[0:18] hello oh there we go okay we're back from recess ready to [0:23] continue with the meeting so I think the [0:28] next item was the presentation thank you [0:34] is this on there we go [0:41] Thank You chair wall on Freedman superintendents school board members [0:47] community members for your patience as we get organized for this Schultz [0:52] Schultz I don't know it's after 10:00 p.m. it's after 10:00 p.m. so I'm gonna [1:09] hear about that tomorrow okay tell me [1:17] what kind of coffee you want I'll take care of so Randi smuzzle director of teaching learning I'm joined here in our [1:23] conversation with Katie Mahoney our principal over at Highlands Elementary Andy Beaton our principal at [1:29] the high school Chris Holden our principal at Normandale Shan deadly our principal at value of you and Karen Bergman our principal at Countryside [1:36] elementary so thank you for being here this evening we are going to talk about [1:41] a little bit of the current reality and how we're meeting the needs of advanced learners at each of the levels we're [1:47] also going to talk a little bit about our our thoughts about the impact of proposed policy 601 so in terms of the [1:55] district summary which I'll start with I'm going to review a little bit of information about our quick and review [2:00] cycle and a little bit of how that works some of our estimates of the costs of [2:06] proposed changes and an estimated timeline or what may be that potentially [2:12] would look like and then also try to articulate some of the uncertainties we [2:18] have about the proposed changes in policy 601 in terms of the design expectations and what substitutive lis [2:25] different means what what is intended in terms of T your qualifications and certification [2:32] staffing teacher prep load and then some of our principals will speak to the impacts that they perceive at elementary [2:38] middle school and high school so part of what we're trying to do is answer the question what would be the impact of [2:44] these changes in our programming so I'm gonna start with impact considerations [2:50] around curriculum so when we develop curriculum for courses whether it's a [2:56] new course or a deeply redesigned course we start out with the model for costing [3:02] so we look at how many units are typical for a course so maybe 10 units across the year typically we allow for four [3:10] hour four hours of development time per unit typically we would have a teacher [3:16] team working on it rather than a teacher in isolation times a rate of pay would [3:21] be approximately $4,000 or if we were able to do the work through releasing [3:26] teachers via substitutes then that is significantly less expensive oftentimes [3:32] if we are designing a new course or redeveloping a course in that course needs textbooks or needs materials a [3:39] hundred and ten dollars or so per book is a pretty good estimate if we were to [3:45] estimate a third of students in a particular grade level taking a particular course that cost would be [3:51] around 23,000 but of course other equipment and materials as curriculum gets developed sometimes those are other [3:59] additional expenses for example a different kind of science course might require some science equipment that we [4:05] don't use in in a regular course and so that particular equipment might have [4:11] some expense to it obviously and then we have a category of professional development so we typically would do [4:16] professional development on the curricular resources and on the the materials that were purchased and then [4:23] we also do assessment development so we're building common summative assessments and sometimes common [4:29] formative assessments as part of the process so that we have some guarantees for the for the curriculum in terms of [4:37] what's delivered regardless of which teacher what school and that all is a work in progress but those are common [4:43] elements that we have put in place when we were developing curriculum in terms of how that flesh is [4:50] out then when we looked at the proposed policy changes we saw that there were a [4:55] number of classes at the middle school so I count one in language arts two in science and two in social studies that [5:00] were asked to be developed by next fall so that's five classes at middle school and I think with the last discussion on [5:08] policy 601 precalculus was removed from that list and so that leaves eight courses at the high school level now the [5:16] other than language arts nine and ten the rest of the courses have an enriched course in place and so there are some [5:24] questions that we have about honors versus enriched in the board's intention [5:29] on how that policy differentiates those two if we go to the next slide then and [5:37] multiply that out so five courses at the middle school level taking into [5:42] consideration some of those other factors we think around 160,000 we would begin to put together a budget for and [5:50] then in terms of high school instead of nine courses we'll make that now eight and so two hundred fifty six thousand [5:57] certainly courses that don't need textbooks print materials would be less if print materials were available [6:04] digitally or through an open source or free medium that would certainly be less certainly courses like science that need [6:10] equipment might have more substantial cost to them and that would need to be considered as well so then one of the [6:17] things that we thought about would be okay well you know if we assume a certain amount of cost where would those [6:23] dollars come from and and I felt like there were a couple of different approaches that could be taken around [6:28] that option one would be to pause current curriculum development work and redirect those resources to this [6:34] particular project to implement the changes in policy 601 so I think that that would be an option another option [6:41] could be to secure new budget for this particular project and improve the necessary budget reductions or balancing [6:48] that would need to go along with that in spring of 2020 because as all of you know our school district doesn't get [6:54] additional bumps we are always operating within the funds we were given so if we were to pause [7:00] what would that mean so just to make the board aware of that prior to your final [7:06] discussion and decision about this so current projects that we're working on this year include k-12 our curricular [7:11] review we're in year two of that work and part of the part of the end of this [7:18] study will be to buy materials and buy supplies and equipment for the art [7:23] program and the art teachers we're also in year two of the k-12 music study and [7:29] so one of the big outcomes of the music study is we buy new music that that meets the needs and principles of design [7:35] that were set out by the committee we're also in year one of the k-12 science study which we've shared before with the [7:42] board because of the number of courses listed in the policy regarding science [7:49] we feel like we would have to continue the science study at the secondary level [7:54] because we wouldn't redesign the courses and then do the science study and then [7:59] redesign them again a year later so we probably want to continue that but at the elementary level we would probably [8:05] have to pause that implementation again if we were going with option one in terms of the impact of that then it just [8:12] kind of pushes these other studies back a year so in 2021 we're looking at k-12 [8:17] science in year two and six twelve language arts in year one so we would push that back a year in 21 22 language [8:26] arts would be in year two and social studies would be a near one so again we consider pushing that back as well in [8:33] terms of other curricular projects that might need to come under consideration one of the things that we are dealing [8:39] with as a district is Minnesota Department of Education is moving curricular cycles academic standards [8:47] review cycles rather to a tenure cycle from what has typically been a seven-year cycle and part of what we are [8:53] doing an analysis of right now is finding those areas where we have gaps where we've adopted materials and [9:00] resources on a seven-year plan but now we're finding that as the state has [9:06] redefined some of these standards review cycles that there might be a gap three years with some of our content [9:12] areas for example in grade 8 social studies we saw that there was a gap [9:18] where our but our digital subscriptions to online textbooks ran out and so to [9:25] fill that three year gap before those standards are reviewed and put into place we had to extend that to make it [9:31] really now what is a ten year adoption and that cost was 35,000 we know that [9:36] next fall AP US history has some digital subscriptions for online textbooks at a [9:43] price of about twenty-five thousand there's a few other of these that we're trying to find and figure out which of [9:50] these areas have a little bit of a gap based on this new curricular review cycle but that's some ongoing work that [9:56] we're doing in our department another area of consideration is we've been working through the language arts implementation for multiple years we [10:02] started with phase one where we brought in being a writer making meaning and being reader resources in curriculum and [10:09] training with staff then we moved to Phase two where we bought resources for classroom libraries across the district [10:15] phase three the benchmark assessment system has been funded primarily by the middle or the elementary schools both [10:22] from school budgets and I believe PTO funds and we're still continuing to work on incorporating the benchmark [10:29] assessment system and doing training with staff around that and then phase four was intended to be additional [10:35] materials for small group reading materials and we just haven't been able to get to phase four yet to add those [10:41] materials but that would be another consideration of impact toward cost and [10:46] then in terms of some other areas we've had conversations so I apologize with a [10:51] little bit of overlap there that should say early childhood curriculum so one of the things that we've talked with our [10:58] folks downstairs about is making sure we have curriculum that's aligned with the [11:03] elementary program and there's a desire to take a look at early childhood curriculum downstairs and then we have [11:10] other things that kind of you know weren't necessarily in the long-term plan but we realized that there were [11:17] some areas of higher need and some areas of needed responsiveness and so we've looked at things like Sunday essentials [11:24] and mending that in all k2 classrooms and that was relative relatively recent [11:29] adventure that we've been working on and I think we have all of our k2 teachers trained or pretty close to all of them [11:35] being trained at this point but one of the one of the elements of that is to also do follow-up coaching in the [11:41] classroom and so there are things that come up at times that weren't necessarily in the long-term plan but we [11:47] feel like you know we need to redirect and be responsive to some of the needs that are emerging and so that's just [11:53] another example of things that we would have to you know figure out how to navigate I guess in terms of a timeline [12:02] you know one of the things that we talked about is just this this lack of [12:07] clarity around what the substantially different mean because that's mentioned in the policy about these courses being [12:13] substantially different from the regular course and so we're making an assumption [12:19] that there would have to be some kind of framework that we'd bid with that would be developed to articulate what does [12:24] substantially different mean part of the challenges in our courses is that they're not necessarily or I'm sorry [12:32] enriched courses is that they're not necessarily substantially different they're different in in some ways in [12:39] some unique ways but because they're still addressing the same standards as the regular course the key design of [12:46] them is that they will extend those standards they might have a little bit faster pacing they might have some more [12:52] time they might have 10 maybe 15% new or different curricular experiences but the [12:59] bulk of those classes are the same because you're still addressing the same standards so part of the challenge of [13:05] the design is that it doesn't really lend itself to substantially different [13:11] as we're thinking about because you're still addressing the same standards in there so a framework would have to be [13:17] designed around that we're assuming that we would have to bring a teacher team together to do that so it works in all [13:22] the content areas because we wouldn't go out and redesign the courses without some kind of framework around it so that [13:28] we make sure we get a design that meets the expectations in the policy and then we would bring that back probably in [13:35] January and have some kind of framework for the board to approve prior to doing that [13:40] design we would also have to develop a number of course descriptions rapidly because those would go into the [13:47] registration guide we wouldn't be able to speak to the entire course but we would just have a general description of [13:53] what we think that would be about and then between February and May we would need to bring teacher teams together to [13:58] develop those courses so 13 courses not 14 and so somewhere between probably 28 [14:06] and 38 teachers would be involved with that work and we're estimating 10 to 12 [14:11] sub days per person depending upon the framework again and what substantially different means but what those teacher [14:17] teams would do is they would develop units they would select or they would [14:23] create a rubric for identifying materials and be able to select materials then they would review [14:28] materials and typically we pilot those materials so we run materials in classrooms for a little while to get [14:34] feedback from students and staff about what's working what's resonating for kids then we would select those [14:39] materials write rationale present that to the board for purchase we'd need to order those materials and develop our [14:45] common assessments and that would have to be done by May and then in August in the workshop week would be your time [14:51] when we would offer professional learning than training one of the other questions that was presented to our [14:57] small group is how do we know that students are growing as individuals and what are some of the ways that we're tracking that I think we did speak to [15:04] some of it in the world's best workforce report but we do have internal measures that we use including teacher formative assessments teacher course summative [15:11] assessments we do intervention monitoring so we're monitoring student progress we have teams in each of the [15:17] buildings that are monitoring the learning progress of all of our students and checking in and adapting and modifying what we need to do as students [15:24] are learning or not learning at a rate that we need we also use grades at the secondary level to monitor progress [15:30] externally we use things like map tests to measure growth and we use MC [15:36] performance year after year looking at cohort growth some community members spoke to this slide previously about how [15:44] students fall out and so I'm sharing this as data when we talk about growth and we look at the [15:50] five bars on the right the five bars on the right represent about 85% of the student population so we could say about [15:56] 85% the student population grades two through eight on the 2019 map reading [16:02] test met or exceeded their projected growth targets which is phenomenal to [16:08] have 85% hitting the growth targets are exceeding the growth targets again in reading in grades two through eight [16:14] about 15% not meeting the expected growth targets so what this in terms of [16:21] how learners are growing this is showing where learners are not growing as fast as other learners in the system in terms [16:27] of reading in grades 2 through 8 as indicated by the 2019 map reading test and then in the next slide it's a little [16:35] bit it's quite a bit less we have about 52% in those far right bars still we [16:40] have that blue whale as Donna described earlier rather than a bell curve in terms of data distribution and about 48 [16:47] percent not quite meeting expected growth targets so in terms of need in [16:54] terms of where we see additional energy we see that you know these are some areas that has the system as [17:00] administrators and teachers we realize that there's some additional energy that's needed for the system we have [17:06] proposed in a work session a k-12 talent development framework that has four pathways there was some reference to [17:13] that in policy 601 but we believe that there's still some may be some clarity [17:19] that's needed around what we intended in terms of the design of those pathways so enrichment is really about critical [17:24] thinking and creative problem solving and we see enrichment as something that should be embedded in all classes for [17:31] all students and it's not that it's not we just want to continue to grow that and raise that to another level [17:37] everybody up here and and our teachers in this district support having rigorous learning environments for kids and part [17:43] of what we set out with with the talent development framework is to articulate how we can maximize that in ways that [17:49] we're not currently doing it so growing enrichment opportunities for kids [17:55] extended learning is where I'd categorize honors types of classes because those really provide an [18:02] opportunity to provide an extent to standards not different standards but an extension to the standards that [18:08] students are supposed to meet her the Minnesota academic standards requirement earned honors at the high school is [18:15] another delivery method that's that's not a separate course but it's another delivery method that we are testing out [18:22] regarding how to extend the learning for students the second the third one [18:27] accelerated learning is one of those areas that at the secondary level few districts across the country truly have [18:35] accelerated programming an example of that that we are piloting is the [18:41] compacted Science in the middle school and the research is really clear about the benefits of acceleration and there [18:47] are many disks or there are some districts as we went out and studied course design frameworks in other districts there are some districts that [18:55] have gone this way and so what this does is this provides opportunities that [19:00] students who are learning at advanced rates this provides those students an opportunity to compact the time it takes [19:07] to learn a curriculum so they can open up an entirely new course choice we feel [19:13] like this idea has a lot of Merit it's supported by the research and this would be a great way to explore how we could [19:22] meet the needs of advanced learners differently than what Edina is currently doing so as an example if we accelerate [19:28] come if we compact the science in middle school and accelerate those students or completely middle school science [19:34] curriculum in two years instead of three