interest in math because some students are taking pre a couple is quite young and they've always gotten it [1:04:13] quick whereas others it might be their culminating high school math class it might be that that's their push is their [1:04:18] senior year or fourth year math class you don't need it to graduate but you know you should have you should have [1:04:24] growth you should have a passion for these types of challenges and also you want to show a college that you're interested in a challenging senior year [1:04:30] so it's a very different set of of needs in a math class which we've kind of [1:04:36] valued the math we have so far is already being differentiated enough in course options but precalculus bringing [1:04:42] that back is the exception many other courses that are listed there we already have the the 90 great year physics has [1:04:50] two options chemistry has two options biology the language ones that are listed already have something called an [1:04:55] drenched enriched whereas the ones that are not listed don't so we're not actually trying to create every new [1:05:01] course it's only eight that are not currently listed and those are the core ones and the Precog someone Martin even [1:05:07] heavily utilized the sociology one didn't run great you know that students register for what fits for him on the [1:05:14] very last point was a nod to the world language needs that we shouldn't have [1:05:20] students forced into say Spanish one just because they hadn't yet [1:05:25] accomplished that class without regard to their proficiency it means it's [1:05:31] rather common sense but it's a conversation we've had before a question of how do you know a students proficiency and how do you offer that [1:05:37] need and so it's not exactly a class proposal but it's more of a placement issue that's put here all of them with [1:05:44] regard to those types of needs you know that's not everything there's a say in fact most of you have other things that [1:05:50] are worth saying and I think a lot of the points that been brought up by people whether they favorite or don't favor it are our valid [1:05:58] and reasonable and deserve to be heard so with that I think I'll just give some other people the chance to express some [1:06:03] of their thinking on this yeah before we start getting too far into the [1:06:09] discussion on this I just wanted to personally state to my fellow board members and the public how much I [1:06:14] strenuously object to discussing this policy tonight I firmly believe if we're going to have a discussion about how to [1:06:21] best educate our gifted in advanced learners first of all this cannot be done in a bubble without a broader [1:06:26] discussion about how to utilize district resources appropriate to meet all learner needs second we should not be [1:06:33] having the discussion without educators and administrators and subject matters [1:06:38] not alone as a board third we should have done research on this matter we should have all relevant data available [1:06:45] and we should know the cost of implementing such a policy anything other than this I feel as an abdication [1:06:50] of our duties as a school board member furthermore by discussing this policy and isolation without even having the [1:06:56] courtesy to ask our educators and administrators to be part of this discussion or ask their input since the [1:07:02] message to all of our educators and administrators that our board is dismissive of their opinions and their [1:07:08] professional advice and expertise is not relevant or valued in our district I'm especially frustrated because of the [1:07:15] convoluted process that has been undertaken as opposed to taking a strategic look at how the best meet all [1:07:20] learner needs as part of our strategic plan including those that are advanced and gifted we are looking at to how to [1:07:27] force through a singular tactic this is inefficient and it's fiscally irresponsible and the policy put forth [1:07:33] is very simplistic and myopic on how to educate advanced learners and I think we [1:07:39] owe all our learners but especially our advanced and gifted learners we're trying to target in this policy more [1:07:46] effort than what is being put in this policy that being said since we're discussing this prematurely with no [1:07:51] relevant information I have multiple questions about the policy construct the written language the policy [1:07:57] implementation data analysis strategic objectives financials and best practices around educating gifted and advanced [1:08:04] learners I didn't know if you were gonna launch [1:08:09] into your questions but so before you do so I will note that I agree with the sentiments that Erica has expressed I [1:08:16] think that the idea of having this discussion without having gotten the input from educators does not make sense [1:08:25] to me also it seems to me that at the last work session what we said was here are a series of questions that the [1:08:31] committee was supposed to respond to and I don't see answers to those questions we talked about putting together a panel [1:08:38] the board appeared to agree on putting together a panel but yet we're good and [1:08:43] the idea of the panel is to actually have information from which we could base a decision but yet where we're [1:08:49] having a discussion without a panel and without waiting for a panel and I do [1:08:55] have questions also based upon the substance of what you're proposing but I [1:09:00] just wanted to know if my concurrence do [1:09:08] you want to go into any of your questions Erica or Amir did you want to respond to a little bit of that sure no [1:09:14] I think this is it's a misunderstanding to say that this is a discussion that's premature in fact it's a discussion that's that's almost a decade old when [1:09:22] we first started to say let's start collapsing these enriched classes and we actually have lost three of them without [1:09:29] without a report on how that's gone without metrics showing us you know who [1:09:34] do you think that should expand in fact did almost expanded to collapse in other things clap seeing folding back in [1:09:42] advanced academic switch may or may not even be a thing it may just be that you say we need to just end that particular [1:09:48] program and the language is folding in you know there are other programs that have gotten support from this board such [1:09:55] as embedded honors that I would say didn't meet a single one of your criteria and weren't met with 50 [1:10:02] questions that a hesitation in fact there's still a push now to give embed honors a three to five year pilot period [1:10:07] so you can really collect some data but let's just look at that a minute that's an idea that came up out of nowhere as a [1:10:15] stopgap measure for this very idea embedded honours and the 10th grade language arts was not a thing having two [1:10:23] different courses was the idea at the time we were rewriting overhauling that course and we were told by a board [1:10:34] member and accepted as a whole without research it's abroad to no occasions we [1:10:40] were asking for two different levels and told you no you can't you can't redesign [1:10:45] a course and have the honors version or enriched version in the same year go ahead and wait a year at a minimum but [1:10:53] sort of as a consolation to the notion what about embedded honours in the spring semester it's two notes Falls [1:10:59] coming up this was summer in the spring semester as a way to to offer what [1:11:05] students might need in fact we were so enamored with the idea that in the fall [1:11:12] this was not last year in the fall we waited to even get that second class [1:11:17] going waited 12 months to hear the report of how it went and granted [1:11:22] there's still some development to that we heard that it took longer to get off the ground and that it's continuing to progress and I think that's fantastic [1:11:29] but here we are now twelve months after that and suddenly embedded honors is is [1:11:36] this reason worth delaying for five to six years for a pilot program when when [1:11:42] really it was only a stopgap consolation prize to begin with and if if we talk [1:11:47] about the research the big push seems to be a different pace and a different [1:11:52] curriculum which embedded honors was not that was sort of a way to recognize [1:11:58] exceptional work from people who had the same pace and same curriculum which really doesn't fit the bill and so I [1:12:05] just want to push back against the idea that this is that this is new and that this type of pushback is just related to [1:12:14] the idea of how we do business with new ideas when it really it's it's isolated [1:12:20] to this particular push to fill in the gaps we're in rich Cris courses are currently offered in addition to [1:12:26] stopping the dismantling of them so tonight ask you when did we have a commerce when we have a work session to discuss [1:12:33] this that included administrators teachers anyone that had any relevant [1:12:40] information about gifted programs when did we have that conversation what I'm what I'm referring to when I talk about [1:12:46] when the whole board had this conversation cuz the whole board has talked about additional classes many times we started in addition to English [1:12:53] 10 it started with a look across the secondary in particular with our strategic planning conversations where [1:13:00] there seven of us and the superintendent were in consultation we asked about what should be our strategic direction you [1:13:07] know where are we off especially when you look at strengths and weaknesses what other what other schools and [1:13:13] districts are offering compared to what we're offering what people seem to want what our gifted and talented study said [1:13:18] what input from parents so I'll ask you well I want to finish this talk what they said and so then we we took some of [1:13:25] the information and we kind of high leveled it decided what detail to provide remember we wanted to provide a [1:13:31] specific question of what do you think of honors in the secondary core at a time we were bringing in administrators [1:13:37] and teachers from across the district in this very building and we had some pushback against not from not for most [1:13:46] of us but enough pushback to say that's not get their opinion here let's let's wait and see if it's their idea and I [1:13:52] think that was a misguided notion because it's not an idea that hasn't been considered in fact I'd say there's [1:13:59] it's frowned upon and that's why there's a push to get rid of some of these enriched classes it's frowned upon [1:14:05] especially when you have administrators saying they're the same thing it's just different students enrolled in them so I [1:14:11] would argue that theory the input has been ongoing from everybody who's a [1:14:17] stakeholder in this in particular how did we ever lose those enriched classes that was a grassroots lawsuit that was a [1:14:24] mere you're talking that was teaching well there was teacher input please [1:14:30] you're talking very globally and I will agree that we've talked about this globally multiple times I'm talking [1:14:37] specifically about the policy you're putting forth this specific policy [1:14:44] when as a full board have we had an opportunity to discuss this policy with [1:14:49] teachers and administrators in one room together can I actually say something [1:15:01] first which is so Amira I've been on the board for many years and I was here during the time period where the concept [1:15:07] of looking at enriched classes and and should we scale them back I've never been in favor of scaling back the [1:15:13] enriched classes and I was part of the group that said you know if we're gonna look at this that's not something that [1:15:20] the board is in favor of so I want that particularly clear in terms of the [1:15:25] embedded honours it was not an idea thrown out by a board member I don't really know where that came from this was a proposal made by the high school [1:15:32] teachers to the school board and but by the principal because I asked yeah I [1:15:38] even said I said is this what your proposal is to us or is this something that we're coming up with and and Antibes Eden said this is our proposal [1:15:44] to the school board so I just want to clarify a little bit of the background [1:15:50] facts here because I disagree with some some of your characterizations and I'm [1:15:56] not aware that there's a movement to eliminate enriched classes throughout the district to the extent that you [1:16:03] think there's that movement I don't agree with in eliminating enriched classes throughout the district and if [1:16:09] that's the the question then we could simply state that we're not in favor of removing enriched classes but that's not [1:16:15] what's happening here you're moving the ball in the in a completely further direction so just with that note and oh [1:16:22] and you can go ahead Thanks in an effort to try to not have to go [1:16:32] through every single question what I've done is I've created a little slideshow [1:16:39] so Zack are you back there the question I have on the slideshow which I heard [1:16:45] about just about a minute before this started which is do you have copies for the public because if you don't I don't [1:16:53] think we can go through a slide show our obligation is that whenever we have material we're supposed to have them available [1:16:59] for the public like that we have materials that we were just given in the session before that aren't even in the [1:17:05] board book can will be put in tomorrow so that is not uncommon practice so when we have a slideshow at these meetings [1:17:12] they're usually available in the back for people no they're not there's an agenda in the back