[1. Call to Order]
[00:00:05]
OKAY. GOOD EVENING CALLING TO ORDER THE SEPTEMBER 12, 2021 LAKE WASHINGTON SCHOOL BOARD STUDY SESSION. LET THE RECORD REFLECT ALL BOARD MEMBERS ARE PRESENT AND PARTICIPATING REMOTELY.
UNDER THE RECENT PROCLAMATION FROM THE GOVERNOR, WE ARE -- WE ARE ABLE TO HAVE IN-PERSON PUBLIC MEETINGS, PROVIDED WE ARE ABLE TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MUSC -- THE MISCELLANEOUS GUIDANCE. THIS BOARD VALUES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION AND ENGAGEMENT WITH THE BOARD AND WILL CONTINUE TO COMPLY WITH THE LAWS OF THE MEETINGS ABILITIES AND REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO THE MISCELLANEOUS ITEMS. IF THE MISCELLANEOUS GUIDANCE EXCUSE ME AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS RELATED TO COVID-19 CANNOT BE MET THE SCHOOL BOARD MUST HOLD THEIR MEETINGS REMOTELY AND LIVESTREAM AND AUDIO.
DUE TO RECENT COMPLIANCE WITH THE BOARD THE BOARD HAS DECIDED TO HOLD REMOTE MEETINGS. THE BOARD WILL NOTIFY THE PUBLIC AND LOCATION OF ITS MODE THROUGH THE BOARD MEETINGS THROUGH THE "BOARD MEETINGS" TAB ON BOARD DOCS.
AT THIS TIME IT IS PLANNED THAT ALL MEETINGS IN SEPTEMBER OCTOBER, NOVEMBER WILL BE HELD REMOTELY UNLESS THERE ARE CHANGES IN THE GUIDANCE PROVIDED.
THE BOARD MEETINGS AND SPECIAL GUIDANCE WILL CONTINUE TO BE LIVE-STREAMED ON THE DISTRICT'S WEBSITE LLL.LWCS -- WWWLWSD.ORG AND IT IS CONFERENCE ID12727. YOU ARE ARE ALSO WELCOME TO
[1. Discussion of OE-14, Anti-Racism, Non-Discrimination, Equity, and Inclusion in Education]
E-MAIL THE BOARD AT ANY TIME AND OKAY WE HAVE ONE ITEM FOR THE STUDY SESSION TONIGHT THAT. IS ANOTHER STUDY SESSION ON THE DEVELOPMENT OF OE-14. DR. HOLMAN CAN YOU GET USSTARTED ON THAT? >> ABSOLUTELY.
TONIGHT SAY FOLLOW-UP FROM THE BOARD'S 2020 STUDY FOLLOW-UP SESSION. AT THAT TIME THE BOARD DISCUSSIONED OE-14. THE BOARD HAS RECEIVED SIGNIFICANT FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY, AND THE BOARD HAS A COMMITMENT TO LISTEN TO THE COMMUNITY AND ADOPT A POLICY THAT DOES REFLECT THE INTERESTS OF THE BOARD AND THE VOICE OF COMMUNITY. AND SO THIS REALLY IS THAT NEXT STEP. AT THE SEPTEMBER 7TH MEETING, THE BOARD DISCUSSED REALLY, THAT OPENING SECTION OF THE POLICY. AND IS THAT THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THE BOARD TO TRULY EXPRESS ITS VALUES, ITS COMMITMENTS, AND REALLY TO BE ABLE TO ARTICULATE HOW THE BOARD KIND OF SEES THE OVERALL WORK IN REGARD TO OE-14.
AND SO THERE WAS DISCUSSION AROUND TAKING THAT LANGUAGE AND THEN REALLY DEVELOPING A RESOLUTION THAT IDENTIFIED SOME OF THE HISTORICAL PIECES, SOME OF THE DATA, SOME OF THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS THAT ARE FOUND WITHIN THE POLICY.
BUT TO BE ABLE TO ARTICULATE IT TO A MUCH GREATER DEGREE.
AND THEN TO, REALLY, HAVE SOME COMMITMENTS.
BECAUSE, REALLY, THE GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE THAT BOARD OPERATES UNDER DOESN'T REALLY ALLOW FOR THE BOARD TO ARTICULATE THE COMMITMENTS IN KIND OF THE PRO ACTIVE NATURE THAT YOU ARE SEEING THIS WORK IN TERMS OF THE BOARD GOVERNANCE PART. AND SO THAT IS WHY THE RESOLUTION WAS DEVELOPED. AS ALL OF US KNOW, IT WAS A PRETTY TIGHT TIMELINE TO BE ABLE TO GET A DRAFT RESOLUTION COMPLETED, AND SO I TOOK A FIRST RUN AT IT AND THEN WORKED WITH DIRECTOR BLIESNER AND DIRECTOR SAGE AND SPWEPBT ABOUT 90 MINUTES WHICH WHAT WAS IT THAT BOARD WANTED WANTED TO ARTICULATE IN A RESOLUTION. WE DID FURTHER WORK THERE.
I DID OTHER WORK AND SENT THAT TO DIRECTOR BLIESNER.
DIRECT DIRECTOR BLIESNER THEN DID SOME EDITS.
JUST RECENTLY THIS AFTERNOON VIA COMMUNICATION WE FINALIZED THE DRAFT THAT YOU SEE HERE TONIGHT KNOWING IT IS HERE FOR DISCUSSION FOR THE WHOLE BOARD. AND WHY IS THAT IMPORTANT? BECAUSE, WITH THOSE COMPONENTS TAKEN OUT OF THE POLICY, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ACTUALLY ARE REFLECTING THE VALUES AND THE STATEMENTS THAT THE BOARD HAD IN THE POLICY PREVIOUSLY BECAUSE THERE WERE STATEMENTS THAT WERE VERY COMPELLING AND
[00:05:01]
DID ALIGN WITH THE BOARD'S VALUES.YOU WILL ALSO SEE IN BOARD DOCS A LANGUAGE OF OE-14 TO PARE THAT DOWN WITH WHAT THE BOARD HAS IN OPERATIONAL EXPECTATIONS. AND WE DID DISCUSS, AT THE SEPTEMBER 7TH MEETING, SOME OF THE POLICY STATEMENTS BUT ALSO THE DIRECTIVE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT.