and it opens up an entirely different choice for them in that third year and [19:40] then on the back end in high school they if they finish one of the requirements in ninth grade it opens up an entirely [19:46] different course that is substantially different than maybe the honors design [19:53] and we just want to be really clear about presenting that another pathway for us to grow in all of our courses [20:00] that will help meet the needs of advanced learners and other learners is authentic learning opportunities where [20:06] students have an opportunity to apply their skills and knowledge to new and novel situations whether they're solving [20:12] a community based problem or they are engineering a new design for something that they're trying to solve [20:19] whatever that is the more we can have them apply learning to real-world application opportunities the better [20:27] that learning is going to stick with them so we believe that the proposed policy as it's written does not enforce or [20:35] reinforce all of these pathways that it really has a focus on one and we think [20:41] that there are some limitations to that focus on one because it's it's just too [20:47] narrow in its design or in its definition and so we feel like that may reduce the ability to offer compacted or [20:53] accelerated courses at the secondary level and we'll talk more about that in just a few minutes in terms of the [21:00] impact and qualifications I think we had a clarification in the last policy update that middle school in high school [21:05] would not be counted as areas where it would be required for GT certification [21:12] so you can correct me if I'm wrong but that's what I thought I read in the last update and so if we look at elementary [21:17] we have five advanced academics teachers that have a GT certification we have [21:23] eight that do not currently so we did look at some costs of programs to get GT [21:28] certification and generally they're 9 to 12 months to complete those programs at a cost of about forty three hundred [21:34] forty four hundred so that was taken from Hamlin University but there are certainly other programs it wouldn't [21:39] have to be Hamlin so we estimated the cost for those credentials would be about thirty five thousand so one of our [21:45] questions was you know is that this is directed is this something that the district would pay for with teachers [21:52] have to pay for this and if so by when would they need to complete it because even if they entered into a program [21:58] they're typically nine to twelve months they would not have time enough to finish that program by next fall thereby [22:04] we would not be able to meet that specific specification in the policy as it is written and with that that was a [22:12] lot of fast talking I'm trying to go quick cuz it's after ten o'clock and I'm gonna turn it over to Chris Holden to speak a little bit about Elementary [22:18] thanks Randy so all of our elementary schools offer advanced learning [22:24] opportunities programming includes young scholars advanced academics math and [22:29] advanced academics reading young scholars is designed to increase access to and representation in advanced [22:36] classes for students that are historically underrepresented in these classes ideally students and young [22:41] scholars would matriculate to advanced academics reading and math advanced [22:46] academics math and reading build on the grade-level standards and reach beyond them students access these classes based [22:53] on a portfolio of evidence including map scores teacher input and classroom [22:58] performance in class different differentiation occurs primarily in math [23:03] and reading at the elementary level and then finally there are other opportunities for enrichment at the [23:10] elementary level that include Math Olympiad junior grade books etc these are typically offered in partnership [23:16] with community ed PTO s and the individual buildings resources so Karin [23:26] Bergman Caity Mahoney and I worked on these slides about a week ago and since we submitted the slides for the [23:33] presentation the policy has been revised so some of the bullet points are no longer pertinent I'll talk about those [23:39] that are first of all I'm still unclear if we if elementary teachers working in [23:45] advanced academics will need gifted licensure if they do then there will be some professional development and some [23:53] some advanced coursework that they'll need to participate in additionally some [23:59] of the other financial considerations depending on how policy 601 is implemented there may be some impact on [24:08] the current language arts and math curriculum if they're deemed insufficiently [24:13] rigorous if we need to redevelop that curriculum as a side note both the math [24:20] and the language arts curriculum were recently revamped on the in both [24:25] advanced math and advanced reading scheduling considerations if if we [24:31] adhere strictly to the language of the policy and consider that pull out in [24:37] separate classes need to be offered some of our buildings may have trouble scheduling that [24:42] and if they were to schedule it it may there may be a staffing impact in terms [24:48] of dollars needed and then finally if we if if in fact gifted licensure is needed [24:55] for these advanced academics classes I know in my building I have two part-time [25:01] staff members currently filling those roles I love the job they're doing I'm [25:07] not sure if they're interested in going back to school to get their gifted [25:12] license to continue to do that work student considerations I think with the [25:18] revised policy the language stipulates that we'd be offering advanced math in [25:26] grades 3 through 5 and advanced reading in grades four and five so the [25:32] fragmented day probably is less applicable under the revision the [25:38] revised policy than the policy that we saw and responded to chair wall and [25:51] Freeman and superintendent Schultz it is after 10:30 but I did get the name right [25:57] so we're happy about that and it's a little past my bedtime but we're gonna go with it anyway [26:05] all right well played so I was charged [26:10] to Tim Anderson and I were charged with looking at the impact of middle school program design for 601 and we realized [26:20] that there's there's a lot and so I will try to fly through some of these these [26:26] ideas not all of them are still pertinent because there's some revisions in the policy after we actually [26:34] submitted the slides so currently the current reality with middle school program design is that students have [26:40] access to enrichment through classes through level classes at each grade level they vary in terms of what they [26:47] are from academic from advanced academics reading to compacted science to enrich classes [26:53] they do basically follow the same standards although with compacted it is different because it's a couple years [27:00] worth of standards in one year we also have enrichment opportunities by virtue of the fact that our schedule allows for [27:07] eight different schedule scheduling choices for kids and that is really a [27:14] eighth period day over two days gives kids sixteen options semester options in [27:19] a year and when compared with a for instance a sixth period day or seven period day kids have more access to [27:25] choice by virtue of that and they are allowed to choose things outside of [27:31] academics to enrich themselves and explore which is integral to the middle [27:36] school philosophy the other part is that through our pathway work that we're working in middle school on and having [27:43] flex time and providing opportunity and access to different kinds of enrichments enhancements and extensions students can [27:49] choose to be with a peer group or choose to seek out those extensions with with [27:55] the flex time opportunities that both middle schools offer impact considerations again we looked at the [28:03] cost of what it would be to have gifted teachers be certified in the middle school and with with including some [28:11] possible costs of hourly wages to attend the classes actual curriculum writing different things [28:16] our numbers suggest that it could be upwards of $400,000 at the middle school [28:22] level which is an equivalent of four FTEs when we look at that some other [28:29] impact decisions and design questions we have then this gets into some the [28:35] nitty-gritty of scheduling and and I have scheduled and don't want to get [28:42] like all sorts of like you know jargony here but let me just see if I can break it down for you the more the more [28:49] options you have tied in your schedule to a schedule framework that's really good so eight options for kids to take [28:56] classes throughout the day is a really good thing because it allows 16 semester options in an over a course of a [29:01] middle-school career that's a lot of different things that kids can take that's 48 hours they in a semester but having the options [29:10] available within a course framework is a little trickier because then you're really parsing that out and making more [29:15] permutations for students to go through in there and their day and so generally [29:22] speaking schedule options good we want a lot of those course options harder [29:28] because when you have a system where there's a finite number of courses of [29:34] when kids can take the courses who can teach the courses how many minutes the courses can be and a finite number of [29:41] teachers who might be able to do that licensure wise you create more permutations with choice than might be [29:48] available finite wise so the more pathways you offer within a course for [29:54] kids to choose it creates more schedule variability and that more schedule [29:59] variability at some point will mean that some kids won't get what they want because there's just a lot of ways to do [30:05] it let me let me draw you another picture let's say that you had a room full of furniture and in that room full [30:12] of furniture you have desks and lamps and you have tables and they're all [30:19] connected together they're all connected together so you are told well I want you [30:25] to take a lamp out of that room when you take the lamp out of the room you just can't take the lamp out of the room the [30:30] lamp comes out with the chairs some of the tables and some of the dusts when we [30:37] add more options within a course taking a piece adding honors adding enrich [30:43] adding compacting what happens is we put more furniture in the room we tie it all together and we make it harder for us to [30:53] remove one single thing and actually make the schedule work because all of it is so complex and tied to one another [30:59] you can't just flop one in and expect the schedule will work the same it won't at some point when you get so many [31:05] presentations the number of conflicts will rise so at the furniture in the [31:10] room is the best analogy I can give you without actually sitting down with you and scheduling it's it's harder to [31:17] resolve conflicts when you have increased variability because there's not as many places where [31:22] you can do it it also raises an idea that we would be a greater risk of having uneven teams D teams classes what [31:32] we call in the business bad numbers so if 45 kids want a class in honors [31:38] Language Arts and there are 300 kids in in the grade level then 45 can't be one [31:45] class it has to be two classes which leaves bigger classes and everything else or more staffing that's hired to [31:52] cover and make the classes of a regular class size so there's going to be less [31:57] options to balance classes when you have more variability balancing becomes more [32:03] difficult and that impacts the entire program Singleton's and unbalanced class [32:10] rosters will be more common it will put stress on all classes and class sizes [32:16] and staffing because there is a finite number of staffing and FTEs that we are allocated and if the staffing allocation [32:24] goes to creating more sections to accommodate one subject area then that [32:30] means something else can't run because of it and so there would be some choices that to be made on that with all this [32:36] said the impact considerations of middle school would be really moving away from the design of a middle school which is [32:43] all about relationship and having a teeny model to becoming more of a disjointed system more like a junior [32:49] high and in a middle school is responsive to a student's needs at that [32:55] time in their life and to put our arms around kids and support them in a way [33:01] that makes sense socially emotionally and academically and to have so many different pathways would leave students [33:08] disconnected from teams and teacher teams and although kids may not notice it teachers certainly will because they [33:15] will be less able to support them in a teeny manner it would become more difficult and the relationship with the [33:20] building mechanisms and the authentic connection inherent in middle school would be would be lost it would be [33:28] harder to keep let's say that and then finally just the coffins [33:33] and staffing stress on other areas and other electives as I said I don't believe this can be done in a cost neutral way because you have more [33:41] likelihood of having those bad numbers of which we speak and when we have so [33:46] many different variability options and those bad numbers you really left with a choice of do you want to tell some kids [33:54] they don't get the class do you want to run some classes with much higher numbers so that you can run two sections [34:00] of the bad numbers or you want to add staffing and if you add staffing under a finite pot of money then something else [34:08] won't be offered in other schools nearby that do this they they have really [34:14] abandoned and a middle school model and gone with more of a sixth period day which is certainly a more cost-effective [34:20] way to run it but that simply means that students will be making forced choices between either being in a world language [34:26] or having a band having an honors class or having Project Lead the Way so [34:33] there's four choices that go along with having some of those things and I think it's just good to think about the [34:41] furniture in the room and once you have all that furniture all connected together it's hard to remove an ad and [34:48] have pathways that work for kids seamlessly test great do I have the [35:04] authority to declare tomorrow on e-learning day at this point I don't have that authority [35:09] well Randy does oh all right well thanks for the [35:21] opportunity to visit about this policy tonight I think first up I just want to make sure I am very open and transparent [35:28] about the high school our teachers the principal of the high school is very supportive of advanced an accelerated [35:36] academic pathways for our students at the high school okay I think that discussion is more about how we get [35:42] there and what that looks like so I think that's really the discussion that we're adding tonight the other thing too [35:47] is you know coming off of national merit a number of hours ago I'm just looking at really high [35:52] achieving high performing students I think we had over 40 commended and semi-finalists students so amazing kids [35:58] that have had an outstanding opportunity at Edina high school so you know some [36:03] numbers here this year we had the highest AC T composite in Minnesota for non charter public schools there's two [36:09] schools to charter schools that have less than 70 kids that had higher AC T composites than us better than that's [36:15] we're number one number one College Prep high school in Minnesota recognized number one for sending students to elite [36:22] colleges clearly number one for high school sports in Minnesota I apologize [36:27] that we're number two in STEM education recognized for Newsweek we're working on it in this order over 40 AP college in [36:35] the schools Project Lead the Way courses and enriched courses offered we gave over 2,500 AP exams about 85% or over [36:45] 85% proficiency we've got about half of our students are involved in in music [36:50] choir band ensembles or theater ensembles if you haven't gone to mathilde amazing best robotics team in [36:58] the state of Minnesota some new partnerships with the rotary about global competencies and and on and on [37:05] and you know and our seniors too on their survey 95% of our last two classes said that they were prepared for the [37:11] next level which is really affirming I think for our staff and then I was really excited this year I was talking [37:16] to our college and career counselors as of November 1st we had over 85 percent of our students that have already [37:22] applied to college for next year in by November 1 which is awesome so I I think [37:27] it's just important no like we are always a work in progress and we can always get better but kids go [37:33] to an incredible high school in Edina so it's it's an amazing place okay next slide some things just directly tied to the [37:41] specific language here in 601 as proposed you heard from our science [37:47] teachers tonight teachers that teach standard biology enriched biology and ap [37:53] biology those are all available and in some of the courses that are proposed in 601 it's really kind of redundant so [38:00] there's really not much of a change that is there because we currently have enriched level courses in math science [38:06] English social studies world language engineering Fine Arts so it really will not have much of an impact so I think if [38:13] this is really about English that's another that's another discussion but in terms of every other subject area those [38:20] pieces are already there a question about precalculus how we've done math [38:25] acceleration as kids that are above level one year accelerated two-year accelerated they are already getting [38:32] advanced or accelerated level of study it is potentially in a heterogeneous by [38:37] grade level in a classroom but really adding an honors track in precalculus [38:43] because it ends up being the same standards we just only add to some of the scheduling conflicts that Sean was [38:49] talking about some things some highlights you know English 2012 was the [38:55] time that they detract English whatever your opinion is about that but we are in [39:00] the middle of a pilot related to earned honors within the 10th grade class so [39:05] this is all students that are taught both grade level and above grade level standards in the class and they are [39:11] graded a through F based on their proficiency on grade level standards but [39:18] they're recognized and potentially can earn honors for the course by showing and demonstrating proficiency of above [39:25] grade level standards now so far within our two assessments that we've done this year because we're just getting started [39:30] the teachers are informing we've got about 50% of our students that are reaching that honors level standard [39:36] which is a higher percentage then typically just do honors or enriched enrolment just by registration so [39:42] if you look at those numbers if that trend continues and we have a number of students that earn honors in tenth grade we will be recommending at least those [39:50] students continue on and take Advanced Placement in 11th grade which will increase our ap enrollment in English in [39:57] the