there's not the whole [1:17:20] deck that our whole packet you can look at the agenda but if you want to look at the packet you have to have an electronic device to do that so what [1:17:31] what has not been posted that we're looking at other than this slideshow things get walking I'm just trying to [1:17:38] point out procedurally we walk things in we were handed a chart tonight in the work session that was not in the packet [1:17:45] and will be put in the packet tomorrow morning I think we I don't see how we [1:17:50] can pick and choose what things would get walked in and not walked in so my [1:17:56] understanding has always been that for regular meetings that if we're going to have things walked in we're supposed to [1:18:02] have a copy available for the public that's all I'm saying I'm not aware of a different rule so every time something's [1:18:10] been put in our green folder before meeting there's been a pile at the back of the room that everybody could see so [1:18:15] my understanding is that there is always written copies available for the public yes if I'm wrong I thank you for [1:18:21] following the songs technicality it's not accurate Lenny but I have no objection to your going through whatever [1:18:26] you're gonna present I'm not sure that you can have a slideshow that's all I'm [1:18:31] saying I just I raised the question if [1:18:36] someone's got an answer to it go for it [1:18:49] well I don't know the answer to that guys merely I mean I have been you know [1:18:56] people are accusing me of not being procedurally good right or something and I'm I don't I don't want that to happen [1:19:03] if you would like it is a long slideshow so if you want me to read it all we will [1:19:10] be here for a while and I'm happy to read it it will just be my comments and [1:19:15] then we can post them online I I [1:19:22] actually am a little surprised by this but if somebody else can can confirm I [1:19:30] don't really care it's a it's just easier for everyone to see the slideshow [1:19:38] I'm just going to inject that we do walk things in and I think we're we're not you know this stuff happens on a regular [1:19:45] basis that's why we have the little green folder that's why stuff gets put in our green yeah and I just am saying I don't know [1:19:53] and I don't really care and I'll do whatever is the right thing [1:20:02] should we look it up in policy [1:20:18] you're looking should I look well I have this cute up on my computer so I don't really okay so I'll just start throwing [1:20:24] as to it while you guys look it up can I [1:20:33] guess some questions about the content of the policy before we get into the [1:20:42] okay so okay I'll just start I'll start talking I'm going to what I'd like to do [1:20:49] is answer the question through a presentation I'll start with a timeline talk about the strategic plan [1:20:56] development the k-12 talent development framework why now why advanced academic [1:21:01] courses revisions what the actual revisions of policy 601 are and what [1:21:08] they are not so so I'll just start the [1:21:18] timeline of policy 601 actually started back in March of 2017 when the board [1:21:24] approved the gifted and talented study recommendations it continued after that [1:21:32] in 2018 the School Board decided to address GT during the strategic plan [1:21:37] process meanwhile in a parallel process the administration began drafting the [1:21:43] k-12 talent development pathway framework in 2018 and 2019 the board has [1:21:55] been working on the strategic plan over meetings for several months the seven [1:22:00] members of the school board discuss and include the following strategic plan language in two iterations of the [1:22:08] strategic plan including the final draft presented to the public action area one [1:22:14] academic excellence and rigor priority strategy being provide advanced academic [1:22:20] opportunities for all students outcome two honors courses offered in the [1:22:26] secondary core and advanced academics in elementary acts include elementary pullouts with a [1:22:33] qualified teacher administrators building leaders and teachers are [1:22:39] involved in the development of the draft strategic plan which includes the [1:22:45] statement honors courses offered in the secondary core and advanced academics in elementary so honors courses offered in [1:22:53] the secondary core emerged in this process and did not originate in the [1:22:58] policy committee or in isolation of EPs staff what is in policy 601 601 is [1:23:09] educational competencies academic standards instructional curriculum numerous meetings in the summer of 2019 [1:23:16] with proposed revision 2 601 on agenda or otherwise mentioned in order to [1:23:22] clarify how emerging board guidance would be defined in policy as it has [1:23:27] with prior strategic plan initiatives so [1:23:33] there's a timeline of meetings mentioning revision of policy 601 in the [1:23:39] policy committee June 6 at the end of the meeting member Michaelson States his desire to incorporate emerging strat [1:23:46] plan honors courses language in policy 601 requests adding in future agenda [1:23:52] this request and brief conversation was not recorded however a mere I own John [1:24:01] Schultz and Sarah were present at that meeting June 27th board policy meeting [1:24:07] agenda notes Sarah Shanley [1:24:14] right sorry so at the next policy board meeting the notes indicate for possible [1:24:23] discussion at the July 15th meeting committee requests 601 competencies and [1:24:29] then two other policies are noted the committee discusses 601 revision [1:24:35] elements with respect to honors notes refer to 601 with quote returned these [1:24:40] three policies to August committee meeting again present a mere me Owen [1:24:47] John and Sarah not Sarah August 5th policy committee meeting no discussion [1:24:54] notes on the agenda say just holding 601 again all of us are present [1:25:00] August 8th after reviewing the pathways documents an expression and expressing [1:25:06] concern at a prior teaching and learning committee meeting that pathways appears to be in contrast to the draft plan and [1:25:12] is to be addressed in the strategic plan process member Jones asked to have [1:25:18] policy 600 on added to the August 12 work session to sort out the differences [1:25:23] between the two parallel paths to meeting advanced learning opportunities the pathways and strategic plan honors [1:25:31] courses and then our August 9th member [1:25:36] Garvey sends this message to the board during Monday's work session we'll [1:25:42] discuss talent development pathways with Deb and Randy that conversation overlaps [1:25:47] with the proposal to in our strategic plan to offer honors courses in the [1:25:52] secondary core given that overlap I'm sending you this attachment with policy [1:25:58] language that Ellen Owen and I started drafting to put board conversations into [1:26:04] pay onto paper the intent of including this document in our work session [1:26:09] conversation is to identify where emerging board guidelines and current [1:26:15] district initiatives stand in contrast to one another I just want to just pause [1:26:21] on that this this policy has what's intended to bring the [1:26:31] board together to talk about quote the intent of this document in our work [1:26:38] session conversation is to identify where emerging board guidance and current district additions initiatives [1:26:45] stand in contrast to one another on August 12th superintendent Schultz [1:26:52] emails the board that we will not be discussing policy 601 at the August 12th work session what was presented at our [1:27:00] on August 12th was a k-12 Town Pathways framework and in it the framework was [1:27:08] worded quite wrigley it's not clear what the district is actually proposing it appears from the first page that this [1:27:14] framework is quite similar to the goals and delivery of our personalized [1:27:19] learning methods currently used in most of our EPS classrooms it appears to [1:27:25] prescribe and every one in one classroom model for EPS classrooms except for the [1:27:31] accelerated pathway and this is where I'll quote then the enrichment Advanced [1:27:38] Learning and real world application pathways are all quote provided by the classroom teacher end quote [1:27:45] the accelerated path room is quote provided by the elementary talent development teacher or a secondary [1:27:50] instructor with content expertise and experience working with advanced learners so there is no stated [1:27:58] endorsement of maintaining honors or enriched courses in the pathways document working within this framework [1:28:04] the district could eliminate all current elementary GT pullouts and Secondary [1:28:09] Advanced Learning enriched courses the framework appears to eliminate the ability to create any new enriched or [1:28:17] honors courses in secondary unless they're accelerated courses so pathways [1:28:23] appears to be in conflict with a strategic plan outcome to quote honors courses offered in the secondary core [1:28:30] and advanced academics in elementary [1:28:38] so on August 12th at the work ports at the board work session the [1:28:43] administration proposes the k-12 talent development pathways after quite a bit [1:28:49] of discussion the board reaches consensus that the k-12 pathways framework needs to include wording that [1:28:55] maintains GT pullouts in elementary and maintains all currently offered enriched [1:29:00] classes in the secondary and the policy committee members do not bring up draft [1:29:07] revisions to the policy 601 as they had been requested on September 5th policy [1:29:15] committee meeting discussion 600 on notes on the agenda for possible discussion September 16 meetings 601 [1:29:24] educational competencies Ahmir will talk with Lenny about when it can be brought to the full board [1:29:31] again this was the policy committee including John September 9th the school [1:29:37] board work session I'm really sorry that I have to read this this is really gonna be really boring but I'm just telling [1:29:42] there's been enough issues with the procedure that it wasn't vetted or talked about in policy and in fact I'll [1:29:50] just keep reading September 9 school board work session during leadership [1:29:55] updates after quite a bit of discussion the board decides to add revisions to SiC so on to the next work session in [1:30:04] order to allow questions to be presented to the policy committee on September 16th the school board work session [1:30:10] there's much discussion about the process of developing and building 601 forward committee chair and member Fox [1:30:19] comment that they think that nothing was done wrong by the policy committee board members on the policy committee are [1:30:24] directed to respond to 50 questions provided by member Alan Berg and as well [1:30:30] as meet with John about the questions on sceptered September 23rd board policy [1:30:37] committee members meet with John Randi smothers Ville and Bryan bass and [1:30:42] discuss a timeline for presenting the answers to the questions in a review 601 [1:30:49] as part of that discussion we requested that the answers to the quiz nth the [1:30:57] answers to the questions and revisions to policy at the October 14th board meeting for a board vote on November 18 [1:31:04] also because there may be a lack of consensus on responses to questions each [1:31:10] policy committee member will respond to the questions independently the administration does not comment on the [1:31:16] timeline or process and state that they will talk with board chair October 3rd 2019 policy committee [1:31:23] meeting notes on agenda for possible discussion October 14 meeting 601 honors [1:31:30] Ahmir will talk with Lenny about adding as discussion item to October 14th [1:31:36] meeting with John Schultz will Joe and John Schultz will check with Trevor [1:31:42] about serial meeting wait and with that we're referring to the fact that I asked [1:31:48] John for the assessment of the 601 revisions and for 601 to be presented to [1:31:55] the board teaching and learning committee and was told that that could not happen until he talked with Trevor [1:32:02] about whether that was part that was allowable under our open meeting laws so [1:32:14] the rest of my presentation will seek to answer the strategic and governance related questions raised at the [1:32:20] September 16th meeting however many of the questions that were presented to us or of an operational nature or referred [1:32:28] to the development of policy of the of [1:32:35] the strategic plan policy which is [1:32:40] beyond what normally is requested of [1:32:46] outcomes in the strategic plan therefore I have not addressed those operational [1:32:52] questions I've read member Garvey's thorough and thoughtful response to questions I share his perspective and [1:32:58] appreciate his response men of the questions within those in those 50 questions are answered in his [1:33:04] response and he actually addressed much of what I had to say and so in the [1:33:10] interest of time I'll just address a couple of things that I feel are important in 2018 the board did a [1:33:20] conducted and outbound survey and engaged Morris Leatherman to have to [1:33:27] talk to all families of students who have left the district the two most important factors for leaving the [1:33:33] district to attend another public school were meeting learning needs and personal attention by teachers for 15 of the 15 % [1:33:41] of those leaving over the last two years to public schools the most important factor that they mentioned was gifted [1:33:50] and talented programs comparison to other districts was given to us as part [1:33:58] of the GT study and they report that neighboring distance off districts offer [1:34:04] comprehensive