THOSE HAVE BEEN UPDATED BASED ON BOARD FEEDBACK AND ARE THERE FOR DISCUSSION TONIGHT AS WELL. SO ONE TOPIC, BUT TWO COMPONENTS TO THE DISCUSSION, BOTH THE RESOLUTION AND THE UPDATED POLICY. PWHR*EUZ SO MY THINKING IS TRANSITION TO THE POLICY AND THEN THE RESOLUTION, KNOWING IT IS -- THAT THE BOARD WILL HAVE TIME TO DISCUSS AND HAVE THE DIALOGUE. DOES THAT SOUND GOOD, ERIC? LET'S SEE. YOU'RE MUTED.
I WAS FOLLOWING DIRECTIONS. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYONE HAD BEEN ABLE TO ACCESS THOSE DOCUMENTS ON BOARD DOCS.
GOOD. LET'S TAKE IT IN THAT ORDER.
>> OKAY. SO DO YOU WANT ME TO GO AHEAD
AND SHARE MY SCREEN WITH -- >> YES.
THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE GREAT. >> OKAY.
GREAT. LET ME GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.
CAN YOU SEE IT IS A POLICY FOR ALL STUDENTS TO CLOSE ALL GAPS AND FOR INCLUSIVE LEARNING FOR STUDENTS AND STAFF.
IT IS ACKNOWLEDGED THIS IS SYSTEMS-LEVEL WORK.
IT IS SYSTEMS-LEVEL INEQUITIES THAT ARE CREATING BARRIERS AND OUR STUDENTS COME TO US WHOLE. THEY COME TO US AS WHO THEY ARE. AND IT IS OUR JOB TO MAKE SURE OUR SYSTEM RESPONDS TO STUDENTS BECAUSE ITS NOT THEIR FAULT.
THEY -- THEY COME TO US READY TO LEARN.
THEY COME TO US WITH ALL OF THESE BACKGROUND EXPERIENCES THAT WE CAN CAPITALIZE ON AS WE THINK ABOUT OUR MISSION AND VISION REALLY IS FOR EACH AND EVERY ONE OF OUR STUDENTS.
CAN YOU SEE THERE THE OPENING POLICY STATEMENT GOES INTO TALKING ABOUT THE DIFFERENT FACTORS THAT WE'RE THINKING ABOUT WHEN WE THINK ABOUT AN EQUITY POLICY -- RACE, ABILITY, RACE, RELIGION, CULTURE, EDGE NICE 2EU -- ETHNICITY, SEXUAL GENDER, ORIENTATION, AND OTHER ASPECTS OF STUDENT IDENTITY AND THAT WE MUST INTERRUPT, IDENTIFY, AND RE-PHAOEF THE SYSTEMATIC BARRIERS THAT ARE CAUSING PREDICTABILITY OF SUCCESS AND FAILURE. SO THAT, REALLY IS IS THE OPENING STATEMENT. AND THEN THE DIRECTIVE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT, AS THE BOARD KNOWS, WE DISCUSSED AND MODIFIED SOME STATEMENTS THAT WERE PROVIDED TO US.
AND SO THIS WAS OF IS A COMBINATION OF SOME FEEDBACK WE RECEIVED BUT ALSO, SOME LANGUAGE THAT DIRECTORS PROVIDED.
AND SO YOU CAN SEE HERE THE -- THE DIRECTIVE IS THE SUPERINTENDENT SHALL ESTABLISH, MAINTAIN, AND EVOLVE A CULTURE OF EUP COLLUSION AND HIGH EXPECTATIONS THAT VALUES AND RESPECTS THE DIVERSITY AND LIVED EXPERIENCE OF ITS STUDENTS, STAFFS, AND FAMILIES. SPECIFICALLY, THE SUPERINTENDENT SHALL IDENTIFY AND ELIMINATE DISCRIMINATORY AND INEQUITABLE AND BIASED SYSTEMS POLICIES AND PRACTICE FOR FOUR SPECIFIC SYSTEMS ONE: TO ELIMINATE RACIST SYSTEMS AND SYSTEMS AND PRACTICES WITH LSWD REPLACING THEM WITH ANTIRACIST SYSTEMS AND PRACTICES. SECOND -- TO ENSURE HE CAN EQUITABLE TREATMENT OF STUDENTS AND THIRD TO ADDRESS EQUITABLE TREATMENT OF STUDENTS AND FOUR, ARE FOR ACCESS FOR MARGINALIZED GROUPS. AND THEN THE NEXT ONE IS DIFFERENT THAN WHAT WE HAD DISCUSSED TUESDAY NIGHT AND DIRECTOR BLIESNER AND SAGE AND I WE SPENT A LOT ON NUMBER FOUR TRYING TO BE VERY SPECIFIC PO ABOUT WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO SAY HERE. SO THIS IS WHERE WE LANDED.
HAPPY TO HAVE CONVERSATION ABOUT THAT.
AND THEN WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANY OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OR THE POLICY STATEMENTS BELOW, OTHER THAN WHAT WERE DISCUSSED AT THE
[00:10:03]
STUDY SESSION ON THE 7TH SO WHY DON'T WE SEE HANDS.I GUESS I'LL START, IF THAT'S OKAY.
I CAN'T EVEN FIND OUR LAST DRAFT UNDER FOUR.
I'M WONDERING IF SOMEONE CAN GIVE ME THE REVISIONS AND ALSO, CANDIDLY, GIVE ME WHAT THE REVISIONS ARE.
>> SO IT WAS HOW TO ACHIEVE THIS END, LIKE, RAISING ALL STUDENTS TO THE HIGH SAME STANDARDS AND BASICALLY TRYING TO INCLUDE ANY MISINTERPRETATION.
THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I -- I'M LOOKING AT -- I -- I SEE MOST OF THE LACK WAPBLG THAT'S BEEN MOVED OUT OF FOUR IN THE PREAMBLE NOW AND AM COMFORTABLE WITH THAT AS A PLACEMENT FOR IT. AND IT IS REALLY RAISING THE ACHIEVEMENT OF ALL LEARNERS AND REGARD -- IT'S -- IT'S -- YES.