junior year so we're hoping those trends will continue one of the things we're talking about kind of tied to this [40:03] about the research is that we are looking at compacted options one of them we're excited about what's happening in [40:10] science and the opportunity for kids to accelerate and there's been some preliminary discussions about compacting [40:16] potentially in English language arts so again the idea is not just a separate class with the same standards but a [40:23] truly class for accelerated learners to be able to get through more standards in a more compacted amount of time to be [40:31] able to further their study going forward and so obviously going forward with this policy proposal I think will [40:37] derail some of that conversation we'll continue to use tearing and acceleration we do right now and enriched in AP but [40:45] there's some pretty substantial research about tracking and just the more levels [40:51] that you have the more it has an impact on segregation of students by race by [40:57] special ed by e-l so typically the more tracks that you have the more you have [41:03] those separations and ultimately sometimes they're denying students access to grade level curriculum over [41:09] time and we are working on as a school getting all of our Al and our special ed [41:14] kids access to grade level mainstream curriculum and helping provide the supports within the course so they can [41:20] stay on track you can see from the data that we had from world's best workforce [41:26] district-wide data pointing to a need to address achievement gaps by race second language and special education that's [41:32] some of the investment that we're doing at the high school in terms of professional development if trying to close some of those gaps and again it's [41:41] really really important if you want the this to work and policy 601 you need to [41:47] include the people that are going to implement this policy so again the high school principal and the teachers at the [41:54] high school are very supportive of Excel advanced-level pathways but I think a [41:59] conversation is warranted about what that looks like going forward in 601 so thanks thank you Andy just a couple of [42:07] final items we have some remaining key questions one of them is what student [42:12] data do you anticipate will change as a result of this policy change something [42:18] we're curious about what is the rationale for proposing the redevelopment of 1314 secondary courses [42:25] outside of a budgeted curriculum review cycle because we lay out the curriculum review cycle across multiple years and [42:31] then we budget and organize around that what would the framework for substantially different be is it [42:37] important to know how well the current and rich course model is working in terms of access and who's accessing the [42:44] model as it is will there be an Associated investment early learners preparing them for accessing these [42:51] advanced learning experiences will staff be required to obtain pay for qualifications and certification how [42:58] will this increase in separate course offerings impact staff and staffing and [43:03] are we clear about that and how would the timeline for implementation impact the system and just as an example we [43:09] know that as we head into this spring you know substitute teachers are always a challenge and just filling those roles [43:15] and oftentimes we have meetings where we don't have enough subs and they get called back to the building and then the meeting has said it's not really very [43:22] effective and so that happens at times the other element that happens is we know that the more we pull teachers out [43:29] the more detrimental that is to the quality of the experience in that classroom because our best opportunity [43:34] is with their classroom teacher so we try to minimize those teacher subs [43:39] pullouts during the year but that would that would definitely be a consideration [43:45] as part of the proposed policy and so I think John read some of this at the [43:51] beginning and as Andy mentioned I think there are ideas and ways to talk about [43:57] this but what we're asking for is a collaborative effort to really look at what are the needs we're trying to make [44:04] and then collaboratively figure out how can we make them in a way that administration [44:09] feels is implementable and at this time we'll pause and just ask if you have any [44:15] questions in terms of the presentation we prepared for you this evening there [44:50] any questions here so and II I just want to be clear on what [44:55] you said about the embedded honors so you used the term 50% of students so our [45:03] 50% of students attempting to obtain an honors designation or 50% achieving the [45:11] honors designation first two assessments of the year 50% achieved the honors [45:18] designation on the first two assessments I still didn't quite understand because [45:26] when we saw the report there was a distinction there was a number of students attempting and then percent of [45:32] them who succeeded and when you look at the number who attempted and succeeded [45:40] it was it was very small to 1% of the grade and so this would be a major [45:46] departure from that or you know telephone game yeah I think what it was [45:51] is that last year when you had that formal data that came to you it was before we actually even called it earned [45:57] honors you know it was basically expert writing standards and our kids didn't attempt it in the same way we were much [46:04] more transparent and communicating with families and kids the opportunity and [46:09] the framework of exactly what you would need to do to earn honors in the class so I'm just saying on the first two [46:15] assessments this year one was related to a reading comprehension standard tied to the Odyssey which they read read first [46:21] and then the second was a paper another exam that had earned honor standards in [46:27] there and so according to the pre AP ten teachers about 50% of the kids on those [46:33] first two assessments hit the standard so it doesn't mean that's what will be at the end of the semester but so far [46:40] preliminary it looks good that a number of students are attempting and and meeting the benchmark and so some kids [46:46] are doing it without extra help some kids are attending the extra flex sessions that our teachers are offering [46:51] so it's just the signs of good right now so I'm pleased [46:57] what what do they have to do to earn to get that on earned honors this 50% so [47:04] that with each assessment they have some different standards there's three standards that they have first semester [47:10] and there's three different standards second semester so to reach honors and earned honors for the semester they have [47:17] to hit each standard twice during the term so they they might earn honors by [47:23] you know they hit this first standard here on assessment one but they didn't on assessment two but they did on [47:29] assessment three so standard one would have been hit during the semester so the I'm trying to off the top of my head I [47:36] know that one of them is basically an Advanced Placement reading comprehension standard and one is tied to writing [47:44] again it's across disciplines that they have so basically they're introduced and taught all of these things that we [47:51] typically would ask for an 11th and 12th grader to be able to do in an English language arts course so they're all [47:57] taught this a hundred percent of our kids practice and are taught these things it's embedded within the course it's not like a separate piece but that [48:06] if they meet that standard on the assessment then they get recognized for honors and if they earn enough honors [48:11] designation over the course of the semester they will earn honors in the course can I had two questions regarding [48:21] the impact of the middle school model and one is regarding the rationale [48:28] behind we alternate having students do honors and social studies in science because I know that we take a year off [48:36] between and it's my understanding and I'm hoping you can correct me if I'm wrong but that we actually specifically [48:43] set it up that way so students could have an honors experience in one of [48:49] those categories one year in a different categories an alternating year and then [48:55] go back so then they could be more experiential in other areas so they [49:02] would get a flavor of what the honors felt like without it being too stressful is that correct [49:09] I just want to get more understanding about why it is set up that way yes that [49:14] is current and that that really would you know play well and if you put in the context of middle school model with kids [49:21] being able to explore and find what their passion is and really branch out and experience a lot of different things [49:26] that would really be a way to do it for students and an intentional in its [49:32] design okay and then my second question is my understanding one of the key [49:38] differences between the middle school model and a junior high model is that the middle schools [49:46] you can basically build a school within a school and so for example my daughter [49:51] is on a specific team and I can't for the life of me remember the team name but she's in a team and so her team [49:58] rotates with the exact same students to the exact same classes and one of the [50:06] benefits of that model is it makes the large school feel smaller and then the [50:12] other benefit is that the teachers can collaborate together so they're seeing [50:17] the same students and it increases collaboration for the teachers is that [50:23] and one of my concerns and I'm just wanted to make sure that I'm it the [50:30] middle school model quite frankly is a little complex to me so I just wanted to make sure I didn't that I'm have correct [50:35] that one of my concerns is that would we [50:40] be abandoning this and would it affect our teachers ability to collaborate to [50:48] understand the students that they have in the middle school and for the [50:53] students themselves to feel like they're part of a smaller group within the [51:00] school themselves so yes so right now there's about 350 sixth graders at [51:08] Valley View and they're divided between two teams we're really two and a half teams because we have an extended French [51:14] team sort of floating out there that hooks into another team so and that's complicated but we won't go there [51:20] that so being connected to a team for a student means that they will move with [51:26] those students to the core classes and because of virtue of in sixth grade there's more core classes they actually [51:32] there's six of them and they move with the same sorts of kids once it gets a fayed and choir and band [51:40] and orchestra those things are D team because then they get to see another group of students and so part of the [51:47] rationale for doing that is it's about relationship building and about knowing your kids because we know that that is [51:52] one of the when kids feel safe and they feel welcomed and they feel like they [51:57] belong they will perform better and so it's it's the art of middle school as [52:03] much as it is the science of middle school so having kids feel like they belong something that place in this [52:09] transition year is important and so when we have teachers teaching multiple [52:15] different preps of a combo platter of honors enriched compacted any or all of [52:22] the above and teaching those multiple preps it it it creates different pathways for their teaching for when [52:29] they teach and then it allows for more of the cross teamed classes because it's [52:35] uneven numbers an example this year is that we have three sections of compacted [52:40] science in sixth grade so mr. Ron Hardy teaches one section on hit on the team [52:46] he's on and miss Matlock teaches a section on the team she's on but because we have an uneven number [52:51] mouna mr. ron Hardy's compacted classes has to be cross teams so kids who are in [52:57] that class aren't associated with his team or him but they have him and to [53:03] balance that off we have to have a regular science class on this Matlock's team cross teams so that there's really [53:09] only four out of six science classes in each of those classes only eight of the [53:15] 12 possibilities that are actually teamed and so that's we're losing one third of the teaming mechanism in some [53:21] ways on that so that that does create a barrier to students transitioning and [53:28] students feeling like they belong and that's we built a model and there's great research on why [53:34] need that kind of model thank you um hi [53:42] I want to thank you all for coming it's five after eleven and I really [53:49] really appreciate that you're here I'm I [53:54] am still baffled why you have not been invited to the policy committee meetings [54:01] we've we've actually delayed a month in order to get more information and it is [54:09] not a school board members role to invite district administration and [54:17] teachers to our policy meetings I would really have loved to have talked to you [54:24] all and the teachers about this policy I [54:30] actually wanted to bring it up much earlier in August no it was September it [54:40] was a the August 12 board meeting where there was pathways was discussed and the [54:47] AP pre-ap ten teachers were there at that same meeting it would have been the [54:53] perfect time to clarify some of these things unfortunately because you have not [54:58] talked with us there are inaccuracies in your slide presentation and we were not [55:07] able to make those kind of clarifications in the policy when we [55:14] were writing them and it would have been very helpful for example in the [55:19] elementary school the policy was written and we had no intention of changing what [55:25] is currently being offered in elementary school so if what is written is not what [55:33] is being done and we are not offering for three third grade and fourth grade [55:42] opportunities in Advanced Learning there there [55:51] super right right so there are there [56:00] were things like that that should be [56:06] chained that were changed prior to your slide show and that have gotten out in [56:13] the community which is misinformation on both the intent either the intent or [56:21] what was actually in the policy and it is quite frustrating the particularly [56:28] the what is being discussed with the [56:33] fact that we would not be interested in what you are telling us this evening [56:40] which is not the case at all I respect you all a great deal and the teachers in [56:48] our community so this is a very [56:53] frustrating situation for me especially [57:01] it just seems that every step of the way as we approach trying to meet the [57:10] promises that were made by this board in 2017 to the gifted and talented [57:16] community there are stone walls being put up truly even this evening where at [57:26] the end our we are being told no there's some new legal opinion on this policy I [57:37] actually that it is so consistent in the [57:44] the difficulty that we're getting in order to get it on an agenda in order to [57:49] have you discuss it in order to have an open dialogue in 2017 the the district [57:58] of Peru the board approved pathways so I'm just [58:04] going to ask Randy it was a recommendation GT the GT recommendations [58:13] one of the recommendations said acceleration and the wording on the [58:20] acceleration was four we find it [58:28] [Music] [58:36] fine to you sorry it's really late provide opportunity for mastery of [58:42] grade-level content and beyond at a date at a pace and depth appropriate wait let [58:47] me read this slowly provide opportunity for mastery of grade-level content and [58:53] beyond at a pace and depth appropriate to the capacity of the k-12 learner so I [59:01] am just wondering where that how I I'm [59:09] just kind of curious because that has morphed into many different iterations [59:15] including the one that you just spoke to this evening and and I can kind of I [59:22] have a couple of the other slides where it has changed in my mind [59:28] 6:01 was addressing exactly this acceleration provide opportunity for [59:35] mastery of grade-level content and beyond at a pace and depth appropriate to the capacity of the k-12 learner so [59:43] I'd like to I would like to hear from Randy why either I'd like to just speak [59:54] to these are courses that would be in this acceleration in my mind I'm just [1:00:02] talking secondary because I have just said the the policy really wasn't to [1:00:09] change what was going on in elementary it was to maintain what was going on in [1:00:15] the elementary so I think part of our challenge is how we're defining [1:00:21] different words so when we looked at Excel when we look at that term [1:00:26] acceleration and we talked about that with the some different committees we [1:00:32] talked about it with the teachers we were defining acceleration as when students are experiencing different [1:00:38] standards and so in looking at that that particular term that has a different [1:00:44] definition than maybe how you're thinking about acceleration in terms of honors classes I wouldn't [1:00:50] look at an honors class and put it in the category of acceleration because they're really in the in an honors class [1:00:57] or in rich class they're really spending most of the time on the same standards but you might be extending those [1:01:03] standards you might be adding to those standards but the core design or construct of that type of class is not [1:01:10] really acceleration acceleration might like Advanced Placement would fall into [1:01:17] the category of acceleration because instead of a regular level of course [1:01:23] students are now working in different standards so in terms of the GT recommendations what we did is we went [1:01:29] out and looked at how our other districts designing courses and we [1:01:35] brought back to the school board a presentation on secondary course designs and we had studied courses around the [1:01:42] Metro we had studied courses nationally and looked at what are the different types of designs people are using to [1:01:50] meet the needs of advanced learners and one of the things that we kind of uncovered at that time where these [1:01:56] things were these compacted or telescoped or accelerated courses so we [1:02:02] came back to the board with a proposal to look at a compacted type of course [1:02:09] design inside of secondary and we looked at this idea of earned honors as another [1:02:16] way of delivering honors competencies at the secondary level so we brought back to the board two different designs to [1:02:23] test out and to pilot the compacted science at middle school and then the [1:02:29] accelerator or the earned honors at high school one of those truly is an [1:02:36] accelerated opportunity and one of those is an extended learning opportunity in [1:02:41] terms of how we're defining it in the pathways document and so I think how how [1:02:48] we are collectively talking about words and what how we're defining it is really [1:02:54] important in the conversation because I think sometimes where we might be saying the same things but it's a disc [1:03:00] but how we're defining acceleration is a little bit different than maybe how you were describing it I I'm just I I'm [1:03:07] using your words when I I mean accelerations been