elementary programs that explicitly address the needs of advanced learners elementary schools and [1:34:11] neighboring districts offer magnet schools are all day schools within a school bloomington offers a dimensions [1:34:19] program magnet program Eden Prairie offers mosaic magnet program Minnetonka [1:34:24] offers navigator magnet program adjacent districts Minnetonka and Eden Prairie [1:34:30] also offer both magnet programs and GT palates in each elementary school Edina [1:34:36] elementary school offers govern gifted and talented pullouts and math and three [1:34:41] through five and reading four and five there Ahmir also discusses statewide [1:34:50] differences between EHS and other high schools improving advanced learning [1:34:56] opportunities is a proactive financial strategy according to our own district [1:35:02] reports with fifteen percent of residents whose students leave EPS for other public schools they state that the [1:35:09] most important factor is gifted and talented programs for every one of those students who leave they take their state [1:35:17] funding with them to another public school the some of those funds transfers [1:35:22] totals between one hundred and fifty thousand or three hundred thousand depending on our school facts per year [1:35:32] more than enough to fund any curriculum development that may be needed for Advanced Learning Program similar [1:35:39] additional funds flow out of the district each year for each cohort leaving in addition to reversing to [1:35:48] revenue loss due to prior year's departures of students secondary schools [1:35:54] are not at capacity and thus not when this lost revenue is not recovered [1:35:59] through in migration while there are one-time development costs for Honor's programming the [1:36:05] operational costs per pupil of providing honors courses are no greater than operational costs for standard courses [1:36:14] so there's just - there's just a couple other items that I wanted to mention one [1:36:22] was people had asked whether we had done our research and the one study that so I [1:36:29] want to point to a Mears document he adds a whole lot of research but there's a couple other research documents that I [1:36:35] would like the two point anybody - that is interested what 100 years of research [1:36:42] says about the effects of ability grouping and acceleration on k-12 students academic achievement findings [1:36:50] of two second-order meta-analysis as an analysis and this is by saying [1:36:57] Steenburgen who from Northwestern University she's a researcher director [1:37:02] of the center for the center of talent development Michael Michael from Duke University he [1:37:09] is the director of US and assessment at Duke talented identification program and [1:37:15] dr. all Zeus ki ku blouse I'm going to really soon [1:37:21] I mess up her name but anyhow she is the director of the center of talent [1:37:28] development at Northwestern University and professor in the School of Education and public policy it's a long document [1:37:36] very interesting to read it's a findings looking over the last hundred years on the effects of ability [1:37:43] grouping and the conclusion is the preponderance of existing evidence [1:37:48] accumulated over the past century suggests that academic acceleration and most forms of the ability grouping like [1:37:56] cross grade subject grouping and special grouping for gifted students can greatly improve k-12 students academic [1:38:03] achievement there is another research article from [1:38:08] the National Bureau of Economic Research that by Courtney Collins and League on [1:38:14] that states that God I'm getting tired [1:38:22] of reading this I'm really sorry guys I wish I could have just put it up on the board this study has valuable policy [1:38:28] implications well read it does hurting students improve scores an analysis of class composition the study was valuable [1:38:36] policy implications because unlike many school policy variables the composition of classes can often be changed with [1:38:43] little need for increased funds a school with a fixed number of classrooms and teachers can increase the ethic [1:38:49] efficiency by rearranging students in the most effective way possible this [1:38:55] study suggests that creating classes with lower levels of dispersion of score or ability level may improve the [1:39:02] achievement outcomes for students across the score distribution and so another [1:39:10] point that I find very important that is being missed in all of this discussion which is my own personal may be the the [1:39:22] largest reason why I am concerned about of the direction the district is going [1:39:29] and it has happens to do with equity and meeting the needs of all students I want us to look at the experience of [1:39:38] removing enriched l8n at the high school is the single class offering in la 10 [1:39:45] and not at 9 improving the academic performance of all of our students of [1:39:51] students in the middle of students who are our ears behind and how can we tell [1:39:57] is this pilot of of removing enriched la [1:40:03] 10 successful enough at improving outcomes for all students to continue to [1:40:09] become a model framework for k-12 I am concerned because then the results that [1:40:15] I look at since that condensing of LA 9 [1:40:21] and 10 began we have increased our [1:40:27] students that are not proficient and and those are the students in the middle so [1:40:34] all students benefit with instruction targeted to their needs I've had people talk to me that actually [1:40:43] the class that we created is too hard [1:40:48] for their middle their student in the middle and they would like and very much [1:40:55] feel that the district should offer a course that meets their needs which [1:41:00] would be a standard course so reinstating the former enriched class creates an opportunity to increase [1:41:07] instruction time and material directed toward the needs of all students and why [1:41:13] is this critical to discuss now for transparency what direction is the [1:41:19] district moving in I don't know I mean I [1:41:24] had I was at a discussion with staff [1:41:30] over the strategic plan where they mentioned the the outcome of honors and [1:41:42] secondary core and they I overheard them say well I thought we were moving in [1:41:47] different direction so I I want to know this is a this is a discussion for the [1:41:53] board for transparency which is what we wanted to talk about when the board when [1:42:02] Amir asked can we talk about this during the framework I'd like to gain clarity and consensus [1:42:08] but by defining what we mean by core courses in the honors courses in the [1:42:13] secondary core I would like to get everyone aligned the board and the administration and the teachers to be [1:42:21] able to offer increased learning I would also like to be able to offer learning opportunities beginning as early as next [1:42:27] school year there's also urgency to respond to curtains to current realities and also [1:42:37] why is it important now is to inform the time study which may recommend changes [1:42:42] to the 2020 2021 k-8 schedule and also [1:42:48] because the district has an eight-year review cycle for subject curriculum every new course defined in policy 601 [1:42:56] all of them are on the district curriculum review cycle for the current next three years [1:43:02] if revisions to 601 are not dealt with at this time these subject curriculum [1:43:08] areas will not come up for review for another eight to ten years so what what [1:43:17] is revised policy 601 it was the best effort to define and put into policy the [1:43:23] intent of the board from the strategic plan that's all it was what are the [1:43:35] proposed changes I'm gonna let a mere deal with agree that aamir really [1:43:42] defined them very well but I want to say the additional things are that revised [1:43:49] policy 601 ensures that the district and the elements of the strategic plan are [1:43:56] aligned it also simply continues successful education [1:44:01] additional strategies that are best practice and have been shown to be successful at EPS what revised 601 [1:44:10] policy does not do it does not change the course proposal process it does not [1:44:17] dictate curriculum it does not create barriers to access for secondary [1:44:22] students who feel that they are ready for more it doesn't eliminate the ability to build strategies and [1:44:28] effective on and off ramps to advanced courses it doesn't eliminate the ability to create effective young scholars [1:44:35] identification and targeted services it doesn't preclude the district from embedding rigor into classes it doesn't [1:44:43] eliminate the flexibility of between grade collaboration it doesn't require the district to continue courses that [1:44:49] are not meeting enrollment criteria it doesn't eliminate the ability to create innovative new courses it does not [1:44:58] create an experimental or untested model of an educational delivery but expands [1:45:04] upon educational delivery that currently works well it doesn't eliminate the [1:45:09] ability for the district to create a GT magnet school it doesn't preclude the district from adding additional GT [1:45:16] services to k2 it doesn't intend to be the GT recommendations implementation [1:45:21] plan it doesn't eliminate the ability to develop subject blended for example language arts and social studies courses [1:45:28] honors courses it doesn't eliminate the ability to develop honors courses with real-world access and problem solving or [1:45:35] the ability to develop courses blending world travel with course materials so [1:45:44] I'm gonna just give this because it's getting really long policy 601 [1:45:49] discussion here's my next steps I would like to discuss this with the board and [1:45:55] hear what you have to say and if and and I want to hear does 601 accurately state [1:46:02] the strategic initiative and outcome as stated in the draft strategic plan and [1:46:08] to the administration during the strategic planning process [1:46:14] does it that's what we're talking about we we as a board drafted those words [1:46:20] what does honors courses in the secondary core mean if it doesn't mean [1:46:26] what's in this policy I don't know how else to define it and then I would like [1:46:33] to bring this policy to a vote on November 18th thank you offer a couple [1:46:42] procedural comments I like this to move forward but it was what about a month [1:46:51] ago that my vote delayed this because of the urgency that you were speaking to Ellen we are going to have this [1:46:58] discussion at September's board meeting you may remember that it was my vote that delayed it I wanted to delay it a [1:47:05] month to put some breathing room into this discussion and I then later [1:47:12] recommended two things one that we [1:47:17] directly address Erica's 50 questions and two that we have a panel discussion [1:47:26] talking about both sides I want to talk to the panel discussion and why that didn't happen I spent hours trying to [1:47:32] get a panel discussion going and it was short notice what the election just [1:47:38] couldn't get people to present so with good faith I tried didn't happen the [1:47:45] second thing is in good faith the answers to Erica's questions we're going to be coming from your comments here [1:47:51] Ellen and Aamir's written statement so that's my that's what I intended in [1:47:59] having that breathing room and it gave a mirror the chance that he had to to [1:48:05] refine his thoughts and for Ellen to create her presentation now that said I [1:48:11] would like this to move forward but I would be open to having a presentation from the teachers and from the [1:48:18] administration about their thoughts about it in the next 3-4 weeks so I'm [1:48:24] open to that procedurally but I myself actually excited about the substance of [1:48:30] this proposal I want the full potential of all of our students realized in whatever way we can whether it's special [1:48:37] lentil x'q mid-range kids high range kids in this proposal targets are high [1:48:42] range kids and we have a disproportionately large number of advanced learners in our district and we [1:48:49] are talking about filling out some holes in the honors courses we're talking [1:48:56] about eight from my understanding of how much it would cost it is not that much I [1:49:03] have a proposal from the College Board which actually puts together the AP [1:49:11] tests and they have a curriculum for tenth grade literature that would cost [1:49:16] if we had 200 kids and it'd be about two thousand four thousand dollars which isn't that much so Aamir's documentation [1:49:25] goes into great depth about the cost it's not outrageous there's been a lot of community support about this for a [1:49:32] long long time and I don't know where I put it but I've got the the thick packet [1:49:38] from the 2016 GT study which documents even further in greater detail the [1:49:43] academic research behind thank you the academic research behind and defense [1:49:51] four separate curriculum for honors and students so I'm I'm supportive of it on [1:50:00] that level and it gives our students more voice and choice it gives more agency to our students and [1:50:06] I think that that's an exciting prospect so [1:50:13] so I do I do have some substantive comments but before I get there when policy 601 and the current draft [1:50:20] came up I actually asked what if there had been a substantive discussion of that with a tea with it but the [1:50:26] administration was told no so yes you ran through a whole list of events where process was talked about I don't hear [1:50:33] anywhere actually in there for substance second Morris Leatherman actually told [1:50:38] us that when he asked the follow-up