THERE ARE -- THIS IS CALLING OUT THE VARIOUS DIMENSIONS OF CONCERN: RACE, ABILITY, RACE, LANGUAGE, CULTURE, ETHNICITY.
ALL OF THESE ARE EXCELLENT. SO OVERALL AND, SORRY, ERIC I -- I -- I ACTUALLY WANT TO START WITH A HEY, THANK YOU TO ALL THREE OF YOU. THIS IS A LOT OF CAREFUL, THOUGHTFUL WORK. AND, MOSTLY, I'M EXCITED THAT YOU MANAGED TO IMPROVE ON SOMETHING I WAS STARTING TO BE PRETTY HAPPY WITH. SO -- BUT, ERIC, FEEL FREE TO -- IF YOU STILL HAVE PIECES OF THAT QUESTION THAT YOU'RE NOT
FINDING IN THE PREAMBLE -- >> NO, NO.
>> THANKS, CHRIS. THAT'S HELPFUL.
I WANTED TO REFRESH MY RECOLLECTION AND NOT WASTE ANYMORE TIME ON THAT. I'M HAPPY WITH HOW IT'S
THE INTERESTING THING THAT WE'RE SEEING -- THE FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY IS STILL CONCERNED WITH INTERPRETATION AT THIS POINT WITH MANY PIECES ON IT BUT, QUITE FRANKLY, THAT IS OUR NEXT STEP. THE INTERPRETATION TAKING IT TO THE ADMINISTRATION AND HAVING THEM COME BACK WITH, NOT JUST INTERPRETATION OF WHAT WE WERE ASKING FOR, BUT ACTUALLY GETTING INTO WHAT WILL BE DONE TO -- TO ADDRESS THIS.
I MEAN, WHAT -- HOW WILL THEY CLOSE PERSISTENT GAPS? HOW DO THEY DEFINE HISTORICALLY MARGINALIZED GROUPS? THAT, I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT. BUT I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE IS STILL SOME RESIDUAL CONCERN IN THE COMMUNITY.
AND, FOR BETTER OR FOR WORSE, I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO MOVE FORWARD FOR THE INTERPRETATIVE ON THE AD MINUTE 12R5EU9 -- THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE, RATHER THAN TRYING TO DO THAT IN THE BOARD DOCUMENT. AND, CASSANDRA, GO FOR IT.
DIRECTOR SAGE, I'M SORRY. >> THAT'S ALL RIGHT.
ALONG THOSE LINES, AFTER THE LAST STUDY-SESSION, I COMMITTED TO LOOKING TO DEFINITIONS FOR TERMS. AND WHEN DR. HOLMAN AND DR. BLIESNER AND I MET, I REALLY REALIZED THAT, ANY DEFINITIONS WE COME UP WITH LOCK HIM INTO PARAMETERS THAT WE MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY WANT HIM TO HAVE.
WE MIGHT WANT HIM TO HAVE MORE OPPORTUNITY TO DO GOOD WORK, AND THAT'S WHY WE WILL DEFINE TERMS WITH HIM, OR HE WILL DEFINE TERMS, AND THEN IT WILL BE A CONVERSATION, SO THAT WE'RE ALL COMFORTABLE WITH WHAT THE DEFINITIONS MEAN.
WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS IN MY INTERPRETATION HERE THAT THIS IS A ZERO SUM GAIN. IF ONE GROUP IS ELEVATED ANOTHER MUST BE DIMINISHED. IN MY MIND AND, ESPECIALLY IN READING THE WAY THE RESOLUTION READS NOW AND, TO BE QUITE FRANK, GOING BACK TO THE BEGINNING OF OUR EQUITY WORK, IS NOT A MATTER OF IF ONE GROUP IS ELEVATED, THE OTHER GROUP MUST GO DOWN IN WHAT'S OFFERED TO THEM, OR WHAT IS EXPECTED TO THEM, IT IS THE IDEA OF ALL VOTES BEING RAISED.
AND, TO ME, THAT'S A COMMITMENT TO THE STUDENTS.
[00:15:02]
THAT'S WHAT EQUITY IS AND, AS WELL AS THE OTHER ASPECTS OF TRYING TO ADDRESS SYSTEMATIC PROBLEMS. YOU DON'T WANT TO CREATE A DIFFERENT INEQUITY.YOU WANT TO CREATE EQUITY, PERIOD.
I THINK THIS RESOLUTION GOES A LONG WAY TO TRYING TO VOICE
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? MARK, I CAN'T TELL IF YOUR HAND WENT UP OR IT WENT UP AGAIN?
>> IT WENT DOWN, NOW IT'S BACK UP THERE. IS A LINE BECAUSE YOU JUST SCROLLED UP FOR IT. THANK YOU.
WELL, 14.1 IS WHAT I'M LOOKING AT: ENSURE THAT STUDENTS HAVE A ANTIRACIST, INCLUSIVE WELCOMING IN A SAFE COOL CLASSROOM ENVIRONMENT. IT'S NOT ONLY HAVE, BUT I THINK THEY NEED -- THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME WAY OF -- OF TRYING TO HELP THEM BELIEVE IT. WE MAY SEE IT AS SUCH AN ENVIRONMENT, BUT UNLESS THE STUDENT SEARCH SAOEFZ IT, IF HE -- UNLESS THE STUDENT PERCEIVES IT AND HE OR SHE FEELS MARGINALIZED, THEN WE HAVEN'T QUITE MADE IT.
AND THAT CONCERNS ME BECAUSE THERE IS PERCEPTION REALTY AND PERCEPTION BECOMES REALTY. AND, GOD FORBID, THAT PERCEPTION WOULD BECOME A REALTY IN THESE SITUATIONS.
WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'VE DONE IT IN SUCH A MANNER THAT EVERY KID FEELS SAFE, EVERYBODY FEELS WELCOME, EVERYBODY FEELS THEY HAVE AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN.
BE AND I DON'T KNOW HOW WE'RE GOING TO ADDRESS THE PEOPLE -- ANY STUDENTS WHO MAY FEEL OTHER DIAGNOSIS WISE -- OTHERWISE.