described three different ways recently from slides from [1:03:15] your department so it is a little confusing but I actually am just trying [1:03:21] to figure out if I look at the curriculum development that is on the [1:03:29] slides I don't see any curriculum development costs for acceleration [1:03:38] because what we would be typically doing as we would you know once the talent [1:03:43] development framework is approved by the board then the way we would implement [1:03:49] that is through the curricular review cycle so let's say that science is up [1:03:54] for curricular review what we would examine are all the ways that we are providing enrichment in science k12 we [1:04:02] would also look at all the ways we're providing extended learning experiences in science k12 where we're providing [1:04:09] acceleration opportunities in science k12 and where we're providing authentic [1:04:14] learning opportunities in science k12 so what we would do is we would build out the budget and the design once those [1:04:21] curricular content areas are up for review then we would apply that talent development framework to that curricular [1:04:28] content area so we would be building the budget out with that design as we get to those study areas okay so I just asked a [1:04:36] point of information quick the the recommendations that you were referring to Randy are those the ones that that [1:04:43] were presented to us on October 29th 2018 yeah and we did get feedback from [1:04:49] the board we've continued to process that with teachers we got some feedback from the gifted advisory committee and [1:04:56] so some of that has continued to evolve and clarify in terms of specific [1:05:01] articulated language so some of it you know as you're describing Ellen might be [1:05:07] this is an evolution to try to get really crisp and clear on the [1:05:12] design and mike my words in the slide tonight were to be to try to be really [1:05:18] clear about our current thinking about how these four pathways might play out in a Content area and what would [1:05:25] distinguish them from each other so and I I'm trying to get back to honoring the [1:05:35] process that that started five years ago and that was to be completed in a three [1:05:42] year process in February which was that [1:05:48] there would be additional opportunities for those students that are ready for [1:05:54] more and so I'm I'm just from what I'm hearing is that there is no plan at the [1:06:04] moment for any additional accelerated options for those students ready for [1:06:11] more until for another three to five [1:06:16] years I don't think that's accurate what I'm saying is that we would apply that [1:06:23] framework and this would be I believe year three of the implementation what [1:06:28] I'm saying is that we would apply the framework that we created as the mechanism for how we would continue to [1:06:35] grow the ways in which we're meeting those needs in each of the content areas but the way we would implement the [1:06:41] framework from a budget standpoint would be with each curricular content area [1:06:47] review we would then put that framework into that review process and that's what [1:06:53] we would be accountable back to the board around are all the ways we're enriching accelerating extending etc [1:06:59] like that so but but that's the pace unless you have something that you're at [1:07:07] science is starting year one right so science is a little bit [1:07:13] ahead of the schedule because we were trying to start with piloting the idea [1:07:19] of trying compacted classes at the middle or at the secondary level so we kind of jump-started science as one of [1:07:26] the areas or one of the ways that we could begin to apply that framework but another way that we're also trying that [1:07:32] out is through the earned honors at the high school level and those were the two main course designs right that we wanted [1:07:38] to test out so and that leads to the other question at one of the our more recent board meetings when pathways was [1:07:46] discussed there was consensus among the board that the wording for the fact that [1:07:53] the board wanted to maintain our [1:07:59] enriched classes in the middle school and and we wanted that wording to be [1:08:07] placed into any documents that were going to be presenting pathways and that [1:08:15] hasn't been done and I'm just wondering I mean the the district refused to do [1:08:21] that before the district that's an accurate interpretation of what happened and we've already discussed this in [1:08:26] teaching and learning once right and and there was there was an audience in the [1:08:34] room when the board discussed it it was at a work session and we can't seek [1:08:40] consensus and vote on things in a work session so I understand that was your [1:08:46] interpretation of it that is not my interpretation of what happened and I [1:08:52] don't think it's fair for you to blame our administration for not having wording on a document that you prefer if [1:08:58] you wanted that added it should have been brought and voted on I don't think that's fair for you to be bringing that [1:09:05] up and then blaming our administrators for that I don't think it's as much of [1:09:11] blame I think there's some confusion around the fact that at the towards the end of that meeting because there was a [1:09:17] great deal of discussion going on around pathways that there was trying people [1:09:24] were trying to find around do these pathways lead to changes [1:09:30] to what we currently offer and so I believe there was discussion at the end of the meeting that was around does this [1:09:37] mean anything that we currently have that's called enriched is going to go away now I I'm not sure that we said [1:09:45] please add it to the document but I do think that we we had that discussion and [1:09:50] there was a lot of head nodding yes yes yes nothing's going away and so I can see where the the confusion lies but [1:09:58] again I don't think it's as much about blame as it is that this was discussed and so there's concern that that that [1:10:04] may not hold true going forward I 100% agree with you there was a discussion and there's confusion I don't [1:10:11] necessarily know that there was a clarity that we all agreed that verbiage [1:10:17] should be added to everything that says we all agree that all the classes that [1:10:23] we have should be maintained and that's where I'm frustrated because I think [1:10:30] that that's a stretch and then to sit in a public board meeting that's being televised and say you did not do what [1:10:39] our board mandated you to do and shame on you I don't think is fair yeah so I [1:10:46] don't think the board mandate but I do think we need to continue on tonight's discussion rather than going back to the [1:10:52] last discussion so I think I understand Randy what Ellen's concern is and so I [1:11:00] guess that if we set up a framework and let's say it calls for more compacted [1:11:07] classes I think that might be preferable so let's say you've got a curriculum [1:11:13] review cycle that for whatever reason is seven years out from today I'm not sure we want to wait seven years I think that [1:11:20] and while I'm not in favor of doing it like everything all at once I think that [1:11:26] if we had a plan a framework that was approved I would prefer that we looked at adding one per year as an example in [1:11:34] addition to what's within the regular curriculum cycle again provided [1:11:39] it's not the one that's going to happen a curriculum cycle review the next year it just I mean I do tend to agree with [1:11:46] what I understand to be Ellen's point which is particularly since you said MDE [1:11:53] is now going to a ten year cycle if it costs another thirty five thousand then [1:11:59] that's a question to the board which is rather than saying let's look at it the curriculum review cycle come to the [1:12:04] board and say your budget normally I think is four hundred that's I think the [1:12:10] ballpark number for curriculum review maybe for a few years and wrote we make it for forty so that you can implement [1:12:16] the framework in a quicker fashion and again I'm not talking about all at once [1:12:21] but again consistent with the framework but more speedily yeah you know just [1:12:28] clarify what you meant by the one per year oh so it wasn't sure which what you [1:12:34] were doing so if we're looking at compacted classes for example and I don't know when social studies is up but [1:12:41] maybe we decide we want to do a compacted class in social studies but the review doesn't show up for five more years maybe what we do is as a board we [1:12:49] say is that something that we can implement in two years and so just kind [1:12:54] of pick them off one at a time which makes it easier to fit a within the budget be within the teachers time and [1:13:00] it still fits within the framework but it does sort of advance I think more [1:13:05] opportunities and and that is what I'm interested in again on a rolling basis [1:13:12] as opposed to a big chunk all at once so I assume we could do that yeah [1:13:20] absolutely we're kind of operating though within an existing allocated budget and so we're [1:13:27] just presenting this would be our plan if we're operating in this existing [1:13:33] budget and earlier I tried to share some some different thinking around how we [1:13:38] could either a redirect current curriculum projects to accelerate that [1:13:44] work or B add some additional funds to accelerate that work but given our [1:13:49] current budgetary model that we we and to operate within that it really [1:13:56] allows us to look at some curricular review areas on a periodic cycle and [1:14:02] then to potentially apply this framework to those curricular areas but if we want [1:14:08] to accelerate that then it would just be a matter of what might that cost be and what is our capacity to do that what [1:14:15] would we need to add in terms of staff to be able get that done depending upon how accelerated you're talking great so [1:14:22] I think that it would be helpful to have the framework completed and have basically a current budget schedule and [1:14:30] then say okay what are the options in terms of the costs of speeding up that [1:14:35] schedule because I think that that could work as a middle ground between the [1:14:41] draft 601 and waiting X number of years till the curriculum cycle shows up so [1:14:49] that would be handy just to have kind of an out it's like when I schedule things I pull off and look several months out [1:14:54] and go what do I have except this time we're looking at seven years out or whatever the number of years are yeah I [1:15:01] mean part of our challenge to be honest with you Lennie is that when the teacher teams come together there has to be a [1:15:08] lot of dialogue and discussion about how the different course designs can work [1:15:15] and in different content areas that the design might be a little different and [1:15:20] so you need the teachers to come together to work through what does that look like if you're doing a particular [1:15:27] course you're not really building it inside of a structure of the whole content area in terms of continuity and [1:15:34] flow you're kind of saying we want to just figure out how to do a particular course in an area so I just it's I think [1:15:41] it's challenging in terms of process I think it can be done but I just think that's a challenging approach so I I [1:15:48] understand the challenge when we've in the past tried to pull one class out and then also and it doesn't flow six [1:15:53] through twelve I get that when it comes to something like embedded honours which [1:16:01] is not going to change the six through twelve continuum then that's [1:16:09] something that in my mind is easier to implement and again I think we need more [1:16:14] data in terms of whether that is effective in terms of a compacted class the curriculum isn't being changed it's [1:16:23] just being compacted from three years to two years and so the only thing it does [1:16:28] is it creates a question of okay so now how do we handle eighth grade and so I understand that it raises questions but [1:16:35] there are benefits to asking the question and pursuing that Avenue can I [1:16:41] point of order are we still on discussion of this or are we going to [1:16:47] move into the actual motion in action portion of the agenda so I still have [1:16:52] questions from the actual presentation that's why I asked point of order I [1:16:58] don't know if others have questions because I kind of interrupted going I have a quick question for the middle [1:17:05] school in the curriculum costs looks as if you you have estimated that a third [1:17:14] of the class would would take one of the honors courses that was an estimate that [1:17:22] Randy put together I don't know I don't know the course taking and yet we didn't [1:17:27] know the course taking of the compacted yeah it seems I mean that that seems [1:17:32] about right that if it's offered than about a third of the students I'm agreeing with you but to me that is [1:17:41] that's a major statement to that there would be that much demand for an honors [1:17:50] level course well that depends as well because if you are maintaining enriched classes because then you'll have kids [1:17:56] filter2 enriched you'll have kids filter2 compacted I mean so it depends on what the offer is within the pathway [1:18:03] is within the course like how many options you have and that would determine the course taking and and [1:18:09] frankly kids wanting it doesn't mean they'll get it if there are so many different options for them to choose it [1:18:17] might air itself I cancelled the other one of the other Corrections I just wanted to tell Andy we were we did not intend for you to be [1:18:25] rewriting all of the the courses that are currently being offered so that's [1:18:31] another one that if we had been able to chat we would have we would have said no that this is in there and in a [1:18:39] curriculum review cycle of course those courses at that time would would be as [1:18:45] part of a normal process be reviewed so but we were not saying that for all of [1:18:52] those other courses so there really are seven courses that are part of 601 I [1:19:01] know we're always just waiting to jump in I had a couple of questions that just [1:19:08] things I wanted to better understand one was at the elementary level about the advanced academics and the notion of [1:19:14] pullouts my understanding is that five of the six super louts and one doesn't [1:19:21] is that is that accurate so you take the students who needed that instruction and they'd be you know given that [1:19:28] instruction in a different location than a general classroom is that correct so um we we do both we do pull out and we [1:19:36] do push in and the way that the Highland schedule is with the school within a school with the continuous progress [1:19:43] I do not currently have the FT to support the pull out of all the three [1:19:49] four and five classes I don't have the FT to support that so we also use our [1:19:55] multi age model for our gifted and talented students as well so we do both [1:20:03] and was that that's only your school than the other five don't have the boat [1:20:10] is that right thank you go ahead Katie I [1:20:16] just wanted to add at Countryside all of our advanced academics courses for our [1:20:22] fourth and fifth graders in reading language arts and then math for three [1:20:27] four five it is done in a pullout format however the configurations of my grade [1:20:36] levels looks different because I too have continuous progress or that multi-age model within the building [1:20:43] katie has almost double what I have in my in my CP classes or I have a quarter [1:20:50] of my students and I think you're about two-thirds at this point so it you were [1:20:57] doing it but we're not doing it in an ideal manner in the fact that I have [1:21:03] some multi age courses that are occurring within advanced academics [1:21:09] because of the fact that I have multi age classrooms in the in the building [1:21:15] I've it has also created for us a situation where are some of our grade [1:21:21] levels are overlapping so that we can get it scheduled in in a day because our [1:21:27] our staffing levels are not going to accommodate us having a separate pullout [1:21:32] class for every grade level I would [1:21:37] agree with that and then I just want to add to that we find that some some of the students really need the [1:21:44] acceleration and that faster pace and then quite a few of our students need [1:21:49] that but then they also really like to go deeper and kind of dig deeper into the enrichment so not always is the [1:21:57] acceleration which needs to be in a pullout the enrichment can really happen [1:22:02] with peers in the classroom and and then the access to more thinking and more [1:22:09] learning can also happen in the classroom so I think the yes--and model here is is better when we're talking [1:22:18] about especially about students in the elementary and the foundational years so [1:22:25] does that mean that 601 does require a change at Highlands so yes so there is [1:22:33] some issues around scheduling at Highlands with the verbage in the 601 with all pull outs with all different [1:22:40] resources that would need to increase staffing at Highlands and most likely countryside [1:22:46] because of our multi age model [1:22:53] countryside to a lesser extent but yes that is true for both of our buildings and was that something that was updated [1:23:00] a couple of years ago a change in weather it was pull outs or push ins so [1:23:11] I'm sorry I usually don't have a problem [1:23:17] with speaking up either so so it wasn't that it was necessarily changed so I [1:23:24] taught fifth grade I don't know if all of you know this but I taught fifth grade at Highlands for two years before [1:23:29] I left and so the gifted and talented or [1:23:35] advanced accelerated courses were happening kind of similar to what Karen is referring to it's a little bit of an [1:23:41] overlap model where there's math and reading and it's like this constant flow [1:23:46] of almost a middle school independent study at times model and so when I was [1:23:54] teaching fifth grade as well as when I returned as principal we really looked [1:24:00] deeply at how to maximize our teacher support for kids who needed that [1:24:05] acceleration and enrichment and we really just became more transparent [1:24:11] about what was actually happening what our parents wanted and how we could really meet the needs of students both [1:24:17] with our advanced accelerated teacher and then also with our classroom teachers supporting each other in that [1:24:24] model so that's that's what happened in 2017 is just more about the conversation [1:24:32] and being transparent about what we actually wanted all together as a community [1:24:40] so speaking of talking about being [1:24:47] transparent I just wanted to ask the budget for the high school included [1:24:54] reworking rewriting all the class that are enriched but that was not [1:25:00] currently enriched but that was not included in the middle school and I just [1:25:05] wanted to make sure that that was not because you are planning I'm getting rid [1:25:11] of them and so I just wanted to ask are you are there plans currently to [1:25:19] eliminate the enriched click classes that are currently being taught at the [1:25:24] middle