question what does it mean that students [1:50:43] are leaving for not meeting learner needs he said low and middle performers that's the eye group he identified not GT kids [1:50:52] so it okay the hundred years the hundred year study talks about ability grouping [1:51:00] and says that actually putting kids in a class and having Flex grouping within that class but not having at a GT class [1:51:06] causes more students to achieve than simply having a GT class that's what [1:51:12] that hundred-year study says you said that you're you've gotten conflicting [1:51:18] information from people in the district so you'd like to know what the district's plan is but then you're [1:51:23] asking for a board only discussion so we can't get the perspective of the district in a board only discussion I [1:51:30] think that we have to have broaden it so that it's district so those are just [1:51:36] some procedural items I don't know who wants to go first on substantive I will [1:51:43] say that the question is is there a need for the honors classes that are proposed [1:51:50] and or is there a need for a more enriched program for our students and if [1:51:56] there is an E and by the way when we talked about need we talked about our students meeting growth and we do know [1:52:02] that our high learners are meeting growth at a higher rate than our medium and low go low learners and so that I'm [1:52:10] not sure that in the materials in support of 601 that there is identified [1:52:16] in need there's I you've identified an inconsistency in the programming but not [1:52:23] a need for it because would focus as we keep talking about how are the students growing and I don't see [1:52:30] any map data within the materials let's assume for the sake of argument that [1:52:35] there is a need for it the next question is we have to balance the need for those classes versus the [1:52:42] other needs in the district and that's one of the issues that I have which is looking at things in isolation so we [1:52:49] could create a GT class then that might serve the needs of the GT kids great it might it might cause other issues but [1:52:56] that doesn't address the needs of other students so we need to take a look and say as we develop programs out so we [1:53:03] develop priorities what is going to meet the needs of the broadest spectrum of kids and so a policy that that simply [1:53:10] talks about Advanced Learner's doesn't bring in the extra data and that's the [1:53:16] data that I would like to see I think at [1:53:22] one point there was a comment made that we don't know what the community thinks and we still don't know what the [1:53:28] community thinks and so to go forward with this based upon a lot of people in [1:53:34] the community want it I'm not sure that we have data to back that up I think [1:53:41] that the if we're going to address the needs of high learners and I would always like to do that there are [1:53:47] multiple ways that we can do it and a mirror you talk about the various things you talked about compacted classes [1:53:52] they're kind of interesting but maybe they have a flaw because there's no way to get in late there's no way to get out [1:53:59] that's a development thing for example if you're in a compacted class and you want to get out there's no barrier to [1:54:05] getting out because you're actually ahead of the pace you could then drop back to the other class we already have [1:54:11] credit by assessment so if someone wants to get in late all they have to do is show that they're ready to get into it [1:54:18] and by the way there are students that take advantage of the credit by assessment I know a number of kids who [1:54:24] are taking ap biology they didn't take bio they didn't take enriched bio they simply learn the work over the summer [1:54:31] the question is what are the pathways that we want to create and what are the most effective pathways [1:54:38] once we get past all this procedural arguing I think we have to discuss what are the best pathways I know that if [1:54:45] you're a middle school student and you do a compacted class now you can do a high school class in eighth grade for [1:54:51] making the high school time period less stressful and more flexible we know [1:54:57] stress exists in the high school so if you were to ask me do I want three honors classes in the middle school [1:55:02] which historically have been more work not necessarily higher level thinking or [1:55:08] do I want a compacted class that frees up schedule in high school I'd like to investigate the compacted class I'm not [1:55:15] sure if we mandate honors in every single class that we're gonna have the [1:55:20] flexibility to do honors plus compacted and so to make a decision tonight or in [1:55:26] four weeks and say this is the rigid approach we have to take I think is fraught with peril [1:55:32] the other thing is the embedded honours and there are criticisms you levy about [1:55:37] the embedded honors it's not like we've had a trial run of the embedded honours it rolled out for a few months nobody [1:55:44] got any credit for doing it and now we actually have it rolled out we talked about as a board allowing and seeing [1:55:51] what happens this year that's as I understand the concept and it's always implementation that's key as opposed to [1:55:58] the concept but the concept is create higher-level thinking in the students rather than more work my kids sat [1:56:06] through enriched classes after enriched classes and and they sat through GT programs when they were younger and they [1:56:11] came home and said I asked for higher level work I got more work and I know that that what you've written here is [1:56:18] that this class is supposed to be substantively will not be subsidy the same as the standard class so I think [1:56:24] your goal is not more work but higher level work and I think that that's the goal of the embedded honors which is can [1:56:30] we create a higher level of work so is that a better approach than mandating an [1:56:39] honors class this is a discussion that I think we have to have with people who can explain what embedded honors would [1:56:46] be what the benefits of that versus having an Honors Program I'm and then the other issue I have is [1:56:53] that this is a requirement that all this happens next year so we're gonna put [1:56:58] this in place next year and then we're gonna have curriculum review which might require changes in in the class based [1:57:06] upon the curriculum review cycle even if we're gonna do in honors a roll out over [1:57:11] a number of years is a better approach and again we're going to go back this is a resource allocation thing we have 20% [1:57:20] of our kids that are not testing proficient on MCA scores or should we be [1:57:26] looking at intervention versus an extra honors class and again let's go look go back to need one way look at map scores [1:57:34] and we've seen them and maybe there's data I haven't seen but the lower [1:57:40] performers aren't meeting their growth targets the high performers are meeting their growth targets I don't want to do [1:57:45] anything to dismantle the programs we currently have in place zero to dismantle the programs we have place and [1:57:51] and that seems to be raised as a specter here and so I want it perfectly clear I don't want to do that I would like to [1:57:57] have a gradual system where we can add more rigor but I just might disagree whether it's better to do it through an [1:58:03] embedded honors and a compacted system than a mandated honors class those are [1:58:09] some initial thoughts and to be honest those are initial because I also have questions about this and we could kind [1:58:16] of go for hours but I know that Eric has had our little green light on so maybe she has some questions yeah I have some [1:58:24] questions actually as to how the policy is written that I think could have broader implications than what is [1:58:31] intended and I was just wondering if you guys could answer some questions for me about that my first question is from the [1:58:39] policy board's perspective what is the broad intent of policy 601 why do we [1:58:46] have a policy significant what respect from the from your policy committees [1:58:51] personal no I wouldn't say there's anything about the committee here this is or why isn't that so this was from [1:58:59] conversations among the seven of us with John with the suit the strategic plan conversations and we've [1:59:05] talked about all of these things which is why it was in our strategic plan and so to the extent that it went to policy [1:59:12] it was to transcribe some of those conversations to document what we said what honors and to call out those [1:59:17] inconsistencies I'm sorry let me ask a [1:59:23] clarifying question before the language around Advanced Learner's why do we have [1:59:31] a policy 601 why do school districts have a policy 601 and what is it the [1:59:43] policy 601 is to define the school districts educational competencies instructional correct curriculum and [1:59:49] academic standards including state and federal educational requirements so my [1:59:55] question is have our have you thought of or have our districts attorneys been [2:00:01] consulted to see if there's a legal issue with our general education policy detailing specific education [2:00:08] requirements for gifted and our classes that are customized customized to the [2:00:14] needs of advanced learners in a general education policy where we do not detail [2:00:19] the educational needs of any other learners especially those that are protected legal classes and guaranteed [2:00:26] certain educational rights in our school district is that an issue that has been [2:00:32] discussed and I do want to mention that from a best-practice perspective we have [2:00:38] 327 independently public publicly operated school districts in Minnesota and I've studied all of their series 600 [2:00:45] educational policies and absolutely none of them utilize policy 601 to define [2:00:52] policies for certain groups of students none of them there are four to five [2:00:58] cases where districts do have gifted policies or talked about Advanced [2:01:04] Learner's but it's a completely separate policy and the 601 policy is written in [2:01:10] the broadest terms possible and my concern is that there could be a legal [2:01:17] patience doing what you've done that's my first question so I think it's it's [2:01:24] important to note that other districts didn't have to go here that they have these types of extra classes and there's [2:01:31] not there's not a push to not have them I think we're in a different situation I wouldn't say legal implication Oh school [2:01:36] boards are are the authority to decide what type of guidance you give your local district I think Lenny is often [2:01:43] talked about how it's wise to delegate so much to the professionals and I [2:01:48] wouldn't use the word expert I think expert is losing its meaning in our community in our country frankly a lot [2:01:54] of discussions but to our professionals to our experienced implementers to our teachers to our educators it's wise to [2:02:00] that a lot of that except when someone starts to to have a different lens that [2:02:06] they're looking through an option rather than what's what's helping a child and grow to meet the full potential what's [2:02:12] helping a child be better next month and they were this meant the next year then this year when you start to say that [2:02:18] we've got to save America we got to dismantle this this type of curriculum dismantle the the systemic barriers you [2:02:26] start to I start to hear somebody in a in a speech and I don't hear I'm talking about a child anymore and that's [2:02:32] bothering me and I think that's one of the big concerns it's one of the reasons they're sort of a standoff at the moment [2:02:38] where we hear look we'll agree we won't get rid of that enriched when we have [2:02:43] but we won't add the next one I get some sort of a power struggle and I think if it makes sense to keep what we have if [2:02:51] you would defend that if you would justify that I think I don't understand how that's necessary to meet student [2:02:56] needs in seventh grade but not 8th or in eighth grade but not ninth or tenth and so it's just it's a question of who [2:03:03] decides and at this point I think it is appropriate to ask if a board should decide that we want a choice in [2:03:11] curriculum a choice in pace and in particular choice where it is not fair [2:03:16] to say that the teacher can just handle it to say there's going to be a different curriculum a different pace [2:03:22] and the teacher can just handle that you can't have different curriculums and [2:03:27] different paces for all sort of needs and just say well handle it second hour we'll handle it third hour and the fourth hour it also [2:03:34] gets to the premise that this is a GT type secondary theme there there is not GT Language Arts GT social studies in [2:03:41] the secondary there's a choice and you can opt in like it's true that there's GT and the elementary in fact for [2:03:48] reading it also in sixth grade but in the secondary we say it I know what it's time for you to decide what you want to [2:03:54] bite off and I've heard some people say well they can't do it all so don't offer the choice we already value students [2:04:02] finding where their niches try something this year try something else another year something that's actually only [2:04:07] available if it's a choice you can make this year and make a different choice next year it's it's not a disqualifier [2:04:14] that they can't do it all and I wouldn't say I robbed anybody of their choice because you offer them a second choice you know and this is this is something [2:04:21] that is for all students in fact the middle and the lower