IF THEY DO, WE NEED TO, PERHAPS, SET UP SOME SORT OF A MECHANISM FOR THEM TO BRING THIS TO OUR ATTENTION.
MAYBE THAT COMES LATER. I'M JUST THINKING IF WE CAN ADDRESS IT IN THE RESOLUTION SOMEHOW, THAT IT MIGHT -- THE MORE TIMES YOU SAY IT, THE BETTER, TO BE QUITE FRANK.
I DON'T CARE IF WE REPEAT OURSELVES.
BUT, ANYWAY, THAT'S MY TWO CENTS.
>> CHRIS, I'M GOING TO JUMP IN HERE REAL QUICK.
MARK, I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU.
I THINK 14.1 CAPTURES THAT. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> WHEN WE GET INDICATORS BACK, I WOULD EXPECT THERE WOULD BE STUDENT SURVEY DATA, STUDENT PERCEPTION DATA AS PART OF
>> I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH YOU THAT HOW OUR STUDENTS FEEL ABOUT -- I MEAN, THAT IS PROBABLY -- FOR ME, AT LEAST, THAT IS THE KEY INDICATOR FOR 14.1, IS HOW OUR STUDENTS FEEL ABOUT BEING IN A CLASSROOM 506789.
>> ERIC, I WOULD GO TO THE POINT OF A STUDENT NOT ONLY HAVING A SURVEY F. A STUDENT FEELS THAT HE OR SHE -- THERE'S A PROBLEM, THEY NEED TO HAVE A WAY TO GO TO SOMEONE TO ADDRESS IT, ONE, THAT WILL BE NON-JUDGMENTAL, AND WILL ALSO -- ALSO LOOK AT AND FIND OUT WHAT'S GOING ON.
>> AGREED. AND I THINK WE HAVE THAT BUILT
IN TO POLICY -- I FORGET. >> THANK YOU.
>> 100 PERCENT AGREEMENT. DIRECTOR CARLSON AND DIRECTOR
BLIESNER? >> AND, MARK, I -- I -- I AGREE IT'S IMPORTANT. I ALSO AGREE WITH ERIC THAT THAT FALLS WITHIN THE REALM OF WE PROVIDED LANGUAGE THAT INTERPRETATION SHOULD INCLUDE SOMETHING TO ADDRESS THAT.
>> OKAY. >> SO I'M GOING TO SHIFT GEARS TO ANOTHER THEME THAT I SAW IN THE FEEDBACK IN THE LAST COUPLE OF DAYS WAS CONCERN ABOUT THE WORD "RACIST" VERSUS" RACISM" AND I ACTUALLY AM PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH THE CURRENT LANGUAGE OF DRAFT AND HERE IS WHY: RACIST SYSTEMS ARE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO CHANGE. THE CONCERN SEEMS TO BE THAT RACISM IS CONCERNED A VERB AND RACIST IS AN ADJECTIVE APPLIED TO A PERSON. BUT RACIST SYSTEMS ARE -- YOU CAN'T CALL THEM RACISM SYSTEMS. SO TOWARDS THAT END, I'M ACTUALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THE CURRENT STRUCTURE OF THE LANGUAGE. I -- I -- I UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT INTERPRETATION AND THE ANXIETY IS COMING FROM, BUT I DO ALSO FEEL THAT, AT THE TERP STATION LEVEL, IT -- THE INTERPRETATION LEVEL IT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT FOR FOR OUR SUPERINTENDENT TO GET BACK TO US FOR A VERY CLEAR STATEMENT AROUND BIAS STATEMENT VERSUS ELIMINATING RACISM, DEFINING THE TERMS SO THAT YOU KNOW -- YOU CAN -- YOU CAN EASILY SPEAK TO
[00:20:03]
THAT. AND I DON'T THINK THAT ITWOULD BE PRACTICAL FOR THAT. >> DR. BLIESNER, DO YOU HAVE
ANYTHING TO ADD? >> JUST THE POLICY AS A WHOLE LOOKS AT OTHER ITEMS AS WE GO THROUGH IT, SO YOU HIGHLIGHTED
14.9 IN GOING THROUGH THAT. >> OKAY.
ANY -- ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS, THOUGHTS ON -- I THINK EVERYBODY WAS COMFORTABLE WITH THE FIRST PART OF IT, THE DIRECTIVE AND THE SUPERINTENDENT.
AND WE'RE ON TO I GUESS -- I GUESS THE ENUMERATED STEPS NOW.
THE ONLY OTHER PIECE WAS THE INTRODUCTORY PIECE AT THE TOP IF ANYBODY WAS WONDERING ABOUT THAT.
THAT WAS A SUMMARY OF THEIR PRIOR.
>> YEAH. I'M PRETTY COMFORTABLE WITH THIS PIECE BRIGHT THE DIRECTIVE BECAUSE IT DOES DEFINE A SMALL, BUT IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THIS; WHICH IS, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE CULTURE OF HIGHER EXMEMBERING -- OF HIGHER EXPECTATIONS AND THE EXPECTATIONS AND IN THAT PREAMBLE, WE ARE CALLING OUT THAT LIST TODAY THAT. MAY NOT BE THE THAT WAY IN THE FUTURE BUT IT IS A WAY WE WANT TO SPEAK TO, AS FAR AS EQUITY. SO I'M VERY HAPPY WITH IT.
AND I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE HERE EVEN THOUGH IT IS PRECEDING THE DIRECTIVE TO THE SUPERINTENDENT WHICH I STILL THINK IS A NOVEL THING. BUT IT IS SHORT AND SWEET ENOUGH, THAT I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
SO THANK YOU THAT. WAS A LOT OF WORK TO GET THAT INTO THIS PIECE, AND I -- I APPRECIATE THE AMOUNT OF BACK-AND-FORTH IT MUST HAVE TAKEN FOR THE THREE OF YOU.
IT IS VERY WELL-DONE. I HAVE NO EDITS TO SUGGEST.
I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT. >> SO --
>> I'M COMBABLE WITH IT, TOO. >> I'M COMB FOR THIBLE WITH
THAT'S WHAT I WAS GOING TO ASK.
SO, DR. SAGE AND BLIESNER, I ASSUME THAT SINCE YOU'RE IN THE ROOM, YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH IT.
I KEEP TRYING TO READ AND WE KEEP SCROLLING.