schools no okay or at the high [1:25:29] school to follow about that the class sizes at the middle school are they [1:25:36] relatively similar between say social study seven and a rich social study [1:25:41] seven or similarly for eighth grade science it depends [1:25:47] every year it's a different group of kids with different you know choices they get to make and so we do our best [1:25:52] to level classes to balance them out and so teachers don't have sections that are [1:25:58] wildly differential and so it's it's part of what we do as schedulers to [1:26:06] balance and so it's hard for me to say it's our wild variation it depends on the year it depends on the kids it [1:26:12] depends on the choices the other piece I just want to make sure everyone understands is that in extended French [1:26:19] articulation for the extent of French program includes that students will have social studies in French so that is [1:26:27] another permutation of schedule that also goes along with honors classes [1:26:34] compacted classes and enriched classes I appreciate that no one I think that makes a lot of sense [1:26:39] you know the year-to-year variation and it's not a matter of hiring you know new teachers everywhere you're just doing [1:26:44] the best you can with the with the staff and their sections you have trying to keep them level trying to make the the [1:26:50] chairs in the lamps right work but as budgets gets tighter for example Valley [1:26:55] View cut to FTEs last year what that means is that teachers are teaching over [1:27:00] multiple grade levels in ways they've never done before and so to kind of creates forks in the our extender French [1:27:08] teacher teacher in both seventh and eighth grade and so schedules on two separate days of an A&B [1:27:13] day to accommodate things and there would be more of that because you'd have not teachers is teaching across grade [1:27:20] levels teaching across different classes across grade levels which then creates barriers for them because they might be [1:27:26] doing a single tune because they're also the Latin teacher and the reading teacher and then you have to create the [1:27:32] schedules that allow the maximum amount of kids to to access that and that's [1:27:37] what the computer does but sometimes we'll get what's called an irresolvable error which means that there is no way [1:27:44] for a student to access it because they're offered at the same time right [1:27:50] right that can't have it all type end-of-the-day math as you were saying [1:27:55] the permutations Sean one more just about the books and equipment and all right but are there different textbooks [1:28:04] with social study seven and in rich social study seven and different equipment with science Eider and rich [1:28:09] Science eight I mean I think it depends I mean in its current model no but I [1:28:15] there is more equipment needed so what's happening in science is that it's the [1:28:20] new standards next-gen standards are coming in and so it's really requiring a flip of not only materials but [1:28:26] additional materials and so the sixth graders this year are in earth science with which currently the seventh graders [1:28:32] are also doing just a few checks ahead of them but they'll be flipping over to life science which is something that [1:28:39] will look different than the current life science innovation in eighth grade so yes there will be new materials just [1:28:46] because especially in next-gen standards we're going to need that but in terms of enriched and compact as social studies I [1:28:53] don't know because that would be largely as teachers look at it and and work on [1:28:58] that framework I can't I can't see what it is because I'm not close enough on the ground to what that would be right [1:29:04] now it they would use similar materials because they're using and working to the [1:29:09] same standards and that again would be a question I would have is that how would they be substantially different in classes if it's the same standards in a [1:29:17] relevant question took that seventy five cents on the dollar for those types of textbooks [1:29:25] so I understood that the question about additional books supplies and material [1:29:31] supplies is based upon not having a definition of substantially different [1:29:36] and so if that's defined to be you can use the same textbook then you wouldn't [1:29:43] have additional textbook charge yeah I think that that was just one of the items we were trying to present as we're [1:29:50] unclear on this definition and how does this definition affect the design [1:29:56] because then that would play out on what you would look at for materials or textbooks etc so and so currently you're [1:30:08] working on science and you're in year one and your your plan is to include [1:30:16] seventh grade science of course that's I [1:30:22] don't want to put words in your mouth but what's what is your plan currently for that I'm sorry what are you I'm [1:30:30] unclear in terms of implementing the science standards will there be a [1:30:36] separate course a separate course in seventh grade or because right now what [1:30:43] we're doing is we're piloting the compacted and so they're teaching that in sixth grade and then the students [1:30:49] will be moving in the seventh grade and they'll be completing the rest of their middle school science and seventh grade [1:30:56] and then taking the new eighth grade course a new eighth grade course maybe a [1:31:04] new eighth grade course yeah I think she meant because there's currently an enriched version of the eighth grade [1:31:09] science that's leveled once next generations implemented was there an intention to maintain that level even [1:31:16] though by then the compact it would have caught up is that that's right right I think part of the discussion [1:31:23] that we need to figure out is what is the impact of running a compacted class [1:31:28] and what can we run and this would compacted replace the enriched would we [1:31:33] have compacted and enriched and regular I don't think we have figured that out yet likewise we haven't figured out [1:31:41] exactly what the 8th grade class would be because part of what the high school teachers have been discussing is the new [1:31:48] standards have a big earth science emphasis and one of our graduation [1:31:53] requirements around science is that they take they have to have biology then they take chemistry or physics and one other [1:32:00] science credit so one of the things that they're looking at is should our science [1:32:06] be part of that other one science credit not the full but maybe half that's one [1:32:12] model they're looking at but that might affect the order in which we order the sciences which could affect the class [1:32:19] that's available in eighth grade we originally thought that that would be physics it might still be physics but [1:32:24] we're just not that far yet on the discussion and the design they're still working through unpacking the new [1:32:30] standards and what that looks like it might be more of whatever the 9th grade is I think part of what's going on at this policy is trying to make major [1:32:38] changes like the idea of a levelled eighth grade science disappearing have to go through the discussion action [1:32:45] process have to come to the board so that it's it's not something that's just done before it's heard of and I think [1:32:52] that's why they've generated some confusion that's why though that the current list of enriched courses that [1:32:59] are in the high school catalog are listed there so that should you want to say where I use the word cutting but you [1:33:06] know no longer offering that at the high school no longer offering enrich this enrich that that has to go through a [1:33:12] discussion action and it wouldn't just be be done without that like so that's [1:33:18] why they're there not to imply that it's 32,000 dollars a pop suddenly but that you know they're sort of it's documented [1:33:26] as this is what we're offering which is strange I think that's the bigger question is you know why is it you're not finding similar policies elsewhere [1:33:32] but I think there's it's responding to a worry that these things are going away and they're gonna go away and they won't [1:33:39] be here much longer and we had sort of assurances that they're not going away but now we're hearing well you know leveled signs eighth you have to [1:33:45] understand the context which isn't what we heard a while ago and I'm not saying that we we're misinformed but that there's it's [1:33:51] constantly a rolling context and a rolling budget and to put these things here in policy helps make it have to go [1:33:59] through the discussion action process to have these sorts of major changes in program offering likewise at the [1:34:04] elementary school the whole point initially with documenting this is that we currently have a certain number of [1:34:10] advanced academics and should those be going away it should go through a discussion action process and I remember [1:34:16] a few years ago there was great concern about them going away and there that [1:34:22] still lingers not on the 12 to 24 month horizon of course because it's just too [1:34:27] much for turnaround and we would have heard about it but what about the 36 month horizon and so just to bring it [1:34:33] back board level and even you know valid reasons about CP and it's you know these special district wide draw programs you [1:34:40] know we try our best to to keep them around and keep the impact it's minimal so it's not like one school is getting [1:34:46] more resources to an extent that we can't justify and in some cases not at all but then you know the change kind of [1:34:54] just happens and what it spread would that be now it went from the nice elated logistical need to a pilot program [1:35:00] that's spreading and so documenting it in policy is is sort of abrupt it's sort [1:35:08] of a bad fit as far as how things typically go but think there's frankly a [1:35:14] fear that things are on the way out and there's not much you can do to stop it and then we hear again tonight you know [1:35:21] even when there was sort of broad consensus that current in rich classes nobody's nobody's asking to get rid of a [1:35:27] mobilization favorite ritterman sort of the status quo and yet that guidance wasn't really in granted we don't make [1:35:33] decisions at work sessions but even that consensus fell flat as far as a meaning and that you have to vote if you're [1:35:40] gonna have any sort of guidance that sticks and I know I know you could go [1:35:46] away as quick as a discussion action cycle again bring some some reasoning but I think that's that's a better [1:35:52] approach than this constant fear that there's nothing there's nothing stopping the sands from shifting out from other [1:35:57] people so each fall we bring to the board a list of course changes or course [1:36:04] proposals unless we've had kind of a freeze or a pause for budgetary reasons [1:36:11] or strategic plan reasons etc but we bring those courses on that design to [1:36:17] the board for a discussion so if we're gonna put in a new course we bring that to the board if we're gonna drop a [1:36:23] course we bring it to the board and so we can go back ever since I've been here [1:36:28] eight years ago where we have a list of these are these are the courses we typically drop these are courses we are [1:36:35] testing out in terms of design these are new courses that we're offering so I so [1:36:45] maybe there's an example but I'm not thinking of an example where all sudden [1:36:50] a course went away and it wasn't a discussion at the board level because we [1:36:55] try to bring those courses even some of the course changes we bring them to the board we've been doing that for eight [1:37:01] years has this happened is there an example a but I can think of if that's a [1:37:06] real concern that was brought to the [1:37:13] board yep I think some of it some of the [1:37:18] concern that I've heard it comes from discussions that have happened at the board whether at a work session or a [1:37:24] board meeting where comments are made like I've heard many times oh enriched [1:37:30] isn't really any different anyway or we don't have any intention of changing [1:37:35] anything we only believe in a P in the traditional classroom so there's mixed [1:37:42] messages coming to the public coming to parents and so they're trying to figure out well what does this mean and I think [1:37:49] what what Amir was trying to articulate is that he wants to ensure that that the [1:37:55] enriched courses that are currently being offered will continue rather than a thought that they they may disappear [1:38:02] because they're not really that different or they'll just lower the standards even more to the point where [1:38:07] you're signing up for enriched but it's apparently not really enriched yeah I I [1:38:13] think the articulation not that much different than regular was [1:38:18] just the expression that in the enriched classes you're still teaching the same standards as in the regular class so the [1:38:26] bulk of it is the same standards and then there is a percentage of it that is different and when you talk to teachers [1:38:32] who teach the classes it might be 10% different it might be 15% different but [1:38:38] it's I wouldn't I wouldn't call it substantially different per the language in the policy so what added confusion [1:38:45] for us is what does substantially different mean is that drastically [1:38:50] different than how we're currently doing enriched and again I would just bring it back to if we're gonna drop a course or [1:38:58] change a program we do bring those conversations to the board I know that [1:39:04] there might be things that might be said in a meeting or they might be said between staff members etc and there [1:39:12] sometimes are ideas that are kicked around or pondered but if we're gonna make a change in what we offer our [1:39:18] students in Edina in terms of courses we've had a pretty solid process of [1:39:24] bringing that to the board discussion discussing it and then the following meeting having a vote on that in terms [1:39:30] of process [1:39:36] so I just want to note something and then ask one last hopefully one last question which is in terms of this being [1:39:44] your first opportunity to come before the board a number of us have asked for a work session for administrators and [1:39:52] teachers to come before the board and we simply haven't gotten board support for it so it's not that because like for you [1:40:00] look at me like that but you everybody wanted to vote on this tonight rather than have this presented as a work session part of this was scheduling with [1:40:08] all the strategic plan meetings but I've been pushing along with others to get meetings with this team so I'm not sure [1:40:19] that that's totally accurate I mean we this came up we it was discussed to be [1:40:25] on this September agenda and we delayed a month to October and between September [1:40:32] and October that we there could have been a meeting or something figured out so I don't think it's a hundred percent [1:40:38] fair to say that the board is not supported getting input on this from [1:40:44] other stakeholders it has not been arranged despite requests anyway here's [1:40:50] my question which is in terms of the middle school model can we offer regular [1:40:58] enriched and compact it and still maintain the middle school model very [1:41:03] difficult just because the different number of permutations that you have you be in four core courses adding a valley [1:41:12] the extended French to the mix as well you would be increasing the variability three folds and and I know that you're [1:41:21] not necessarily an expert on other districts but I think in the presentation it said Minnetonka does not [1:41:28] have a middle school model they don't they have a sixth grade eight and why is that it has a middle school model I said [1:41:33] it has a middle school model and they do not actually have enriched classes in the middle school no when they only offer one world language [1:41:43] are there other questions [1:41:49] chairwoman Friedman I would like to respectfully make a motion that action for policy 601 be removed from tonight's [1:41:56] board agenda so do you have reasons why [1:42:07] I mean you've got a motion in a second so now we're a discussion so I think [1:42:12] it's reasonable to see given that we've scheduled it what's your why do you want [1:42:18] it removed well I'd like to make it fully clear that I support engaging all [1:42:23] of our learners including our advanced learners but I feel as a governance board it's our responsibility before we [1:42:29] pass policies that will have lasting impact to our budget curriculum and secondary and primary scheduling that we [1:42:36] have a crystal clear understanding of the following the fiscal implications of the policy the legal implications of the [1:42:43] policy the timing of the implementation of the policy and the broader impacts to [1:42:49] the middle school and other schedules I'm asking my fellow board members to take a more thoughtful approach to this [1:42:54] policy and bring it back to a work session and the policy committee so we can get this right for all of the [1:43:00] students in our district I truly think we can move forward with some of the ideas presented in this policy I [1:43:06] acknowledge some of the gaps in our system and fix them but do it in a strategic way if given the opportunity I [1:43:12] do not think this is the best way to do it and we will end up with a subpar result I had a question about the FTE on [1:43:21] the cost I think I heard four and I know that was with the original look at the numbers does it does it affect well no [1:43:31] sorry but aren't we discussing the motion at hand I don't know but I have a question I feel like we just kind of [1:43:36] abruptly went and I just don't want to lose that destroy it but definitely was abruptly it changed but so we so I can [1:43:45] leave at this point I was just saying typically if a motion is brought I believe we have to finish that [1:43:50] discussion and have that boat so I assumed your question pertained to whether you would agree with a [1:43:57] postponement well I'd like to have that conversation as we get towards the item on the agenda and if [1:44:03] you if you want it voted down you can vote it down but I don't know that we're not I feel like we jumped ahead to [1:44:09] action and we're still on discussion at the meeting so I'm not sure we had [1:44:14] finished discussion and then it is an action item already so it would seem to [1:44:20] me that it's more a matter of voting yay or nay right then removing it from the agenda so you can't bring a motion to [1:44:28] table an item that's an action item I'm [1:44:35] not sure that there's it my motion is to remove it from the agenda to table it so we can have further discussion before [1:44:43] voting on it I guess the question I [1:44:52] would have since Erica is talking about an additional work session which is what [1:44:59] you presented tonight was based upon a policy draft from a week ago and then it got revised a couple days ago so do you [1:45:07] have suggestions on revisions that would create more advanced opportunities but [1:45:14] not necessarily follow everything that's set in the current version I think [1:45:24] that's some of the things that are in the language about an expectation from [1:45:30] the board