students might benefit from teacher time that's more directed at the pace and curriculum that [2:04:28] they're looking for in fact this is not the end of it this doesn't fix all that [2:04:33] needs fixing nor does all need fixing but this is a step and I think this is the step with the most reluctance from [2:04:41] people who would otherwise make a decision based off of the best that we can do with best resources best [2:04:47] knowledge best practice we have best teachers best spaces there's so much where we're getting the best advice and [2:04:54] I don't think we're getting the best advice with regard to how do you help every student grow but I think there's a push to say well first of all they have [2:05:00] to all be in the same room from there we'll do the best we can and that bothers me that there's that that [2:05:05] qualifier put up front and I think there's there isn't much of an alternative we hear what the compact [2:05:12] didn't I agree with you about compacted being an interesting and a valuable option in fact we've this year started [2:05:17] the sixth grader in science which means when this sixth grade cohorts in eighth grade there's going to be the standard [2:05:24] science in rich science and the compacted year got there so you can have [2:05:29] all three and that might be a beautiful thing and it might be necessary it might be wise you know we don't know exactly [2:05:35] but I wouldn't say that it's one or the other I do think I need just a small [2:05:40] point that there isn't the off ramp we heard that splited Lee from the administrator who said the off ramp it's a downside and [2:05:47] it's not a reason to veto the idea but you can't just bail out on a course that [2:05:52] merged three years into two and say I'll just chill and I guess I've already covered this right whatever the idea is [2:05:58] that's what we were told now you may have heard an update but that that's a [2:06:03] problem and the extent that there are students who are middle or lower and who [2:06:09] aren't getting what they need that's a real concern too and I don't think that's that's addressed enough you know [2:06:14] math actually did a great job addressing that because they introduced the bridge support where you're trying to keep them on grade level but you're giving them [2:06:20] some extra support some schools have had success with that some not I think you Dinah is is wise to try that I think [2:06:26] it's it's important there there's so many things that are important we're doing some right now like the Sunday [2:06:33] essentials we've heard about some of the other initiatives that are ongoing it's important to fire on all cylinders and I [2:06:40] would never want this to preclude something that's that's essential elsewhere but frankly you're not going [2:06:45] to find a more cost-effective plan new courses are not that expensive and if [2:06:50] all you're doing what you say about distributing students differently say for example for a particular subject in [2:06:57] a particular grade what pace and curriculum would best fit you think this is this is trying incredibly hard to be [2:07:04] responsible to all students and leaving a lot on the table for what else is next the reason this is getting a little [2:07:11] different treatment is because this is getting a little different treatment this idea of whether there should be different courses is is frowned upon is [2:07:19] resisted and the best we can have right now is a neutral zone where whatever you [2:07:24] have is what you have as if our wisdom says we should go with the status quo bias is there any way I could get the [2:07:30] question I ask you answer you know that that's a standard question that we would [2:07:36] run through legal so with the policy committee we'd be happy to run that through legal so so this hasn't been won [2:07:43] through legal yet no we've been trying to get this talked about in policy for a [2:07:49] while and then we didn't think that it was necessary to really speed it through because we didn't realize that pathways [2:07:54] would be developed and that it would be so different from what the goal of the [2:08:00] outcome from the strategic plan so so if you if well if you listened we put this [2:08:08] policy on hold because we had we didn't [2:08:13] really think we needed to move this forward and when we presented it and we [2:08:20] wrote that email to the board we were just saying look let's try to sort this out I think one of the first things that [2:08:27] you guys need to do if you want to push the policy for it is to have legal look at it because I think it actually could [2:08:33] be legally problematic to discuss certain certain groups of students in a [2:08:42] general education policy and not necessarily others which leads me to my other question is I think if you look at [2:08:51] what other districts are doing that it might be better to pull this out of [2:08:56] policy 601 and create a separate policy about how the district wants to [2:09:02] differentiate learners or have a gifted and talented policy so I guess I'm a [2:09:07] little confused as to why it's appended to the bottom of 601 why wouldn't we leave that to be a general education [2:09:13] policy and create new policy [2:09:23] it just seems that would be a better practice [2:09:31] you see a difference between borg guidance and policy and board guidance and a new policy I'm ready to move on to [2:09:39] a different point I'll write that down I think we should ask somebody but I don't know that that's I'm moving much forward well but what I'm saying is that if [2:09:45] there's a legal issue with having that in policy 601 there's going to have to [2:09:51] be other ways around that so all I was saying is if you look at what other districts are doing that's what other [2:09:57] districts are doing to jump in for a second year I've brought this up Matt I [2:10:02] think you want to go pretty soon here - I brought this up in the past to me [2:10:08] that's not a concern because the board what the board makes his policy is what [2:10:16] is legal I'm reading from state statute 123 be here governing the school boards [2:10:22] we subdivision seven policy making the board shall make when and when deemed [2:10:27] advisable change or repeal rules relating to the organization and management of the board and the duties [2:10:33] of its officer so we make the board we make the policy so and so this is [2:10:39] consistent with the state statute now that doesn't completely cover the legal question but I think this covers a lot [2:10:46] of it and this is why I've never thought of this as being a legal issue and subdivision eight right after it is [2:10:52] duties where there's a bunch of verbiage here but it what's relevant here is we [2:10:58] have as that the board had the duty to prescribe textbooks and courses of study [2:11:04] so I'm not advocating getting into the weeds and creating any classes setting [2:11:10] up any curriculum but we have the ability to do that but we delegate it away so we we as the representatives of [2:11:20] the voters of Edina have the authority to construct our policy as we would like [2:11:26] I'm not saying we don't have that authority I'm saying it might be legally problematic to utilize a policy 601 a [2:11:33] general education policy which is supposed to define the policy goals for entire district and within that policy [2:11:40] only then identify gifted and talented students [2:11:46] and how we want to educate those students that it could be legally problematic from an equal protection [2:11:53] clause which has nothing to do with us that we need to take a look at that and [2:11:59] make sure that language does not need to be removed that's all I'm saying I'm not saying we don't have the right [2:12:06] to that's all I'm saying Matt did you have something you were [2:12:12] yeah I just realize I haven't spoken yet so I thought I'd say something just as a [2:12:19] framing comments this this might be a good idea it might be the process and [2:12:29] the evidence of how we got to today is incredibly flawed so as a board and I [2:12:36] push for this really hard myself we all felt it was important to do a strategic plan we felt it was important to balance [2:12:43] the budget where I spend 90% of my time and think about how we allocate our [2:12:48] resources across all of the student base we thought about how it involved the [2:12:54] community how would involve the administration how it involved the teachers and how we get to a point at [2:13:00] which we could determine which needs to prioritize in a resource constrained [2:13:05] world which is what we're in if the front row can just stop for a second [2:13:11] in this situation we're trying to figure out how to make a decision around which [2:13:17] students were supporting over others in a silo because I don't agree with any of [2:13:24] these numbers that have been provided at all whatsoever Alan I did say that there's nothing done that was wrong and [2:13:31] by that comments I meant people three people having ideas they bring to the [2:13:36] board never bothers me I don't agree with what happened the word wrong and in [2:13:42] bad or different words so I still think it was a bad process I still think that [2:13:48] what happened was frustration built up amongst the seven of us over 16 18 [2:13:54] months that we wanted to move fast we wanted more data we wanted better endpoints and we wanted to figure out [2:14:00] how to take 124 million dollars and spread that across the whole district but right now we're at a point at which [2:14:07] I mean I do think we have precalc in the books Allen I don't agree with the first [2:14:13] five these don't because each of those don't statements do actually have a reactive nature in your second or last [2:14:18] page of this will not affect this this will not affect this it was the second to last slide that you read off they [2:14:24] will affect other things there is a trade-off we just said there's no trade-off no trade-off no trade-off so [2:14:29] it worries me is that we haven't followed a process we haven't gotten public feedback from the strategic plan [2:14:35] we haven't balanced the needs of all the learners and we're unilaterally choosing one group to prioritize over others this [2:14:43] was never our intent 18 months ago I take personal failure responsibility that we didn't bring the strategic plan [2:14:48] forward to the community in 2018 and that were in 2019 finally having these sessions because it was an initiative [2:14:54] ice that I would drive and I think that as the seven of us you've done our best we've had some challenges with [2:14:59] consultants getting information but at the end of the day we knew what we needed to do and we didn't do it so now [2:15:07] we're at a point where we have to make really smart decisions with limited resources and again this could end up [2:15:14] being a good decision to put these courses in place but we're not going to have the information in two or three [2:15:20] weeks and we're not going to have one panel come in and give that to us and we're not going to get to the point at [2:15:25] which we understand the fiscal implications of all the different groups and their needs and community feedback [2:15:31] and this truncated timeline so I understand that there are people on this [2:15:36] board that really feel strongly about moving in this direction and I'm super understanding of trying to get there [2:15:42] with you but I can't do it on this timeline I can't do with a lack of consideration for all the other groups [2:15:47] we have to think about we had one parent here tonight speaking about how she has gifted kids and a child that need [2:15:53] special needs or additional support and that child has had his or her I'm not [2:16:00] sure I caught the gender resources cut well we're now going to continue to add more choice to the top end of learners [2:16:06] language arts ten has been referenced multiple times and that is a big buzzword or a big issue still in this district I've received [2:16:13] zero emails about Selangor arts ten I don't know if you guys have in the past 14 months that have been negative okay [2:16:26] okay then for them to me because they've I don't recall seeing them so the point [2:16:32] that I'm making is that this is being done in a silo by the seven of us and I [2:16:39] don't support the process that we're undertaking so and also I the the [2:16:45] decorum tonight has been just brutal but I think overall I don't understand the process that we're undertaking as a [2:16:51] group of seven [2:17:38] debate going on here and these are our children I'm just absolutely at a loss [2:17:46] as I'm out on the predict this election I don't know why we're still having this [2:17:53] discussion we have been talking about these courses for a long time we [2:17:59] approved this course in a bubble these courses were approved all of these [2:18:08] arguments are just arguments for us to stop this discussion if there is an [2:18:14] ideological issue here that we need to address it's time to address it [2:18:20] I hear us say things you know what's [2:18:25] about budgets it's about process it's about who was and wasn't at the table [2:18:31] I've sat at the table for many years hearing this discussion at different [2:18:36] levels I'm not good as just because on this one issue where some board members [2:18:42] said finally we want to try to do something that now it's all about [2:18:47] process and budget we've never approved a course as a one-off without having to [2:18:55] put it in the context of the entire district they're valid arguments but [2:19:02] it's not how we've oh not how everything has come to the table over time we are [2:19:10] not picking winners and losers amongst our children Christmas tonight said it [2:19:17] best he doesn't have advanced