LANGE ON A SECOND. LET ME PULL UP DIFFERENT -- I DON'T HAVE THE PREAMBLE AND THE COPY THAT I HAVE FROM THE -- THAT WOULDN'T BOTHER ME AT ALL, JOHN.
THIS IS GOING TO LOOK LIKE A NITPIK AND I THINK IT PROBABLY IS, BUT WHAT THE HELL. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT -- LET'S SEE. WHERE AM I? I -- WE TALK ABOUT STUDENTS AND STAFF AND THEN IT IS FLIPPED IN THE SENTENCE. DO YOU SEE? THE ONE PART THAT APPLIES TO THE STUDENTS IS IN THE FIRST HALF VERSUS -- YOU SEE WHERE I'M GOING 0? IT IS JUST A MATTER OF SEMANTICS.
OF "BY CLOSING GAPS" .... IT DOESN'T MATTER.
>> MARK; THAT THE PART YOU WERE REFERENCING?
>> "THE ACADEMIC SUCCESS" AND --
>> OH. INSTEAD OF STAYING LEARNING
I SEE. >> "WORKING" AND -- YOU SEE
>> IT IS JUST MAKING IT PARALLEL.
SORRY. IT IS THE EDITOR IN ME.
>> NO, THAT'S OKAY. WE CAN MAKE THAT CHANGE.
[00:25:01]
>> IT IS NOTHING SUBSTANTIVE. >> YES.
THIS FEELS VERY MATURE. MY CONCERN IS THAT THE SECOND RESOLUTION NEEDS MORE EYES ON IT THIS EVENING SO I'M ACTUALLY
COMFORTABLE WITH THIS PIECE. >> OKAY.
BEFORE WE MOVE ON, COULD SOMEBODY HIGHLIGHT FOR ME ANY OF THE CHANGES TO THE ENUMERATED PART OF --
>> THEY WERE THE ONES THAT WE DISCUSSED BEFORE.
>> OKAY. >> POTENTIALLY THAT IS NOT TRUE. 14.11, I BELIEVE, HAS A CLAUSE AT THE END TO PREVENT STUDENT INEQUITIES AND TO PROMOTE
SUCCESS. >> IN 14.9, WHAT WE ADDED ON TUESDAY OF LAST WEEK WAS THIS CLAUSE, PARTICULARLY RELATED TO RACIST OR OTHER DISCRIMINATORY ACTIONS.
IN 14.8 -- I'M JUST LOOKING BACK AT THE CHAT SINCE WE HAD TO USE THE CHAT BECAUSE WE COULDN'T SHARE.
14.8, WE IN -- WE TOOK OUT LANGUAGE THAT -- AFTER "DECISION OEUZ" SO 14.8, SO AFTER -- SO WE TOOK OUT "BY IMPLEMENTING AND MAINTAINING EFFECTIVE PARTNERSHIPS AND EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION SYSTEMS" AND WE ADDED" RELEVANT STRATEGIES AND DISTRICT SCHOOL COMMUNICATIONS." AND THEN THIS LAST PORTION IS ALL NEW FROM WHAT WE DISCUSSED ON TUESDAY -- IT IS WHAT WE DISCUSSED ON TUESDAY, SO THAT IS THE NEW PART. IN 14.10, WE SAID "COLLECT, DESEGREGATE AND ANALYZE DATA." SO "FROM PHULT PILL SOURCES" IS NEW, INCLUDING: ACADEMIC PERFORMANCE, PARTICIPATION, SURVEYS, AND FOCUS GROUPS.
"FROM MULTIPLE SOURCES IS NEW" AND WE ADDED" TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT STRATEGIES TOWARDS ELIMINATING THOSE INEQUITIES.
AND THEN IN 14.4, AND THIS WAS THE ORDER WE DISCUSSED THEM IN, THAT -- THAT'S WHY I'M NOT GOING IN ORDER.
IT USED TO SAY: "ENSURE APPROPRIATELY RIGOROUS EXPECTATIONS." WE TOOK OUT THE WORD "APPROPRIATELY" AND PRAPT ATE ACTUALLY WAS -- AND PROPERTY WAS BEFORE SUPPORTS AS WELL. AND APPROPRIATE WAS BEFORE.
AND WE TOOK THAT OUT AND WE ADDED TWO WORDS STATEMENTS LEADING TO STUDENTS' GROWTH. "SUCCESS" WAS THERE PREVIOUSLY AND WE ADDED THE WORD," WELL-BEING."
ARE AND ARE DOCTOR BLIESNER? >> SO I JUST HAVE ONE MOW TEPBGAL CHANGE ON 14.8, AS I'M READING IT AGAIN IS: "WE INCORPORATE THE RESULTS AND DISTRICT STRATEGIES IN DISTRICT SCHOOLS/EDUCATION AND PARTNER 14*EU7SHIPS." -- PARTNERSHIPS." MY CONCERN IS THAT IT IS NOT ONE WAY; THE INTERACTION THAT WE HAVE WITH GROUPS AND HOW WE ARE DOING THAT.
SO THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT WE LOST A PIECE WHEN WE WERE TALKING ABOUT INITIATIVES OR PROGRAMS WE LOST THAT PIECE, I
THINK, WHEN IT GOT PULLED OUT. >> IF YOU PUT "INTERACTIVE
COMMUNICATIONS" WOULD THAT -- >> NO.
BECAUSE THAT IS NOT COMMUNICATIONS; IT IS ACTIVE COMMUNICATIONS IN THE PROCESS TO BRINGING THEM FORWARD TO HAVE
THOSE STRATEGIES. >> SO COMMUNICATIONS IF YOU JUST ARE CHANGE THAT TO DISTRICT SCHOOLS AND COMMUNICATIONS --
>> OH, THERE YOU GO. >> THAT MAKES IT A TWO-WAY
STREET. >> OR COMMUNICATION AND
[00:30:01]
ENGAGEMENT. >> I'M OKAY WITH THAT AS
>> THE CONCEPT I AGREE WITH. THANK YOU, DIRECTOR BLIESNER, FOR THAT. I'M FINE WITH ADDING IN COMMUNICATIONS AFTER OR I'M FIND WITH DIRECTOR CARLSON'S -- I GUESS MY PREFERENCE OF DIRECTOR CARLSON.