that from 3:12 we will provide advanced accelerated opportunities for [1:45:36] our students and through these pathways enrichments acceleration real-world [1:45:42] learning all those things we should be held accountable for those things if the board is asking for those I guess from [1:45:49] my perspective is we just want to be part of the conversation about what that exactly looks like and have a stake in [1:45:55] that as administrators in our building and then also the feedback from our teachers because I think we can get [1:46:01] there and I think this would already have been going forward if it wasn't so prescriptive and I think that's that's [1:46:07] my perspective I'd love to be back at the table with this group to talk about how we can meet that expectation but it [1:46:13] just might not be as prescriptive as described because we might have some different ideas they go [1:46:18] further can we resolve the motion tween get back to some questions - sure but I [1:46:23] would to me whether they had something to add in relator - Heather I would agree that you might [1:46:30] want to stay on the agenda well if they had nothing to add then why would I table it but if they're if they [1:46:37] have things that they could add to it and that we could come up with a policy that we could vote on so that my question was directly related to the [1:46:43] motion that's all I don't know if anybody else has questions directly related to the pending motion if not I [1:46:49] would add that I think in addition to what Andy said is thinking well that's what we get to clarify intent and [1:46:55] purpose and language we may be able to add more we'd have a better understanding alright any other [1:47:03] questions otherwise we're gonna vote on the motion to table so all those in favor say aye aye all those opposed nay [1:47:12] motion does not carry so I and I'm sorry about you're interrupting the discussion [1:47:18] I thought actually that you were done with it and maybe Erika did too but [1:47:29] all right EFT is my question about the budgeting because I see I see the I [1:47:35] costs about curriculum writing as as being sort of up front startup cost one [1:47:41] time whereas FTEs you know that's potentially your career is worth a [1:47:46] commitment and so if you look at this as well first of all without the the [1:47:54] enriched science and they're high school courses I've our exist so that's already taken this budget estimate and cut it in [1:48:00] half and then you look at that upfront cost as being a one-time and then these [1:48:05] courses exist and you know now you have it what does that do to your comparison to for FTEs does that still stand or how [1:48:13] would you how would you update that my four FTE was based on the training and [1:48:19] the gifted resource certification through Hamlin and the time the teachers spend with it and the time that not only [1:48:27] spent in class but spent writing in the curriculum so and that was to include all four core classes at each middle [1:48:34] school with two teacher teams at each grade level so that's where that came [1:48:39] from wit so and that's probably my fault I met John and Randy and Lenny and Erica a month ago and we talked about you know [1:48:47] the GT thing not being as necessary that certification wasn't what it was saying [1:48:52] it was sort of deemed qualified as you currently have but it just acknowledges that you currently have a process at the [1:48:58] NIH or anyway for deciding who's qualified who's not for that particular role and then at the element at the [1:49:04] middle schools it was a month ago that we came up with a list of of edits to the policy and because there were three [1:49:12] of us we didn't share with anybody until November 4th but on November 4th we shared with the [1:49:17] board and the public the updates to clarification and I think the the three five what did you mean when you say [1:49:23] three twelve does that mean that advanced academics for reading goes down to third grade I think that was a fair [1:49:29] interpretation and no it's it wasn't the idea we were talking about and so I went [1:49:34] and you know agreed a month ago ten dead at that and we shared that in the [1:49:39] November 4 meaning and you know the edits only are just getting to you and so I think it's hard to kind of swag the FTEs at this [1:49:45] point now so it's a little unfortunate but I do think that really puts the cost back in the context of curriculum [1:49:52] writing more what a typical cost would be and I look at the English ten class from a year ago eighteen months ago and [1:50:02] that was actually right about 32,000 to rewrite that and to buy all the books I think it was like 34 or 35 if you don't [1:50:09] count the consultant to checked in with the focus groups and so I felt it so this you know a particular course is [1:50:15] kind of for a third of the students being budgeted at the same rate as a [1:50:21] course that was for an entire grade subject but even that I think it's a steal you look at you estimate 215 [1:50:29] that's a third of sixth graders of seventh graders eighth graders ninth [1:50:34] graders tenth graders opt you in like as soon as the wall is down they're crossing that border they're opting [1:50:40] right in and that's that's 13% of our 8,500 School District four for the cost [1:50:49] of some curriculum development you won't get more cost efficient and I just I want to make sure that that doesn't get [1:50:54] lost at the you know the four FTE number or or this talk of well now we're not [1:51:02] going to make our dyslexia that's an option not make our dyslexia changes I think those those options need to be [1:51:10] thrown right out you know we didn't have a guiding change document where you're normally a list of how nots you know [1:51:15] what you see unacceptable means and I think several of the options that you [1:51:21] listed would be under the unacceptable means so you know there is still some confusion things to be clarified but it [1:51:27] strikes me that the you know the verbal clarification over the course of months [1:51:33] just wasn't getting out and it's not it's not binding it's just not binding until we vote [1:51:40] are these questions just real quick are we asking them questions so they can be done and we can discuss or are we still [1:51:45] just Kalitta getting our positions which are we doing you know I respect you more [1:51:50] friends the dues are these are questions are we so I think they were follow-up [1:51:56] questions to the discussion that's how I interpreted them are there other [1:52:04] questions yeah there was a phrase minimum impact and I forget where it was [1:52:11] [Music] [1:52:17] what was your question doesn't just cost half and is it four hundred thousand not [1:52:22] real because it was more of an interpretation budget it was about budget the sort of ease because that's [1:52:27] you know say over ten years that's forty FTEs and that's a very different cost and I don't think that's what they meant [1:52:33] to to estimate this as a cost but yeah that's where it was but it had I found [1:52:38] it was a question from the high school program design in the impact it's [1:52:47] written there that this would have minimal positive impact on learning [1:52:52] you don't even referring to oh I think I [1:52:57] was saying in that first slide the fact that we already have enriched and accelerate adoption so many things there [1:53:03] you really not you're putting into policy something that really will not have much of an impact being just in the [1:53:09] straight English yeah which is half their English experience in the high school yeah so as far as the impact on [1:53:16] English I I don't mean to quibble with that directly but is that imply anything about your thoughts on the the other [1:53:21] enriched courses and if we're getting rid of them have minimal impact on learning or what you see value and the [1:53:28] ones we have nobody's proposing to get rid of any weren't enriched but you seen minimal impact with adding some does [1:53:35] that imply this minimal impact in removing some or it doesn't imply the whole where I looked at the policies you [1:53:40] had a number of courses listed that we were going to create honors level courses and my comments on my [1:53:48] presentation is that they already exist there we already have three levels in science so if it that's what I said if [1:53:56] this is just about English then we should have a conversation about English and uproots the middle school you know [1:54:02] the elementary visual is it good for students not suggest that removing all [1:54:08] of our honors courses would have minimal impact on my question so that is not [1:54:14] what he was does it provide more than minimal impact that we offer leveled science in nine [1:54:20] tenth and eleventh grade I would say there if you ask me just personally [1:54:25] philosophy I would say that's enriched classes that are the same standards [1:54:31] typically that are a little bit faster deeper and so on do not have a super high leverage point acceleration has a [1:54:38] very high leverage point for gifted learners when that we're talking about a compacted class where you do two years [1:54:44] and one for a truly gifted accelerate that has that's a high leverage impact strategy the research points to that [1:54:50] there is minimal impact for a tracked class a leveled class like an enriched class versus a standard class most of [1:54:58] that benefit goes to the upper level not to those that are left in the in the lower level just historically and that's [1:55:04] what I said the more levels that you have the more you have an impact on stratification within your student [1:55:10] population so and again nobody's proposing to get rid of our current enriched classes but as the the policy [1:55:17] was written it it spoke specifically about those courses and that's why I was addressing it so I think I understand [1:55:24] the better thanks okay [1:55:30] any other questions all right thank you [1:55:35] very much [1:55:50] next we have policy updates we can I get a motion to approve policy 607 and 608 I [1:56:03] got a motion can I get a second hello [1:56:13] all right I'm here any changes since the last month when the worst were before us [1:56:19] on discussion no these are policies that have to do with with administrating the [1:56:26] 504 plans and working with I EPS and and our intervention works and so we we [1:56:33] talked last time about the works that are ongoing the policy is is updated and corrected but not necessarily the be-all [1:56:42] end-all of some of those changes are underway but it does represent some of the things the clarifications around [1:56:47] relevant laws and some of the restrictions and props around those changes in particular the the [1:56:55] Disabilities Education Improvement Act of 2004 IEP and 504 is correct okay all [1:57:08] right any questions all those in favor of approving policies 607 and 608 say aye aye any opposed motion carried [1:57:17] next can I get a motion to approve revised policy 601 I believe that's the motion you want correct there just isn't [1:57:25] one of my notes here it says to be determined by school board so but I think you are looking for a motion to [1:57:31] approve revised policy 601 so moved [1:57:38] so I don't know if you need to make a presentation on it unless you've got something different to say than what we've talked about tonight so far well [1:57:46] sure because I think there hasn't really been a run down we did a run down a month ago but just the general idea [1:57:54] elementary schools are largely held as status quo but it does refer to pull outs which have gone away in a couple of [1:57:59] ways a couple of places it maintains what we have for some leveled options [1:58:07] for example seventh-grade in social studies eighth grade in science and it [1:58:12] introduces seven new courses level [1:58:17] courses and that's ninth and tenth grade language arts which is currently one class for all ninth graders and then [1:58:24] another single class for all 10th graders and then at the middle school [1:58:30] level five additional courses where you've got eighth grade social studies seventh grade science and in sixth grade [1:58:39] the language arts or social studies in the science so so those are the with [1:58:49] traditions and other things that are listed referenced some of the ongoing work for example the k-12 talent [1:58:55] development framework what's listed in the policy is that the curriculum would [1:59:01] contain elements of them then it lists out what's what's relevant in the k-12 talent development and then what [1:59:07] elements mean would be subject to the development of the course which the board is in undergoing they're sort of [1:59:14] saying that these courses are to be developed which lends itself to an implementation timeline and I think some [1:59:21] of the questions that we've heard earlier and and tonight have a lot to do [1:59:27] with the implementation timeline so when they say well what is what do you what [1:59:33] are you thinking what's different enough what's not different enough I don't think it's a place of of sentences and [1:59:39] policy to start to specify what do you mean when you say different in seventh grade for social studies versus eighth [1:59:45] grade I'm sorry seventh grade for science versus eighth grade for social studies so that would be [1:59:51] ongoing conversation I think that's what the administration of the board had said earlier that there'd be an ongoing [1:59:56] touchpoints to clarify some of those points but the major the major questions [2:00:02] would only be decided on a vote they wouldn't be decided through any sort of broad conversation and those questions [2:00:08] are say for the 215 students in sixth grade seventh grade eighth grade ninth [2:00:15] grade and tenth grade we anticipate out stop ting in which is a good estimate because you look at [2:00:21] where we offer choices and that's what we see seventh grade social studies that's enriched we see a third of the [2:00:27] students there in eighth grade so it's it's a good estimate and that's huge [2:00:32] that's of those five grade levels it's a third of the kids that would be impacting four I think the updated cost [2:00:40] depending on what you think of books 50 to 200,000 the books are the big cost that's 75 percent of the dollar so if we [2:00:49] don't have different books and we didn't really get an answer if we don't have different books currently in seventh grade social studies and rich versus not [2:00:55] then really what your difference different between the classes is what's so hard for a teacher to do otherwise [2:01:00] and that is differentiate the pace to say that where you're gonna be we're [2:01:06] gonna be doing this unit or me doing that unit you know the third one and that we've got this this rapid-fire pace [2:01:12] who's up for it and also our performance expectations what is it that you think [2:01:17] is is a level work that is so hard to look in the same classroom and say I've [2:01:23] got a different idea for an a for you than you and if you don't differentiate that what's really to incentivize the [2:01:31] student to opt in to so much more effort to reach their full potential on a day [2:01:37] to day basis when they're in the class have gotten a what more can you say what are people gonna ask what at home how [2:01:42] school going I've got an a you know what they're not going to be able to prompt you day to day but at the time of [2:01:47] registration you can really say what course is the best fit for you and your [2:01:53] growth you know and I appreciate this idea of people should be able to explore something in fact I think that's my [2:02:00] point that if you explore it in middle school where there aren't as many calm quinces you try it and you like it why [2:02:06] is it gone the next year and if you explore it in middle school it doesn't go well you then fine you don't have to [2:02:14] opt into the enriched science the honors science when you're in high school and college is going to want to see those [2:02:19] grades and if you tell students well you have to consider enriched social studies [2:02:24] in seventh grade because otherwise it's not offered I think that's a shame because you don't you don't have that [2:02:30] choice for the fit you know when what if a student wanted to try something in different order what if their interest [2:02:35] in science was was found earlier and then it was not nurtured it just strikes [2:02:41] me as as inconsistent and you know something we haven't mentioned much is [2:02:47] is the resident moment and how that was about plus thirty-six kids over if you [2:02:56] look over ten years kind of the year-to-year the first jump it was about average outlook sometimes more sometimes last was about thirty six more then we [2:03:05] got the report from hazel Reinhart which was the first year acknowledged a major dip and it weren't really quite sure [2:03:13] what to make of that and I there was a demographer sort of saying keep your eye on it and the next year it got a little [2:03:18] deep little deeper you know it's not even leveling out and what is the cost of that and some of those students as [2:03:24] far as the the dollars the school gets have been you know that that loss [2:03:29] financially has been offset by open enrollment but not all not even close to all and if you look at so we've lost [2:03:37] three hundred twenty two over two years and if you look at that compared to the plus seventy two we should have been at [2:03:44] and that's a huge huge change in resident I think that's just so important to keep an eye on I think it [2:03:50] should be on the board's dashboard when we get one you know and I know we're developing a dashboard but what do [2:03:56] people think of our schools locally are they opt in or opt you know and it's [2:04:01] been 15% for the longest time now it's 20 percent resident kids that have opted [2:04:07] out and it just it strikes me as a point of concern that that isn't on a five to [2:04:12] seven year timeline it's so much so much more important than that type of time [2:04:17] to make sure that people in your community are opting into your school [2:04:23] and this isn't the only up problem there are their concerns and some of them are [2:04:29] being addressed some of them are about to be addressed but what's so different with this one is how frowned upon these [2:04:37] ideas are and how difficult it is to to get any traction with them you know and [2:04:44] we keep referring to that studies release date about about what's gonna be appropriate and accelerated enough for [2:04:52] students to reach their capacity but you know think about how long that study ran [2:04:57] and the time people were asking for it before it ran and this is this is so [2:05:02] many years in the making I don't I don't at all want anybody to get the impression that it's year one and boy [2:05:08] aren't they hungry for year one it's not your one it only feels like year one because we sort of constantly find [2:05:14] ourselves resetting a timeline just like with some other things in the old strategic plan the the dashboard the [2:05:21] idea of a dashboard there was a board before us that had that idea and it just there's some difficulties with it first [2:05:26] of all we couldn't even decide how do you know when students are growing and how do you measure that what what [2:05:33] metrics do you value and these these are intractable questions in the