learners he's saying go deeper with this policy not [2:19:26] just our advanced learners and filling the gap and what I used to think was maybe four classes but maybe it's seven [2:19:31] or eight what about on the other end what is wrong with choice for our kids I [2:19:38] just had a loss that we're here and that we're still fighting about this and [2:19:44] nobody can give me an answer okay no talking from the public I know [2:19:50] we've had some people jump on about two policies tonight that are around 504's [2:19:55] and ie PS but again this is not about picking one student group over another [2:20:02] when you tell parents that their kids that are advanced learners are just fine [2:20:07] they don't need more resources you know whose kids actually get hurt the most is [2:20:13] our underserved kids who don't know the right people of how to get around the [2:20:19] system they don't have the money to go outside of the system let's actually [2:20:25] have a real discussion about this and I would agree with mr. mo Quest let's [2:20:32] expand these types of policies and talk about how we address our kids with needs let's talk about more ways to intervene [2:20:40] let's make sure that when we're looking at data for our students and they're [2:20:46] showing that they should be a blue student based on our colors and they're not in the classroom is anybody calling [2:20:53] that out or green or red or wherever they're at it's about every kid and I [2:20:59] will not as a board member sit here and be told that I am picking one student [2:21:04] group over another because we serve every single one that comes into this building just so it's clear that's not [2:21:15] been the tenor of the discussion in fact as we talk about adding choice my [2:21:21] question is we need to ascertain needs and you even said we need to talk about kids with need so we need to determine [2:21:29] the scope of what the needs are and then address those needs and so if one group [2:21:35] has a slightly higher need maybe we need to put more emphasis on that particular group we are not approving a single [2:21:42] course and by the way the concept of approving courses in silos we've talked about not doing that on a going-forward [2:21:49] basis for several months now so this isn't new and it's not related to policy [2:21:54] 601 it has been raised for a year at this point about not doing things in a [2:22:00] silo because we have to our job as allocating resources I don't agree that pathways is [2:22:09] different than the strat plan there was a comment made about honors in the secondary and the strap plan I know [2:22:15] people like to think about this differently but we approved honors and secondary in the strap plan with the express statement that embedded honours [2:22:22] might satisfy honours in the secondary that's exactly what the board voted yes [2:22:30] that's exactly what the board board voted that was the discussion that night and a mirror you and you remember that [2:22:37] that was you know was a might so what we said was honors in the secondary core these courses might not be a broad [2:22:44] enough goal and perhaps we should expand to honors level content to include [2:22:50] adding more compacted to include the consideration of meted honors there was [2:22:55] never I don't think anybody on this board said that embed honors alone might [2:23:02] be enough for any of it so let's do it was made that embedded honors might satisfy the honours in the secondary no [2:23:10] that was no that we might broaden the language in this teaching plan to be an umbrella term that would cover honors [2:23:16] courses in the secondary core would cover compacted idea would cover embed honors so we have a different recollection but I will say this [2:23:22] nevertheless the goal of the board should be to determine the district-wide [2:23:28] needs and try to develop policies that meet those district-wide needs as best [2:23:33] as possible and not go one at a time through areas and when we talk about [2:23:39] it's easy to add another course have we asked any of the teachers if it's easy just to add another course I mean that's [2:23:45] the other part that's missing from this discussion is finding out from the people who would have to implement the [2:23:51] policy what would be involved in doing so and by the way that does lead me to a [2:23:56] question which is when you say that a class will not be substantively the same as the standard class so give me an [2:24:04] example we could take precalc in what way is that not going to be subsidy the same to meet this policy I [2:24:11] can give you is the concern and I didn't mention this earlier the concern among our [2:24:17] administrators even our principals two of the three secondary I remember explicitly saying the courses aren't [2:24:22] that different what's different is when you look in the door what you can see which bothers me because you're trying [2:24:29] to say that you're I've summarized what's going on with learning and growth and need just by looking in a window but [2:24:35] also that the courses aren't that different that's a huge problem to bring that to light we've also heard the [2:24:41] opposite though that the enriched courses are substantively different and they are meeting needs and so this [2:24:46] doesn't try to answer that question about what's going on but it lays down the expectation that if you're gonna [2:24:51] offer a choice and pace in curriculum you better follow through okay so I didn't answer my question [2:24:57] so he wrote a policy it says that the advanced class will not be substantially [2:25:02] the same as the standard class that's a direction that you've driven from the board so I'm now sitting there as a [2:25:08] teacher or administrator trying to create a precalculus class that's not substantively the same tell me what it [2:25:14] looks like tell me what you're requiring here so I don't think that is something I'm gonna be able to tell you I don't think that is something that you're [2:25:20] asking me to tell you in other context would you want me to show you an exam to talk about a unit pace to talk about [2:25:27] formatives or somebody I don't think you want that but I will remind you we had [2:25:32] enriched precalculus so I might refer you to what that course was as a starting point and I've looked at a [2:25:39] number of our rich classes and and the curriculum a lot of times they are [2:25:44] parallel curriculums written enriched and regular and the reason I ask is [2:25:49] because someone's going to have to implement this policy and you've talked about how you're not sure you hear [2:25:56] different stories about sometimes they're the same sometimes they're different I'm just trying to understand if I vote for this policy what am i [2:26:03] directing people to do and that would be across I think eight different courses [2:26:10] right so I'm I'm very aware that the board needs to hear from the teachers [2:26:16] that's not ever that hasn't been a doubt I requested that this go to teaching and [2:26:23] learning and as it has appeared on the policy [2:26:30] committee frequently and I never asked for administrators to be brought in our [2:26:37] teachers to be brought in but they just appear so I guess I need to be more direct this time and say at the next tee [2:26:45] at the next policy meeting we need to hear from the teachers so I mean that I [2:26:53] guess that that's what I need to do but in the past I didn't have to do that it would go on the policy and we would [2:26:58] really talk about it but in the past also in this in the development of this policy we were in such an emergency well [2:27:08] what would this look like and honestly I don't I just want to make sure that we [2:27:16] are very clear that what we we're not [2:27:22] clear on what we we thought second honours in the secondary means we still [2:27:27] aren't there's room for listening [2:27:33] there's a lot of room for listening and trying to unify the community and [2:27:38] especially the educational community I don't ever want to make this appear that [2:27:47] we are going to be doing this in a box the last policy meeting I asked for it to be sent to teaching and learning so [2:27:55] it's not that I don't want to hear from the teachers I actually reach out to [2:28:00] them when I can when I see them to try to figure out how this would fit some of [2:28:07] them have told me yes we really need an honors class because that opens up the [2:28:14] opportunity for me not to be stretched thin from dealing with my upper end in [2:28:19] the lower end and not meeting anybody's needs as well so I have heard that from [2:28:27] some teachers and I do want to hear from the teachers and I hope that they can be [2:28:32] scheduled at our next policy meeting and then we sort out and hear from the [2:28:38] administration how this can materialize and or not what are the options I just [2:28:45] it's been kind of a funky process I agree but when I see that that there's [2:28:53] two different really different things happening between what the administration says and what that vision [2:29:01] was I we had to take a moment and stop and say what is it that that is the [2:29:08] direction of the board by the way I think that if we're going to have teachers or administrators at this point [2:29:14] this should just go to the entire board rather than to a committee of course that's fine so can I just interject and [2:29:23] I want to make it very clear that there's elements of this that I actually [2:29:28] really like I think there's certain areas that we don't serve our Advanced Learner's well I think we can do a lot [2:29:36] more for Advanced Learner's my frustration is that I think this [2:29:42] discussion should be part of a broader strategic planning process and without [2:29:49] being able to do that it is very hard for me to know from a prioritization [2:29:57] perspective how do I fiscally prioritize these things and the notion that [2:30:05] creating advance classes and having different tiers of classes is going to [2:30:11] benefit all learners is quite frankly a little offensive to me having a son that [2:30:17] has significant learning differences so I just think we need to acknowledge that [2:30:24] this policy is for advanced learners and gifted learners and we have a lot a lot [2:30:31] a lot of kids in our district that need a lot of support and it's really unfair [2:30:40] to ask me to vote on this not knowing how much it's going to cost [2:30:47] not knowing what we're going to prioritize from a strategic planning perspective and the reality is we have [2:30:54] limited fiscal resources so there will be a trade-off and that's the part that [2:30:59] bothers me so much all I am asking is that we can have this conversation as [2:31:06] part of a broader conversation in our strategic plan I don't understand the [2:31:12] urgency to pull this out and do it in a silo I don't think that I think that [2:31:19] does a disservice to all of our students in the district and what if we end up seeing like we can actually do more than [2:31:26] what this says we can do summer programs for advanced learners there's so much we [2:31:32] could do with advanced learners III guess I just don't even really understand why we're discussing this now [2:31:42] so I wouldn't say it's for a summer program for advanced learners would fit the bill I think this is about what [2:31:48] education we offer during our school year in our public schools when we spent [2:31:53] all this time on the on the facilities and the transportation our budgets a hundred plus million dollars we need to [2:31:59] be doing the right thing throughout the nine months and by the way that's where we've already spent all of these [2:32:05] top-level dollars what we're looking for is the curriculum writing time which we [2:32:12] have a list of the courses we've proved over the last eight nine years minutes it's not actually all that much in fact [2:32:19] one of the most expensive experiences we had was when we had to overhaul pre AP [2:32:25] English 10 for the mainstream offering not counting that evaluation cost where [2:32:32] you spend you know a number of months with consultants and focus groups which was an extra 16 thousand but aside from [2:32:39] that there was 35 thousand most of that textbooks meant to serve every student in the tenth grade who's taken this [2:32:45] class and I know that's a lot I don't think any other class would be that much [2:32:50] because textbooks are where the costs are that in Project Lead the Way are just they're very expensive opportunities but textbooks where the [2:32:57] costs are none of the other classes face for example in rich language arts 8 what [2:33:04] side that one is 9 or or 6 would likely have 22 sections my part 10 so I think [2:33:11] we're looking at a fraction of the cost I tried with my assessment to give you a fair estimate that was actually rounded [2:33:18] up significantly I think it we do absolutely need once we say that ok let's let's ask give the direction to [2:33:24] the administration because they haven't had direction from us yet they've they've been privy to some of the conversations but they have not had [2:33:29] board direction and none of us can offer direction individually we need to have a vote as a board all four direction but [2:33:36] give us please a better estimate a more accurate estimate about where these costs are where this curriculum writing [2:33:41] which by the way we outsource a lot of the we need to give direction to give that cost estimate they don't have it [2:33:47] one for us because we haven't asked for one is a full board which I think we should do let me finish this thought the please the curriculum writing which [2:33:54] isn't that much even when we outsource the EPP English 10 there were some ops were seen a pretty