AX I RIGHT? IT WAS TO STRIKE THAT AND PUT COMMUNITY
ENGAGEMENT? >> IT SEEMS LIKE THAT IS THE
SUPERSET. >> YEAH, THAT WAS MY FEELING.
>> I THINK WE HAVE SOME CONCERNS, TOO, AMONG OUR PARENTS THAT WE DON'T COMMUNICATE WELL ALSO.
SO I THINK TO COMMUNICATE AND TO MAKE SURE IT IS NOT JUST AN OUTREACH. BUT ONCE WE OUTREACH, WE
ACTUALLY LISTEN AND WE HEAR. >> YEAH.
ACTUALLY, MARK, I'M WITH YOU ON THAT.
CALLING IT OUT SPECIFICALLY ENSURES THAT IT WILL BE
MONITORED SPECIFIC SPECIFICALLY. >>> YEAH.
SO AFTER "ENGAGEMENT" ADD" COMMUNICATIONS."
>> YEAH. GREAT SITTING HERE RIGHT NOW, I HAVE NO ADDITIONAL EDITS TO THIS.
ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE? HEARING NONE, I GUESS WE'LL MOVE TO THE RESOLUTION.
>> BUMP IT UP ONE MORE TIME. >> THANK YOU.
>> SO YOU WILL SEE LANGUAGE PULLED FROM THE FORMER POLICY KIND OF EMBEDDED TO THIS THROUGHOUT.
AND AS THE BOARD WAS TALKING ON TUESDAY NIGHT, YOU'LL KIND OF SEE A SIMILAR FLOW. DIRECTOR BLIESNER ADDED THESE KIND OF HEADINGS TO THE -- TO TO THE RESOLUTION WHICH TYPICALLY AREN'T IN RESOLUTIONS. BUT, FOR ME, I THOUGHT IT REALLY HELPED DEFINE THE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS THROUGHOUT THE DOCUMENT. DIRECTOR BLIESNER, WAS YOUR INTENT TO KEEP THESE HEADINGS IN FOR THAT CLARITY?
>> NO. THAT WAS NOT NECESSARILY MY INTENT. MY INTENT WAS MORE FOR ME TO
KNOW HOW IT WAS STRUCTURED. >> OKAY.
SO I KIND OF LIKED IT IN THERE BECAUSE I THINK IT DOES PROVIDE GREATER READ ABILITY FOR UNDERSTANDING WHAT IS IS THE PURPOSE IN HAVING THESE SECTIONS OF THE RESOLUTION? I'M FINE EITHER WAY BUT, FOR ME, IT WAS -- I LIKED IT.
>> I THINK IT'S GREAT FOR THE IDEA THAT PERSON WHO COMES INTO THE OF OF RESOLUTION AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE RUBBER MEETS THE ROAD AND THEY WANT TO ASSESS. AND THEN THEY CAN GO BACK TO THE WHOLE THING I GUESS. I AGREE, I'VE NEVER SEEN A HEADING WITH RESOLUTIONS. I LOVE IT FOR THAT REASON.
R*Z. >> SO I ACTUALLY WOULD LEAVE THEM IN BUT "ACTIONS," THAT SEEMS TO BE A SUMMARY OF PAST ACTIONS. DECLARING IT AS SUCH, WE'LL KEEP PEOPLE AEFPLZ PECK STATIONS OF WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO SEE IN
>> AND I'VE GOT ONE OTHER MINOR THING I MIGHT AS WELL GET TO RIGHT NOW, AND IT'S DOWN IN THIRD-GREAT LITERACY, WHICH I THINK IS GREAT. THE LAST BULLET POINT ON THIRD-GRADE LITERACY HAS A "DO NOT" IN IT THAT WE NEED TOO GET RID OF. IT CREATES A DOUBLE-NEGATIVE IN THE STATEMENT. "SO LESS THAN 8.
>> % OF MALES ACHIEVE LITERACY" AND IT NEEDS TO BE
CHANGED. >> I TRIPPED OVER THAT AS WELL. DOES THAT MEAN 20% OR
GREATER? >> YES MORE THAN 20% OF MALE STUDENTS FAIL TO ACHIEVE AND HREUS THAN 20% OF FEMALES
>> BUT JUST GETTING RID OF THAT "DO NOT" MAKES THE LITERACY MAKE SENSE AND JIVE WITH THE DATA.
[00:35:20]
>> I'M GLAD WE GOT TO THAT. I'M WONDERING ABOUT THE THIRD GREAT LITERACY AND WE ARE SEEING THE GAP TRENDS AT THE END OF FIFTH AND AT THE END OF THE MIDDLE, SYSTEM, WE'RE SEEING THOSE GAPS. GRADUATION AND LITERACY ARE NICE. BUT THEY'RE VISIBLE IN ALMOST EVERY SUBJECT AS LONG AS WE GOT ENOUGH DATA YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE MATH, JUST AS YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE LITERACY.
I WOULDN'T MIND INCLUDING SOMETHING SAYING THIRD-GREAT LITERACY IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE SEEING GAPS IN THE SYSTEM.
THOSE ARE PERSISTING ALL THE WAY THROUGH AND I KNOW THAT MAKES IT LONGER BUT, AT THE SAME TIME, DAMN-IT, LET'S PUT IT IN.
>> WE ARE NOT JUST PUTTING THAT IN.
WE TALKED ABOUT THAT A LONG TIME AGO.
>> AND DIRECTOR BLIESNER, WHAT DO YOU THINK?
>> WELL, WHAT DIRECTOR CARLSON SAID IF YOU HAVE A THOUGHT GO AHEAD AND COMPLETE THAT. OKAY.