profession and I wouldn't want them to hold up [2:05:40] small steps that are incredibly cost efficient especially when you look at at some of the questions we have lingering [2:05:46] about this they go back as far as you can go in a school district they ask what are what are students needs and how [2:05:52] do you meet those needs how are we doing those are the the highest in the sky level of looking at these questions this [2:05:58] is zoomed in fifty to two hundred thousand dollars startup cost for a third of your sixth through tenth [2:06:04] population perhaps more because sixth grade offers so many I bet you'd have [2:06:09] more than a third of students in sixth grade saying yeah I tried my hand at an [2:06:14] honors course I have some questions for [2:06:19] the board but first I would like to make a point of clarification and that numerous board members have referenced [2:06:27] students leaving our district enrollment studies and as well members of the audience and people have sent us [2:06:34] emails talking about the fact that gifted and talented and rigor for some [2:06:39] of the top reasons people have mentioned and leaving our district and that is actually not correct information and I [2:06:45] want to clarify for the public what the correct information is we did a 2018 [2:06:51] study by Moores Leatherman it's the only statistically accurate yep you can shake your head but it's the only [2:06:56] statistically accurate study that we have the number one two and three reasons that people said they were [2:07:03] leaving our school district were meeting learning needs personal attention by [2:07:08] teachers and focus on character development gifted and talented and more challenging coursework were the number [2:07:15] eleven and thirteen reasons that people mentioned and I want to say that they actually weren't even mentioned at all [2:07:22] as a reason when they weren't prompted so they weren't even mentioned as a top reason when they weren't prompted I'm [2:07:28] not saying that it's not something we need to focus on as a school district but we need to understand what the data [2:07:35] is actually telling us and I don't it I think it does a disservice to our community to pretend that this is one of [2:07:43] the number one people reasons people are leaving when it's actually not and then it's disingenuous to say that if we have [2:07:50] some of these programs that it's going to be a windfall from a financial [2:07:56] perspective because the data does not show that when people were prompted as [2:08:01] to what is the most important factor in you leaving Edina public schools 17% [2:08:08] said gifted and talented programs which means seventy percent of respondents said it was not a priority for them [2:08:14] seventy percent of respondents more challenging coursework sixty-six percent [2:08:19] of respondents said this is not a priority for me I want it to go on record what the data is saying it wasn't [2:08:27] the number one two reason people are saying they're leaving her school district [2:08:37] Erica I'm not sure where I'm looking at the results here yes my looking at your [2:08:45] AdWords I'm looking at other results and and that's not the time doesn't an [2:08:52] eighteenth survey yes number one reason for sending some child somewhere else is [2:08:57] specific program specific program need for going to other public schools better [2:09:04] behavior personalized education right correct and on that nowhere is listed [2:09:10] gifted and talented at all right but then if you scroll down to most [2:09:17] important factor in decision gifted and talented is that has seventeen and then [2:09:23] if you look at the disaggregated data from that chart it says people rated at [2:09:29] a one two three or four seventy percent of people said that is not important to [2:09:35] me in my reason for leaving right but there aren't there aren't any other okay [2:09:40] so I'm looking at programs on this most important factor in decision so there's [2:09:47] a gifted and talented programs listed and then there's language immersion [2:09:52] programs and special ed program so when people are leaving the the number one [2:09:59] listed as programs is gifted in China where you're looking I'm looking at page [2:10:05] there's no pages it's the most important factor in decision but meeting learning [2:10:13] needs is the most important factor you are correct [2:10:18] of the programs listed gifted and talented is the number one it's also the about twentieth of the reasons but [2:10:26] fifteen percent or seventeen percent in 2018 and then the only other study we [2:10:34] have but which is not scientific which is twenty four percent but where I take [2:10:41] exception is you pull out that one data point and you say thirteen percent of respondents said this was the most [2:10:47] infected and sector leading for leaving you don't say [2:10:52] that it's number 15 and 70% of people said personal attention by teachers 67% [2:11:00] said meeting learning needs 62% said focus on character development 61% said traditional moral values 60 I'm [2:11:09] sorry now you have to tell me where your class slide 4 so it's fine to say that [2:11:15] it was a factor but you have to couch it in where was it listed and what are [2:11:20] people telling us it was not even close to being one of the most important factors okay so here's my here's here's [2:11:26] my point with with this of this was a strategic initiative when the board [2:11:35] started talking of when the policy committee was responding to a strategic [2:11:42] initiative where we said our I can only speak for myself I included this as a [2:11:53] strategic in this into the strategic plan core courses in this honors courses [2:11:59] in the secondary core because I felt that there was some urgency to meeting [2:12:06] the needs of advanced learners and I've Stickley accurate data so there's not [2:12:11] anything to agree or disagree all refer to your specificity but she was saying the specific program under reason for [2:12:18] sending child number one specific program as in navigator or yes you don't [2:12:25] know what the specific program is right so that's what so you're saying you're looking at that data and I'm saying I [2:12:32] think we need to talk more to our stakeholders our students and their [2:12:38] families and the students and their families that came and spoke to us this evening had something to say that I [2:12:45] listened to very clearly that I I would like to find out more about why about [2:12:54] what they're feeling and and so I feel very strongly there may be many people [2:13:01] who are very happy with our programs and I hope that there are and I know that there are but I [2:13:08] would also like to find out from our community especially the gifted and [2:13:15] talented community that that make up so much a part of our population as to [2:13:22] whether or not their needs are being met I think that is an outstanding idea and [2:13:27] I would love to do that and build an outstanding gifted and talented policy off of that information yes so would I [2:13:35] and I feel strongly and I still see teachers here that they need to be a [2:13:40] part of the conversation on a policy tonight right and and I will tell you [2:13:47] why I would be voting on a policy tonight and that is because this has been a Sisyphean effort to get this in [2:13:57] front of the board and so I'm just I I realize that if we vote on this tonight [2:14:06] and if it is approved it will come right back to the board very quickly at the [2:14:12] beginning of the year so you're voting on a policy that you don't think is the best policy just because you want to get [2:14:19] it passed no I'm getting it not you got [2:14:25] the wrong reason I would be voting on this policy just so that we will have a [2:14:30] very transparent conversation and make sure that all of the people that are [2:14:37] involved will listen so you're voting on the policy of a transparent conversation yes okay okay [2:15:04] okay how am i doing all right Eric I think you and I have we haven't shared [2:15:12] desires for the benefit of the district the but I think we're interpreting the [2:15:17] exit of the gifted and talented a little bit differently I'm recalling administration gave us on October 24th [2:15:25] an exit survey it wasn't scientific it was as good as they could give to us but 25% of the [2:15:33] residents who were leaving Edina cited the lack of or for them substandard [2:15:42] gifted and talented it's 25% I did a little math on on that and we have at [2:15:48] that same meeting we were told a hundred and fifty resident and students left the [2:15:54] district this past year in one year and you take 150 by and multiply that by 25 [2:16:03] percent you're 37 and a half students you multiply 37 and a half students by [2:16:09] $8,500 which is about how much the state gives us for students and were at three [2:16:16] hundred eighteen thousand dollars so talked quite a bit about the cost but the revenues a real thing and yes we can [2:16:24] pick at the fact that this wasn't scientific the an wasn't real big but that's the best we got and I'm working [2:16:31] with that and it seems to me as I recall from Morris Leatherman that one could [2:16:36] interpret also those results as being similar to that so I want to have this [2:16:41] on the public record on the camera too that we recently heard that 25% 24% 0.24 [2:16:49] of our residents students were leaving because of gifted and talented reasons [2:16:54] so how many is that is that like wasn't that eight or nine people indeed that's [2:17:02] what I'm saying okay so it's not right but that's the best administration base and we did asked for more specific information we [2:17:09] had asked for individuals to be asked upon their exit and so we could get it [2:17:14] nailed down get the count exactly but that didn't happen so we're working with what we have I wonder you can sit and [2:17:21] continue to argue about what the numbers tell us about exiting enrollment and actually were throwing around all kinds [2:17:27] of numbers and the bottom line is we've asked for this information I asked for [2:17:34] it last December as I recall Erica you didn't think we needed it because we had [2:17:39] Morris Leatherman so this is data that we've been clamoring for forever so that we can understand why we would lose [2:17:47] resident students we were at 8500 students once and if you look at the [2:17:52] numbers that are in our packet tonight now we're at 83 19 so we're clearly going the wrong direction but as to the [2:18:00] why I'd like more detailed information on that as well we are hearing and it did show up at least in this survey and [2:18:07] it showed up in the other one as well but we've also heard from families who are leaving for the other reason for dyslexia for lack of meeting needs on [2:18:15] the lower end and those are all issues that we have to address I have been on [2:18:22] this board for almost eight years and we have talked about these classes about [2:18:28] the gap at the middle school with the social studies and the science we have talked about language arts 9 and 10 [2:18:34] forever this policy didn't come out of the blue it's just that when I hear people saying [2:18:41] that we're supposed to be working together that were were supposed to get input and feedback we have gotten a lot [2:18:49] of feedback and input and it has been displayed tonight of how hard the [2:18:54] pushback is on this this is not a give and take and let's work together [2:18:59] this is constantly being told no no no no I mean we had this discussion about [2:19:05] language arts ten what two years ago a year ago and and minimal change was made [2:19:12] and we were just told absolutely not we are not adding a different course and all that I believe that this policy was [2:19:19] set to do was to offer choice for kids that's it and I'm and and when I hear [2:19:26] things like it's just about people wanting to pass some policy and that [2:19:31] it's about us is so not about us this is about the kids this is about offering [2:19:39] choice and we've been arguing about pre-ap nine ten we've had students come in front of us and share their [2:19:45] experiences and say how when they're told to go around the system to opt out [2:19:51] to test out to go online they feel lonely they're not with their peers so [2:19:57] I'm looking at all of the information I'm reading articles and studies about [2:20:03] how we're pitting students against each other and referring to our gifted students as these bad horrible elitist [2:20:12] and this is going on in our community when I hear tonight that we will not have dyslexia services because of 6:01 [2:20:20] which really depending on how it lands is five to seven classes I find that [2:20:25] very hard to believe that suddenly dyslexia services are going to be gone because this is what we're doing we're [2:20:31] pitting parents against parents were bullying parents we're bullying parents who show up to give their opinion that [2:20:37] may be different than other parents all parents care about their individual [2:20:43] student and that student can be super high special needs dyslexia [2:20:48] middle-of-the-road or high high achieving students who want to grow every year and have their meet needs met [2:20:57] we have talked about the the language arts class that's been in place since [2:21:02] the fall of 2012 I have yet to see data that proves to me that that has worked [2:21:09] out for our kids and every time we've asked for it whether it's AP stats or other things we don't get that [2:21:16] information then when we talk about a CT and we like to quote that apparently [2:21:22] hardly any kids like seventeen percent of kids are getting tutors the question [2:21:27] actually is did you use an academic tutor during your senior year well you get your AC tutoring usually in [2:21:36] your junior year so again let's be honest about when we're throwing out facts and figures about what we're [2:21:42] talking about as for the cost when it's not these costs that we've talked about [2:21:49] tonight I to me again it's just if people seem to like this word this fall [2:21:54] fear mongering I think we're fear-mongering we're scaring parents that you're not gonna get your your classes we're gonna stop [2:22:01] all of the development going on in our other courses or the other curriculum [2:22:07] cycles that's just not the case I have so much more belief in this district and [2:22:12] the teachers and the community if we set our minds to something we can do it and [2:22:19] all I hear is roadblock after roadblock after roadblock which I'm telling my own [2:22:24] kid figure it out quit telling me about that that this is a zero-sum game and [2:22:30] that if this one gets this one isn't going to get we're better than that and calling parents out and saying that if [2:22:39] you want this you want segregation and that your elitist because you want your kids to be challenged it makes no sense [2:22:48] all we're saying is choice choice in a handful of classes and one that we've [2:22:54] been fighting forever this is not new and as for the enrollment we can sit and [2:23:01] pick through all those numbers but it is clear that we are losing students the [2:23:06] wise like I said I would like to better understand that but some is gifted and [2:23:12] talented or lack of advanced academics and some is because we're not serving our dyslexia kids or whatever other [2:23:18] means were needs we're not meeting we need to do this work and when I hear [2:23:25] admins say that we have not asked for their opinion they have not been a part of this and I look back and you at the [2:23:32] policy committee asking for this policy to be discussed since June at a minimum [2:23:39] how have you not had a chance to weigh in I to put that on the policy committee and [2:23:47] claim that they didn't want any input or that they weren't that nobody was asked [2:23:53] to come to the table just it's disingenuous at best they have been [2:23:59] asking as we've been discussing Stratton we have talked about different needs and [2:24:05] we have talked about stress but again I don't believe that stress and we've had [2:24:11] this discussion that we are here to tell kids that the way to not have stress is [2:24:17] we're going to tell you what classes you can and can't take because that's going to reduce your stress there are those [2:24:22] kids not mine who can take five AP classes and be just fine but it's not [2:24:28] for us to say it's for families to make those choices with their children and we [2:24:34] need to allow families to do that and not say that we're going to reduce stress because we're going to dictate [2:24:40] the classes that you're taking we are talking about mental health and the strategic plan but when we've talked [2:24:46] about honors and even though it got so far through the system then all of a sudden at the last minute again another [2:24:53] roadblock well that's not really what we meant and now it appears that we're slow [2:24:58] walking the strap plan that maybe will come to fruition in January or February [2:25:04] which the intent was for it to be done by the current board that put two years of work into that so I this this is not [2:25:14] this is not new this has not been without roadblocks as a mere referred to [2:25:19] and Alan referred to and and we can look at the data of the of the bell curve our [2:25:25] bell curve is tipped so far to one side and then if you look at it from the year before and we want to talk about growth [2:25:32] and well all the top kids they're the only ones growing that's not fair well they're growing less than they did [2:25:37] before from what map data we do have and again why are we not focusing if it's 15 [2:25:44] percent of our kids absolutely we should be focusing on that it's 15 percent of [2:25:50] our kids but to say that 50 percent of our kids don't deserve a choice [2:25:57] Richmond to me just it makes no sense and we have tried to overcomplicate this [2:26:04] discuss adult issues that are not kid issues and this isn't that complicated [2:26:10] we are better than this and we are more than capable of getting a few extra [2:26:16] classes into the system and making it work if we really want to so I was gonna [2:26:27] say a few things three quick things first I want to thank the audience for staying until 12:40 in the morning I can [2:26:34] tell how much everybody cares by being here so thank you I want to thank the teachers the administration for staying [2:26:40] till very late and providing us with all the information the third thing I want to say before I make a very strong statement is I really respect my peers [2:26:47] and know that everyone that's coming to this board right now is putting in significant time as mostly charitable [2:26:53] activity to really try to help our district so this will surprise many of you but I was a gifted and talented [2:26:59] student I recognize we need to challenge all learners to reach their individual [2:27:04] potential and I admit that elements embedded in policy 601 may ultimately be a very good idea however as I think back [2:27:13] about all the reckless and endangering things I've done including allowing my young kids to use the waffle iron at a [2:27:19] hotel buffet this is by far the most irresponsible activity with the largest opportunity to damage the future of [2:27:25] children's growth that I have ever overseen I ran for school board in 2017 to improve our financials and to develop [2:27:32] a