marine it still was [2:33:59] very modest the textbooks are expensive that's true they had an almost at sea seven and a half thousand dollars in [2:34:05] teacher training opportunity to which may or may not be necessary perhaps the teachers don't need that was like ap [2:34:12] level training I think or something to meet those levels of need they may not need nearly the cost not [2:34:19] even in fractional proportion to what that class was and yet it still wasn't [2:34:24] actually all that much and so if we if we say this is somewhere around the $200,000 mark for eight courses 25 [2:34:31] thousand each I think we've rounded up I would like to hear more accurate number but in in one [2:34:37] year budget fixed cost so I could one time it's done it's not an ongoing expense it actually hasn't precluded [2:34:42] anything and so I I object seriously to the premise that we're putting suit against a student we're picking one [2:34:48] group or another if anybody who thinks this is a better course for their pacer curriculum can opt in [2:34:53] I would I would ask people to stop calling it a GT opportunity because it's no more GT than any other enriched or AP [2:35:00] class we offer which by the way everybody should try a few of those over the course of their second versus gifted [2:35:06] and talented and advanced the the policy is both the gifted and talented and [2:35:11] talented is holding harmless this is what we offer with Highlands actually moved to push in [2:35:16] a couple years ago these are the questions that we need clarified before it's a the gifted and talented is not [2:35:22] holding harmless because you're dropping down language arts a grade no I'm hoping that's the same one who can fix the [2:35:27] language to clarify them safe language arts fourth grade yeah and that's where this policy says [2:35:33] third grade okay so I think we're gonna have to figure out next steps because I [2:35:39] think everybody's kind of said various things I'm hopeful that people have said [2:35:44] I mean I can always say more but I don't really want it let me ask another financial question really charger Evan I [2:35:52] still want to get to next step I I know but but I buy into your I can buy into [2:35:57] your like I averaged out the classes and stuff like that for well the high [2:36:05] averaging for high school but for adding separate honors classes to middle school [2:36:10] that's a much more complex process that I think needs a completely different [2:36:17] financial look and I don't think just simply taking the high average of how [2:36:22] much it would cost to implement that class is is an acceptable look at what [2:36:29] we're essentially doing is changing from a middle school model to a junior high model and in doing that it might [2:36:36] actually impact the number of sections [2:36:41] of music that we can offer and things like that that we can offer so we will [2:36:46] be changing our the way we actually give classes to students we might not have [2:36:53] flex scheduled so those need to be taken into consideration because that's a [2:36:59] different budgeting situation yeah no no [2:37:04] I would think it's wrong to put the fear in people that were cutting music sudden now you just heard that for the first time and I want to push back strong [2:37:10] against that there's nothing in here about hiring more teachers which is where significant costs are there would [2:37:16] be an opportunity to write some curriculum to buy some books maybe do some teacher training those are [2:37:22] exceptionally modest you won't find more modest costs and they're all one time [2:37:28] it's not at all gonna start cutting programs I think it's wrong to put that fear into people that's not a fear [2:37:34] someone can't do it all I actually came out of our middle school study that our administrators presented to us civilians [2:37:40] they came back they presented to our board one year ago the middle school [2:37:46] time study and if we wanted to keep a middle school model or if we wanted to change our middle school model and they [2:37:53] recommended that we keep our middle school model and the middle school model involves giving students more choice [2:38:00] which is why we deliberately don't have honors classes at every level and in [2:38:05] their recommendations they said to us if we change the framework of our middle [2:38:11] schools then we will quote have fewer opportunities for exploratory classes so [2:38:17] these are the things that I think we need to keep in mind that there are impacts to your policy that we might not [2:38:26] have taken into consideration to understand it's not simply changing things to to honors from honors and not [2:38:35] honors there could actually be downstream implications that we don't understand and that's why we need to [2:38:40] have a discussion about it so I don't recall anybody saying that we can offer to enrich tell a but not 3-1 enriched [2:38:48] social studies but not 3 do you guys know like what was that I mean might just have a different memory but I don't [2:38:54] think anybody ever said that if you offer another enriched social studies that someone could opt into instead of [2:38:59] the other that the middle school model would yeah I don't understand what [2:39:05] you're referring to because if we have more classes that if we have more [2:39:10] classes that the kids have to schedule into so as opposed to right now it's [2:39:15] much more flexible because they can go across like eight different science classes and they can do it any period of [2:39:22] the day if a student do it all that's for sure there's a difference between [2:39:27] not being able to do it all and not being able to do it it's just picking social studies or enriched social [2:39:33] studies it's still one slot in a child's schedule but I don't think as a board we [2:39:39] understand what doing this will do to change the model of our middle school [2:39:44] which we literally just had a discussion about one year ago and I'm concerned and [2:39:49] don't understand that please don't talk out loud thank you why we wouldn't [2:39:57] actually actually bring up that discussion again and bring our administrators in and say if we do this [2:40:05] this and this will there be changes to our schedules at our middle school what will the impact so that's a perfect segue to next [2:40:13] steps so we will have feedback on the strap and by the end of this month if [2:40:20] not a little bit you know before the end of the month so that will give us some ideas on what the community is thinking [2:40:26] in terms of the strap plant goals now we've talked about getting input from teachers we talked about input from [2:40:32] administrators we talked about a panel so it seems to me that the one thing we [2:40:38] need to do is say okay so here's a here's a policy draft policy 601 what [2:40:44] are the implications of adopting that policy right I mean don't we all want to know that okay so do we want to set up [2:40:54] basically a work session where people who are able to answer the questions and [2:40:59] in fact I kind of thought that that was what was going to happen over the last month with Erica's questions so I think [2:41:09] we need to kind of go back and say what what questions do we have because if [2:41:14] we're going to put together a group of people to answer questions we have to tell them what they're coming for and [2:41:21] what the specific questions are otherwise it becomes a nightmare Lenny I thought there had to be kind of a [2:41:26] majority for for asking these types of questions because I know an HR we've talked about you know questions and [2:41:32] one-offs and you know too much time it's a list of 50 questions so I don't see [2:41:39] why I mean it seems to me that if only one person asked for the 50 questions why is it mandatory that those have to [2:41:45] be answered so I don't think all 50 need to be answered I think a number of them were processed related and people that [2:41:52] we would call wouldn't have answers to those questions anyway the people on the committee would have had answers to those questions so [2:41:58] that probably eliminates you know maybe even thirty other questions but I keep [2:42:03] hearing people say oh I want to hear from teachers and so it seems to me that we do have a consensus that we want [2:42:08] questions answered about the implications of adopting this policy and [2:42:14] when I that includes what's the impact on other things that we could do I mean [2:42:20] it seems to me that there's a general consensus on types of questions that we [2:42:26] have I'm happy to participate in trying [2:42:32] to put together a cohesive list of questions Ahmir I would request that you join that [2:42:39] particular group since you put together a fair amount of work and so I think [2:42:44] that you've thought about this and you may have your own questions about the implication from the draft policy and [2:42:52] then since Erica is the one that put together the 50 questions that I'd like to whittle down I would ask for her to [2:42:58] be on that group and we can either get [2:43:03] the board to approve the questions or rely upon the three of us to come up with questions to form a panel and but I [2:43:11] do want board input on who's gonna be on the panel it seems to me and representative teachers I think John and [2:43:19] I we had talked about someone from the state several experts from the state [2:43:31] there's some other other universities that have experts in this that we can [2:43:37] bring forward so there's several names that we can so part of it the part of what I see the [2:43:42] questions are is what's the impact within our district and then the other is what's general best practices so I [2:43:50] view those as two separate areas because I think that if we're going to go forward we want to adopt best practices [2:43:56] but we want to adopt them consistent with what we're trying to accomplish within the district so do people agree [2:44:04] disagree well I guess might go ahead you [2:44:10] know we talk about best practices and I guess you know some of that's I hope gonna be based on data and some of that [2:44:15] I think it's gonna be based on opinion too and I would say did we go through this much discussion and thought and [2:44:24] demanding of answers when we switched language arts to being a single class [2:44:30] for both 9th and 10th grade because I don't think we did now granted I wasn't [2:44:36] on the board at the time but I've looked back at the materials that were presented and it was pretty pretty short [2:44:42] so again I would say we can have this panel but I'd like to understand better [2:44:49] what's coming from this panel I think because I think this is going to come [2:44:54] that this to me is starting to feel not very much based in just pure data and [2:45:00] best practice I think for me what's missing right now is I have no data to indicate that this is a student need I [2:45:08] have no information I've never been able to speak with any of our teachers about [2:45:13] this topic I haven't if you could point to a work session when I have please let me know I have not I haven't been able [2:45:20] to speak to anyone that is a subject matter expert and gifted and talented learning there's half of the new written [2:45:31] thing is for gifted and talented so if we're gonna write into policy what we want for gifted and talented don't we [2:45:38] want to talk with people that are experts and gifted and talented and make sure what we've written makes sense and I have no problem with that but the bulk [2:45:46] of the changes that were have been discussed tonight or just general enriched honors type [2:45:53] which can be registered by any student so just focusing on gifted and talented only is Iceland I said I would like to [2:46:00] bring a subject matter expert in and gifted and talented who also could talk [2:46:07] about advanced learning for advanced learners I don't understand as a board [2:46:14] how or why we would not want relevant good information before making a [2:46:19] decision I'd suggest you put the discussion of elementary school work into an [2:46:24] initiative for the elementary school which might come as early as a month or two or three I don't know but just quite [2:46:32] for this holds what the status quo is steady with the one exception which is the school that stopped pullouts a [2:46:37] couple years ago but for the most part holds it steady and so it raises it up to the assurances are written down and I [2:46:43] wouldn't say you can't write down the assurances of that having another panel I would say that you write down the [2:46:49] assurances and then any change that comes down the line would have to [2:46:54] receive again the board approval just like frankly we pretty much said when we [2:46:59] said there's there's no longer on the horizon there's no push to change any or fold in I think was the language some of [2:47:06] the gifted talented programs but I would say that's a separate conversation and it shouldn't get wrapped up into [2:47:12] something that's for the secondary generally then it should not be in the policy it should be taken out of the [2:47:18] policy because I do not want writing on the assurances nor will I approve a policy for gifted and talented where we [2:47:25] have not had a chance to talk about how can we best meet the needs of gifted and talented students cuz quite frankly I [2:47:31] think we need to expand that to lower grades we have a whole study and recommendations of how to meet their [2:47:38] needs I don't know why we say that we don't have any of this we did a study [2:47:43] right there yeah I think it's important to get some of these questions answered but I wouldn't I'm not signing off on [2:47:49] any process that makes this another 18 month or even six month process I think [2:47:54] we need to have a better cost estimate I think we need board direction that that should be worth administrator time to [2:48:00] tell us if $25,000 per class of the eight classes is too high [2:48:05] just right to low more discussion around the impact and best practices but again you know there's so much out there that [2:48:13] we we say we're gonna look for best practice and frankly I struggled to find an example when we could all agree on [2:48:20] what what literature what input even with start times we heard valid [2:48:25] arguments about best practice from both sides and we heard it from teachers on both sides we heard a lot of different [2:48:31] perspectives some of it was about neuroscience and some of was about individual children or individual [2:48:37] families so I wouldn't I don't sign off in any process that imagines we're gonna find consensus here when we couldn't [2:48:44] find it there so I don't know that's just someone where I'm think my thoughts are and and then the other piece of all [2:48:51] of this is actually are we developing a policy that's proactively addressing [2:48:59] some of the issues that we're seeing happening in our community and whether [2:49:05] or not an expert is going to tell me that embedded honours may be and it may [2:49:13] be very good at serving the needs of our kids but am I going to convince the [2:49:22] families that are looking at Edina and comparing us to another opportunity [2:49:28] whether or not we will be there choice school because of that I have to say [2:49:35] that we should be looking proactively at what the community is looking for in [2:49:44] schools as far as programming and we do know that people are unsatisfied enough [2:49:54] to leave our district because of that so we know people come to the district [2:50:00] because of what we offer so I think if you were actually the one that said at the last minute you don't know what the [2:50:06] community thoughts are on this I'm yeah that was before I remembered to look up [2:50:12] in the Leatherman survey which said that with failure to meet the low and middle [2:50:17] kids as well it's driving people from the district it asked what the main reason for your decision was for leaving the district [2:50:24] that was what is the main reason and it [2:50:29] was 15% said gifted and talented programming all right so my recollection [2:50:40] was when he asked the question he was he told the board that the main reason that [2:50:46] people gave for not meeting the needs was not meeting the needs of the low and middle Werner's do it so but let's go I [2:50:54] can show you where that is the process because it seems to me that we should be [2:51:00] able to agree upon next steps and I'm here if you want a narrower scope I've [2:51:06] asked you to participate in putting this so that you're quite able to raise that [2:51:11] point and push it forward and again if if we can't figure it out among the [2:51:17] three of us then we'll just be back here before the full board [2:51:29] one even I think it's important to come back here I think this was important to [2:51:35] have on camera there were recollections shared with the public or summaries [2:51:41] sometimes motivated summaries that couldn't possibly capture nobody [2:51:46] watching this video could possibly summarize it to somebody else on another moment who said outside from saying you [2:51:53] should watch the video which they couldn't do if we didn't have it at a regular session right I very much appreciate the chance to have this [2:51:59] discussion in this format because it's something that's important and actually to a point Matt brought up before there [2:52:05] aren't many issues to head seem to split the board like this one and we do tend to work well together on so much if you [2:52:12] know if we all agree now that maybe you're not the quickest but we work fairly well this is unusual it's unusual [2:52:19] for something to to say split people who [2:52:24] all have the same goals in mind you know and that's doing the best that we can and appreciating the people the teachers [2:52:29] the administrators who are doing the best they can and it's it's a sensitive [2:52:35] question in in some phrases that people would refer to two different courses is tracking and that's that's a terrible [2:52:42] word in education others would say tracking is when you kind of pick like well not to pick on a country in Europe [2:52:49] but to pick and about fourth grade which direction somebody's going and to give [2:52:55] them a pipeline that just shoots them right out in that direction that you knew they'd go and they don't have any [2:53:00] chance to change their position they don't have the on ramps and the off ramps they're not given the high quality [2:53:05] education and because we're talking about high quality best program we can [2:53:12] offer with all of the bells and whistles that our teacher can put in and still keep the class kind of focused and going [2:53:17] and monitored for the emphasis on individual growth which frankly I heard the administrators say was selfish but [2:53:23] individual growth it's not enough to say that students are already fine they'll be fine they already met the standard [2:53:28] everybody deserves to grow so if we have a plan that's looking at that for everybody supports some of them will be [2:53:36] ideas we haven't frankly heard of yet figure out what their cost figure out how you're going to sequence some [2:53:42] instead the summer learning loss is a pretty ambitious goal if you're not excited about that holy cow so we've got some [2:53:48] big endeavors this is relatively old and affordable and yet it's a major sticking [2:53:55] point and frankly I think the district would be better off if we get on to the other stuff rather than making this the [2:54:02] focus of an extended process but it's not tracking because you have you have everybody on an opportunity path for for [2:54:10] college if they want it we've talked about creating partnerships for other opportunities if you want it we've [2:54:15] talked about everybody should have the best general education they can we but [2:54:21] some need faster and the curriculum so it's frankly it's almost like you imagine the old system being low medium [2:54:28] high and double high and what we have is somewhere with the double high and high [2:54:34] kind of merged and the medium and high kind of merge work I think we're coming in between there but these are no matter [2:54:39] what class you take in our schools you're going to have a great teacher it's not like we're compartmentalized with teachers are a great curriculum [2:54:46] great peers good experience I haven't heard anything other than that but the [2:54:52] exact mechanics of whether there are two classes or not are divisive at this moment just one last thought real quick [2:54:59] is Ellen it's about the one time is that just to boil this down to one thing because I I do appreciate what you said [2:55:05] a few minutes ago about the idea that the seven of us usually work toward a conclusion together we had the same [2:55:10] general ideas in mind and so with that as a concept what I think we're going [2:55:18] we're kind of going from the the tactic all the way to a big ideological thing and back and forth and I don't think any [2:55:24] of the seven of us have an ideology around hitting kids against each other or groups against each other or not my [2:55:31] perspective that I've tried to voice tonight is that we do have one bucket of money and we do have one 8,400 student [2:55:40] population group that we're trying to serve all of and I just feel like I voted against a pea seminar when that [2:55:46] came in from English last year that seems to surprise a lot of people I didn't have the information I didn't [2:55:52] have the cost and I didn't understand that we were really trying to do and I just no matter what I [2:55:58] feel this process is a bit rushed and I would like to understand it better that's what I heard Erica and let me [2:56:03] sing and I don't hear anybody saying get rid of enrichment get rid of classes just when I look at eight classes on [2:56:09] there and I like think about all the things we have to do and we are starting to get feedback now from the strategic planning sessions that just this should [2:56:16] be done formulaic ly not eighteen months but not my opinion one or two I think [2:56:22] there's a proper time frame and a proper set of steps we go through to validate whether this is an acceptable approach [2:56:27] or not and I realized there's time constraints and there's curriculum or terms or things like that that kind of [2:56:33] people's heads but right now I would prefer to see more information than where we are all right [2:56:48] unless there's an objection I think we should go onto the action items so can I [2:56:54] get a motion to approve the issuance of general obligation school building and [2:57:00] refunding bonds series 219 B would it be [2:57:12] inappropriate to tell you to keep this short no no John take whatever time you need I [2:57:20] think we talked about this last month oh yes we did good evening chair wall and Freedman superintendent Schultz and [2:57:26] members of the board this is a board requested parameters resolution to establish a floor for the savings that [2:57:34] we would like to realize when we refund bonds on October 24th the resolution has [2:57:43] a floor of 4.1% the minimum that we have to have by state statute is 3% soar [2:57:50] above 1% above that and the revised presale report also shows estimated [2:57:56] savings which I know Ehlers has a little bit of cushioning of about five point two six seven percent so how it asks for [2:58:04] the board's approval take questions at this time I don't have any questions [2:58:10] this is what we asked you to bring to us soon all right [2:58:19] yes I guess it is okay all those in favor of approving the motion to approve [2:58:25] the issuance of general obligation school building and refunding bond series 219 B say aye aye [2:58:31] any opposed motion carried thank you thanks John so mirror that policy 606 is going to be [2:58:38] another two-hour discussion well then it is a policy about the discussion of controversial issues I apologize for [2:58:45] that now this is a policy entitled selection and now its review of instructional text materials content or [2:58:53] issues with an eye towards questions of appropriateness or controversy it is the [2:59:01] policy we brought up a month ago so I won't go into such detail but I will say there was a concern a month ago about [2:59:07] how much to review upon reception of a complaint and sort of the the two types [2:59:14] of complaints and one is I don't mind what you're doing but I'm opting my child out of it or my or a student [2:59:20] saying I won't opt out of it and the other being this seems inappropriate to [2:59:25] me for for the grade level or the subject matter or the relevance to an education and I think you should review [2:59:32] it with an eye towards whether it should be pulled away from everybody not just my own child and so there are the update [2:59:37] here is there are two different pathways of procedures depending on which type of [2:59:43] complaint it is if it's if it's an individual or if it's the our concern for everybody so it's it's a formatted a [2:59:50] little differently from last month credit to our to our team from the district who put that together Sarah and [2:59:57] John behind the scenes I think it it flows better than it did before and it [3:00:04] meets that concern in a way that hopefully you guys approve what we [3:00:11] talked about last month was was was just that you know a parent comes it's for whatever reason says my child is not [3:00:17] going to read this book so it didn't need to go through that review process so the way I read this now is if there's [3:00:23] that type of complaint they will just be given another option and and I do like [3:00:29] that it put in here with quest for confidentiality I think that's I really appreciate that and then and [3:00:37] then still having the procedure and they did I actually called a mere today just to ask about the change in the language [3:00:43] on number eight in appendices in appendix five but it looks like the the [3:00:51] listing of race color and all of that that is reflective of what we changed in four thirteen so that was just updated [3:00:58] is that correct yeah there's the point she's mentioning is a sentence that [3:01:04] starts with the discussion will not reflect adversely upon persons because of and then it lists a long list of [3:01:10] categories and and it's modeled after the categories that are also listed in [3:01:16] for thirteen which is a non-discrimination policy because it wasn't in the version that we looked at [3:01:22] a month ago so I just want to verify that we're not excluding anybody but in fact we're just adhering closer to our [3:01:29] four thirteen and that all all protected classes are covered thank you all right [3:01:38] any other questions otherwise all those in favor of approving the revised policy 606 say aye [3:01:43] any opposed motion carried I think [3:01:51] Loretta motion well that's too bad let's go back and get a motion all right [3:01:59] now we'll just this one more time all those in favor of approving policy 606 say aye aye any opposed motion carried [3:02:07] thank you Sarah it's a good thing someone's listening all right now there [3:02:13] any I think we've had a bunch of committee updates here as we went through the evening any updates anything [3:02:20] else to add finance is refunding and refinancing bonds that's good all right [3:02:27] we have completed the agenda is there any objection to a journey hearing none [3:02:33] we are adjourned thank you everybody