strong and academically excellent strategic plan in terms of our approach to fiduciary oversight I have worked [2:27:39] with two well trained finance directors over the last two years who are thoughtful and detail-oriented we've [2:27:46] been fortunate to refinance bonds twice saving the district and he dinah taxpayer millions in the years to come [2:27:52] we have also achieved and maintained the highest credit rating in the state however to get there we have had to make [2:28:00] significant cuts each of the last two years impacting students across every [2:28:05] learning level having gone through countless hours of budgeting cannot conceive of supporting a policy [2:28:12] that uniquely directs resources from many to a group without deep study and [2:28:18] understanding of the full impact to repeat in contract to some esoteric arguments about pitting student [2:28:24] populations against each other that is not and has never been the intent public [2:28:30] school is not a capitalistic environment this is a government regulated entity with a fixed number of resources we must [2:28:38] as a measure of our fiduciary responsibilities know what actions we have taken have what consequence in [2:28:46] terms of our strategic plan we have failed as a group to advance this effort in a reasonable amount of time we should [2:28:53] have brought it to the community administration and teachers a year ago that failure is shared by the 7 of us [2:28:59] and John however that doesn't provide a reason to short-circuit the process by [2:29:04] jamming in a major decision that will without question pull resources from [2:29:09] other children who do not qualify for accelerated courses let's look at two hard decisions we've had to make the [2:29:16] first one for one large decision regarding school start times we studied the evidence we looked at peer schools [2:29:22] we spoke to the community we spoke to teachers we work to understand community [2:29:27] education impacts through the teaching and learning committee I personally read over 500 emails and over 200 pages of [2:29:34] primary data from the American pediatric Association and other noted research outfits to understand all the benefits [2:29:41] and consequences I voted in alignment with the international scientific community's evidence and the [2:29:46] administration's recommendation in another case the administration recommended a seminar class option in [2:29:53] the high school for approval last year this recommendation akin to policy 601 [2:29:58] was not fully costed data of its impact was not provided and I promptly voted [2:30:04] against it was it a good idea maybe was it presented to a governance board in a [2:30:10] way that meets our fiduciary and oversight responsibilities no the same exists here with policy 601 our elements [2:30:17] of it positive yes is it superseding nearly two years of work on a strategic plan that is now [2:30:23] yet approved thereby being not appropriate yes does this board know full well that in [2:30:28] 45 days you will have a new constituency voted in by the majority of the community who does not support this [2:30:34] policy as currently stated yes we don't have time to waste your later to our [2:30:39] children in their futures we as importantly don't have resources to waste it is significant violation of [2:30:45] our ethical governance and fiduciary responsibilities to vote a change that pulls resources from one area to another without understanding the full impact so [2:30:53] if my colleagues which it looks like choose develop this through today it is also remarkably inappropriate because we [2:30:58] know in January the board won't support this decision the only reason I'm not more disappointed and frustrated by this [2:31:04] policy 601 process is because I know that for all decisions that are driven by sentiment and not data by fear or not [2:31:10] reality by sound bites not impact in January we will improve I do not support [2:31:16] policy six to one is currently stated and will work to ensure that we do provide an extremely challenging [2:31:22] curriculum based on academic excellence to our highest achievers while balancing [2:31:27] and meeting the needs of all of our learners in line with our current resources thank you for listening in my [2:31:32] position and regardless of tonight we will get this right in the short term [2:31:47] I have a few closing remarks my intents [2:31:53] and purposes for supportiveness were to make changes to the district [2:32:00] that were much more modest than how they're being interpreted my intent was [2:32:05] to just codify what we have going on in the elementary school to really not touch it to add five classes in middle [2:32:14] school and to add two classes in the high school to codify the existence of [2:32:20] the five classes that as a mayor talked about so that they would have to come to the board and so the costs that I have [2:32:27] understood that I would be voting for are much more in line with the mirrors rough estimate of two hundred thousand [2:32:33] dollars when I take that into account with what I just talked about that we are losing students and from the best [2:32:40] information that we have as of this fall we are set to gain that money back if we [2:32:47] retract if we attract and retain our gifted and talented community it seems [2:32:52] to be making an exodus this would be much closer to cost neutral this is also [2:32:59] to me a very strong marketing statement because it says that we are here open [2:33:05] for business for gifted and talented services we have many community in many neighboring communities that have robust [2:33:12] gifted and talented that don't seem to be apologising for it the way that we do at times no not with our AP but with the [2:33:20] enriched and honors I'm not calling for [2:33:27] something that's significantly different I'm calling for something that is much more similar to what we had before the [2:33:33] last strategic plan that we had in place for many years beforehand where we had pretty much a robust and unapologetic [2:33:42] gifted and talented program there's been talk that this has some tracking [2:33:49] elements to it I don't really see that because students can get on and off [2:33:55] every single year they're not paid for the rest of their careers with and we've there's somehow this has been [2:34:02] associated with the achievement gap and as we heard from our presenters earlier [2:34:10] much of the achievement gap is dealt with by improving third grade literacy getting kids ready for kindergarten and [2:34:17] we didn't talk about this but stemming this summer learning loss you handle those three things you got 80% of the [2:34:24] achievement gap dealt with so this is really not affecting the achievement gap [2:34:30] that much another point is licensure our language [2:34:36] has been changed or my interpretation of it was from the get-go that it was to [2:34:41] provide for the district to make the choice for what would constitute a qualified gifted and talented teacher it [2:34:48] did not demand licensure and licensure would cost a tremendous amount I'm not asking for that I don't want that I want [2:34:54] the district's own determination and judgment to be made on that I am very supportive of the idea of voice and [2:35:01] choice giving more choice to our parents and to our students we talked so much about that but I tell you that l8n class [2:35:08] has been a point of contention for a long time and I would like to see another choice given to our community [2:35:13] about that there's also been some talk that that having heterogeneous classes [2:35:25] is more research based well I've dug in a little bit and I don't intend to get [2:35:31] into the research here but I do want to create the impression that the support the academic support for gifted and [2:35:41] talented is not the void of substantial academic research and for instance [2:35:47] there's a page in Keith in 1996 a little bit old but from John Hopkins press a [2:35:53] compendium of the review of major literature of homogeneous and [2:35:58] heterogeneous instructions concluded that homogeneous grouping has a positive effect on high ability students in an [2:36:05] even better effect on minority students and they drew into this study Oaks and [2:36:11] Slaven who are the big names in non gifted and [2:36:17] talented instruction so they took those folks into account as well I embrace [2:36:24] gifted and talented instruction and I think it has tremendous effects on the [2:36:30] economy and our society as a whole I have cited this to a number of my fellow board members but the Atlanta the [2:36:37] Economist March 24th last year had an article about how to teach gifted [2:36:43] children where they use gifted and talented instruction as a proxy for [2:36:49] economic success and they used patents generated by society and by societies [2:36:55] and compared those that had more enriched and honors programs and those societies had more patents and they also [2:37:02] correspondingly had more economic growth so it's it's not just a trifling thing [2:37:09] people are just not making this up this is a fairly well esteemed publication [2:37:15] and it is not a small population that would be addressed by this as we've [2:37:20] heard a couple of times here tonight 50% of our students basically are 80% we [2:37:25] have a whale shape tail whale shaped distribution curve we do not have the kind of distribution curve found in [2:37:31] other districts and so I think this this Accords well this initiative Accords [2:37:37] well with the recognition of that reality so and I think that this does [2:37:44] make good on the commitment made to the gifted and talented community at the end of 2016 or the beginning of 2017 [2:37:51] so those are my remarks here at five [2:37:57] minutes to one [2:38:22] hello the only thing I want to add is [2:38:28] that as a board I think that our actions speak louder than our words and I wanted [2:38:34] to say that I feel it's the epitome of irony that we are contemplating introducing a new mission statement for [2:38:41] a district that says our mission is to quote educate each individual to reach their full potential but as a board we [2:38:47] refuse to better understand the impacts of prioritizing budgetary and human resources of this policy specifically [2:38:54] for Advanced Learner's in a vacuum and not part of our broader strategic plan to say that I'm disappointed in this [2:39:00] process or lack of process is an understatement [2:39:13] well actually have a question so why was [2:39:19] precalculus drop from the honors requirement so the math program has its [2:39:27] own sequencing and we raised the question about why there was a previous [2:39:32] enriched precalculus that was dropped and concern about the possibility of [2:39:39] some of the early in their high school career who's been precocious and math all along and someone who is finishing [2:39:45] their high school career and needs more time on a given topic being in the same class and also the notion that precalc [2:39:52] is a fork in the road between calc a b and calc BC but in our in our [2:39:59] conversations with the board and questions about whether that was necessary and just the overall focus on [2:40:07] having choice which the math program inherently has it didn't quite fit the [2:40:14] rest of the logic it didn't sequence with this notion of everybody's being forced into the same class in those [2:40:20] other areas and so it's more consistent it's more rational if it meets the core [2:40:26] concern which is you you keep accordion kids with regard to pace and content and [2:40:33] expectations you say for example with language arts seventh grade you could [2:40:39] take an enriched course if you think it'll better meet your needs and eighth [2:40:45] grade likewise but then not ninth grade and not 10th grade that's that's the [2:40:50] heart of the concern and precalc didn't get to that heart of their concern I would also I had just in addition to [2:40:58] that part of the choice something I don't think in this come up what tonight and that's why not just test out of it [2:41:05] credit by assessment which is sort of a secret in our district not literally but it's it's under verbalized in the [2:41:12] conversation and things that fair to say that credit by assessment isn't widely known as an option but I also think it's [2:41:17] a shame of an option in one very important sense and that's that you're saying at the beginning say of 10th [2:41:22] grade you are so amazing just don't even register for 10th grade [2:41:30] English for example because you were just you know so much already when [2:41:37] really I would rather we say we're gonna help grow your full potential you're clearly precocious and how are you able [2:41:44] to test out of what we think is a 10th grade class but let's give role you we've got amazing teachers and all the [2:41:51] resources that goes along with it and for a one-time fifty to two hundred thousand dollar cost which is the the [2:41:58] two hundred thousand is the cost we saw in tonight's report because once you take out those once you take out those [2:42:04] classes it already exists their number falls down to about the two hundred twenty twenty four thousand dollar range [2:42:09] and seventy-five percent of that is the question of do textbooks that's where anyway for the one-time cost fifteen to twenty thousand you get that choice and [2:42:17] you can say welcome to tenth grade let's find the best fit for you as we grow you over the next academic year that's such [2:42:24] a beautiful thing and it's true for the different subjects it's offered and it's true from sixth grade all the way through tenth grade and we offer that at [2:42:31] so many places we do it's an amazing opportunity amazing schools I'll tell you I'm not pulling my kids no matter [2:42:37] how this goes we're we're gonna be here but it's not consistent and I think we can get there for a fifty to twenty [2:42:44] thousand dollar upfront investment and it could in fact oxeye in fact could affect a third of our students any given year [2:42:50] I think I think much more than that if you look at those deciles and you look at the number of kids in any given [2:42:57] decile the top two thirds of decile which is kind of the population that [2:43:02] might be thinking should I try something more challenging in a subject that I'm passionate about that represents 94% of [2:43:10] our kids it doesn't reach all of them we have to do more we have to do other we already are we must continue we've got [2:43:17] to get our Lee reading right but ninety four percent of our kids should consider look at the registration read the course [2:43:22] description talk about it with their family that's what I want and that's why [2:43:28] I want to vote YES tonight okay so I'm just gonna make a few comments because [2:43:33] it's approaching one o'clock so I am concerned and I'm not going to be in [2:43:39] favor of this in what of a series of reasons one of course is we didn't follow the normal process and that means we didn't get [2:43:45] full input from our teachers from administrators and from those that we consider to be our professionals and and [2:43:52] I've heard comments about well it wasn't the policies committees job to go seek that out and actually I would differ [2:43:58] so when administration comes to the board with a proposal we expect the administration to line up teachers and [2:44:05] professionals to say here's the basis of their proposal so I would submit that if the board comes up with a proposal it's [2:44:11] actually the board's obligation to come up with with the questions and requests that people come in so I differ in that [2:44:18] particular one the net effect though is that we didn't get that input and so part of the issue I have is we don't [2:44:24] know today what we don't know we do know that there's a policy that's interpreted [2:44:29] multiple ways because the words are not defined you have Advanced Learner's in [2:44:36] here but I didn't see a definition for it but I saw a capitalized term that would imply that it's supposed to have a [2:44:41] definition so what does it mean I don't know and there are other areas where we can see from the presentation that [2:44:48] there's confusion about what the policy says when it talks about we're going to have advanced classes in three through [2:44:54] twelve it doesn't say I set forth below it says three through 12 and so there are [2:45:00] changes that we could make that would make it cleaner and more understandable I'm concerned about the data so we have [2:45:08] data that's given to us that says the high learners are meeting their growth targets and the people at the bottom are [2:45:14] not meeting their growth targets and so as we know I'm not pitting one student against another but you do have to [2:45:20] allocate resources and you've got to say to yourself so where are we going to allocate money and if for the two [2:45:27] hundred thousand is the number that's fine we still have to decide how we're going to spend the two hundred thousand dollars and perhaps as Owen said we [2:45:35] should look at investing that in stemming summer loss we should start to [2:45:41] sit there and say here are ways that we can address some of the issues that our data does say absolutely exists and by [2:45:48] the way as I said from my questions I am in favor of X bandung the program we have just not in [2:45:55] this bulk fashion Morris Leatherman says there are a number of reasons why [2:46:00] students are leaving you can't focus on one of several reasons you've got to focus on all reasons that's the whole [2:46:07] idea the strap plan is to try to focus on all reasons and then allocate resources I am concerned that if we [2:46:14] require honors at the middle school level that will eliminate the middle school model and/or it will eliminate [2:46:21] the opportunity to provide compacted classes and personally as I look at it I [2:46:27] think a compacted class which is accelerated learning the data better supports that for our students than an [2:46:33] honors class in fact the reason I ask the question about why precalculus was dropped is calculus is an accelerated [2:46:39] math is an accelerated program and so what's interesting is that in the accelerated program you're not pushing [2:46:47] for an honors class and so we should be looking and saying where else should we [2:46:52] have accelerated programs as opposed to where else should we have honors programs so these are and by the way in [2:47:01] terms of is their broad community support the reality is we had people come and speak tonight there was an [2:47:07] email sent out to 250 people asking them to come tonight [2:47:12] well that drove people I don't know but also as I door knocked people didn't say [2:47:19] to me you need to add honors classes now do I think that we need to add a level [2:47:24] of rigor yes I just don't think that this is the way I would prefer a different way because I think that this is a silo approach and so I'm not going [2:47:32] to be in favor of this because I think there are better ways to accomplish what I think is your objective that's all we [2:47:38] just differ differ on ways of accomplishing the objective [2:47:45] I think we're ready to vote all those in [2:47:50] favor of policy 601 say aye all those opposed say nay nay motion [2:47:57] carried [Applause] [2:48:05] we have completed our agenda is there any objection to a journey hearing none [2:48:10] we are adjourned