NOW, UNDER THE THIRD-GREAT LITTA RA -- LITERACY, WE TALK ABOUT PERCENTAGES IN EVERY BULLET POINT BUT WE DON'T WRITE IT OUT AS A PERCENT IN THE THIRD BULLET POINT FOR LOW-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS. I THINK IT HELPS ME TO KEEP TRACK OF WHAT PERCENT OF KIDS WE'RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT IF WE ACTUALLY PUT "GREATER THAN 50 PERCENT" AND WRITE IT OUT
>> VERY MUCH COMING OFF OF WHAT YOU JUST SAID, IT IS ALWAYS HELPFUL WHEN YOU'RE DOING A COMPARATIVE LISTING THAT IT'S ALWAYS IN THE SAME DIRECTION SO 52% OF SPED ARE NOT ACHOPPER 4ING PROFICIENCY, 42% OF STUDENTS ARE NOT ACHIEVING EFFICIENCY. 52% OF SPED ARE NOT ACHIEVING
EFFICIENCY. >> IF WE COULD SAY FAILING TO ACHIEVE THAT EFFICIENCY, THAT WOULD BE PREFERRED.
SO THAT WOULD JUST BE TURNING THE OTHER THREE AROUND.
BUT IT WOULD STILL GIVE YOU THE SCALE OF WHAT'S MISSING, SO
.... >> SO THAT'S A KEY POINT.
DO WE WANT -- DO WE WANT THE THIRD-GREAT LITERACY TO REPORT PERCENT OF STUDENTS ACHIEVING? OR PERCENT OF STUDENTS NOT ACHIEVING? AND THEN I'LL GO THROUGH AND RE -- REDO THIS SO
THAT IT'S CONSISTENT THROUGHOUT. >> FROM ONE SIDE I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A ASSET APPROACH AND, ON THE OTHER HAND THIS, IS A CALL-TO-ACTION PIECE ON WHY WE NEED TO THAT -- WHY WE NEED TO DO THAT AND HERE IS THE GAP. SO I GUESS I'M TORN, IS WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY ON THAT STATEMENT.
>> I'M INCLINED TO GO ON THE LATTER.
WE ARE POINTING OUT INSUFFICIENT EFFORTS.
WE WANT TO POINT OUT WE HAVE MILES TO GO AS OPPOSED TO MILES WE'VE COME. NOBODY CARES HOW FAR WE'VE COME SO FAR; IT IS A MATTER OF CLOSING THE GAP, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ADDRESSING -- CLOSING THE GAP.
>> IS THERE ANY WAY WE CAN CHANGE THE VERB? ACHIEVING PROFICIENCY IS PUTTING IT ON THE STUDENTS.
AND BRING -GS IT TO PROFICIENCY IS BRINGING OUR STUDENTS. I DON'T HAVE AN EASY SOLUTION. I WOULD LIKE IT TO BE A SYSTEMATIC VERB, RATHER THAN A STUDENT-BASED --
>> THAT'S THE PIECE THAT I THINK WOULD BE KEY BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT. IT DOES IMPLY STUDENT AND THAT'S NOT THE GOAL. IT IS NOT THAT WE'VE SUCCEEDED
IT IS OUR FAULT. WE WOULD LIKE TO BRING THEM ALL. IT IS OUR FAILURE, NOT
THEIRS. >> AND WE BELIEVE WE CAN DO
>> AND I WILL SAY WE HAVE HAD THAT CONVERSATION A COUPLE OF TIMES IN OUR MEETING WITH DR. HOLMAN.
>> YES. >> BECAUSE IT IS NOT A STUDENT'S FAULT THAT THEY'RE NOT ACHIEVING AT PROFICIENCY OR
[00:40:02]
>> IT'S THE SYSTEM WE'RE TRYING TO IMPROVE; NOT THE -- THE STUDENT SHOULD NOT BE BLAMED FOR THE SYSTEM'S FAILURE.
SO IF THERE'S A WAY -- I'M SORRY.
JUST OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I DON'T HAVE THE LANGUAGE TO REFRAME THAT, BUT I'M PRETTY SURE WE CAN COME UP WITH SOMETHING, JUST -- JUST NOT JUMPING TO THE TIP OF MY TONGUE.
I HAVE -- I HAVE A FEW MINOR THINGS.
BUT I'LL START WITH MORE STRUCTURAL.
IT IS JUST THE ORDER OF THE, I'LL CALL IT, HEADINGS AND SIGNIFICANT -PLTS OF THE RECITALS.
-- HEADINGS AND SEGMENTS OF THE RECITALS.
I'M JUST WONDERING -- I'M CURIOUS IF THERE WAS ANY THINKING TO I GUESS I'LL CALL IT THE PRIOR ACTIONS OF THE DISTRICT AND THE PLACEMENT OF THAT, AND WHETHER THE DATA SHOULD HAVE BEEN AD HOCK BEFORE THAT OR SHOULD BE BEFORE THAT? RIGHT NOW WE HAVE "GOALS" AND THERE IS A SECTION CALLED," ACTIONS" WHICH IS -- I MEAN, IT IS REALLY THE HISTORICAL ACTIONS OF THE DISTRICT AND THE BOARD. AND MAYBE THAT SHOULD BE RELABELED. BECAUSE THAT SUGGESTS ACTIONS WE'RE TAKING WITH THIS RESOLUTION AND THAT'S NOT THE CASE. AND THEN IT'S DATA AND I GUESS THAT'S CURRENT DATA. IT MAKES SENSE TO HAVE IT FOLLOW A CURRENT ACT, HISTORICAL ACT.
THAT'S CURRENT DATA. >> I GUESS I'M OKAY WITH THE
THE WORDS -- DATA IS TOO NEUTRAL.
THIS IS A GAP WHERE WE ARE TRULY NOT PERFORMING AT A LEVEL WE WOULD LIKE TO BE. WE WOULD LIKE TO CLOSE THE GAPS. SO IS THIS GAP ANALYSIS -- I'M SORRY. GAP ANALYSIS IS JUST
SO THE POINT THAT WE'RE GETTING TO IS I WOULD -- I WOULD -- I KNOW WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THE HEADINGS EARLIER AND WE WERE REPHRASING THE HEADINGS EARLIER BUT I WOULD SCRAP THE HEADINGS. I DON'T KNOW.
I THINK IT'S FINE WITH THE RECITALS.
WHEN I SIGH THE HEADING I DON'T WANT TO INTERJECT A STATEMENT WITH IT BEING INACCURATE.
>> WELL, YOU PUT THE HEADING TO DATE, CHRIS, BEING HISTORICAL OR PASS. IT IS SORT OF IN THE SAND AT THIS POINT. I THINK WOULD YOU REFER TO IT
AS ACTIONS TO DATE. >> DIRECTOR SAGE?
>> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY, DR. CARLSON, WHEN YOU'RE TALKING
>> -- THAT YOU'RE CLARIFYING THAT THIS IS NOT JUST TWO
THINGS; IT IS JUST ONE. >> YEAH.
IT INCLUDES, INCLUDES. >> YEAH.
>> BUT ERIC'S POINT -- YEAH. GOSH, THIS IS -- THERE'S A FINE LINE TO BE WALKED HERE 'CUZ, I MEAN, IN BETWEEN YOUR "WHEREAS'" OOH, I'M NOT A HUGE FAN OF THE WHEREAS STRUCTURE BUT I KNOW THAT'S HOW A RESOLUTION WORKS.
THERE'S PROBABLY A -- I STILL THINK THERE IS VALUE IN HAVING THE SECTIONS DELINEATED BUT THE TITLES, DATA, ACTIONS NEED MORE SPECIFICITY TO WHY THEY'RE A SECTION.
YEAH. I APPRECIATE THE CHALLENGE.
>> I GUESS MY POINT IS WE'RE HAVING HEADINGS ALMOST AS IF WE'RE DRAWING BROADER CONCLUSIONS ABOUT THE -- ABOUT THE WORDS THAT FOLLOW THE HEADINGS; RIGHT? AND I MEAN, IT DOESN'T WORK WITH THE WHEREAS STRUCTURE.
SO I'M WITH YOU, ERIC. WE COULD GET RID OF THEM
[00:45:03]
BECAUSE I MEAN, REALLY, WE COULD INCORPORATE AFTER THAT FIRST WHEREAS. WHEREAS THIS BOARD BELIEVES .... IT COULD BE "WHEREAS, THIS BOARD HAS IDENTIFIED SIGNIFICANT GAPS FOR PERFORMANCE IN HISTORICALLY MARGINALIZED GROUPS, SUCH AS" .... AND THEN WE CAN MOVE THE TITLE OF IT INTO THE NEXT WHEREAS, THE SECOND TERM.>> DIRECTOR STEWART? >> I'M LOOKING AT IT.
I'M TRYING TO SCAN IT TO SEE IF I SAW IT ANY OTHER PLACE ARE WE BEING CURRENT IN OUR TERMINOLOGY, HISPANIC SLASH LATINO, SHOULD IT BE LATINO OR LATINOX OR AFRICAN-AMERICAN AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE IN THE USING TERMINOLOGY FROM THE 60S
WHEN SOME OF YOU WEREN'T BORN. >> THANK YOU, MARK.
UNDER THE SECOND BULLET MARK "GRADUATION" IT SHOULD SAY
PWHRARB/AFRICAN-AMERICAN. >> OKAY.
>> THESE ARE THE RACE/ETHNICITY TITLES, I'LL --
THAT OSPI GETS BACK TO US. >> OKAY.
>> THERE IS A SLASH THAT NEEDS TO BE IN THERE FOR BLACK SLASH AFRICAN-AMERICAN. THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT.
>> AGAIN, IF THAT HE IS THE WAY THE CATEGORIES COME DOWN TO US FROM THE STATE. WE'RE TRYING TO PIN APPLES TO APPLE IS -- APPLES TO APPLES IS WITHIN MY UNDERSTANDING.
>> WHEN WE'RE READY, I'VE GOT A EUREKA SO IT DOESN'T PHRASE ON
THE STUDENTS. >> PLEASE PROVIDE YOUR EUREKA BECAUSE I'M STRESSING ON THIS END.
>> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. THE FIRST SET OF DATA THE BULLET POINTS; REEVE IT WHERE IT IS AT.
EIGHT YEARS SHOWS COLON .... IT SHOWS THE STUDENTS -- INSTEAD OF THAT FIRST BULLET POINT IT SHOULD SAY "GRADUATE STUDENTS AT A RATE 20% OR 30% IN OUR SYSTEM BELOW ITS PEERS.
OUR SYSTEM GRADUATES HISS PAN TICK OR BLACK STUDENTS AT A RATE 20% LOWER THAN ITS PEERS. THAT RATE I THINK MAKES IT CLEAR THAT WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE THE
SYSTEM WORK BETTER. >> EXCELLENT.
I SUPPORT THAT. >> DO WE WANT TO SAY "OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT" VERSUS" OUR SYSTEM"?
>> GOOD QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW.
>> I THINK IT MAKES IT CLEAR. >> IT IS CLEAR.
>> BUT IT IS US OWNING THESE GAPS, RATHER THAN THE STUDENTS
BEING BLAMES FOR THEM. >> YEAH.
NOT ONLY THAT, AND TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE CURRENT SYSTEM. IT ACKNOWLEDGES THAT IF THERE IS A FAILURE BEING MADE, IT HAS BEEN MADE BY US.
>> I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH CHRIS' REVISION AND DIRECTOR BLIESNER USING "OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT."
>> AND THAT IS GREAT FOR GRADUATION.
IT IS TRICKIER FOR THIRD-GRADE LITERACY.
I'M GOING TO KEEP WRESTLING WITH THAT ONE.
>> YEAH. I THINK THE SAME CONCEPT MAKES SENSE FOR REPHRASING IT. I DON'T HAVE THE WORDS RIGHT
NOW, BUT .... >> I WOULD SAY, CHRIS, OF THE GLOBALNESS THAT YOU'VE BROUGHT FORWARD THAT WE HAVE SEEN GAPS HAS EXAPLIFIED THROUGH THE P THROUGH 5 SYSTEM, I THINK THAT
I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO MAKE IT -- HOW TO CALL -- HOW DO YOU DESCRIBE THE GAPS AND OWN THE GAPS, RATHER THAN BLAME
THE GAPS. >> COULD IT BE IN THE EUPBT DUCK TRAER OR WHEREAS -- COULD IT BE IN THE INTRODUCTORY, INSTEAD OF PUTTING THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE BULL KWREUTSZ WOULD. THAT HELP -- WOULD THAT --
[00:50:10]
>> YEAH. AND REPHRASING THAT ARE BULLET, IT COULD BE 30% TO 40% OF OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT BRINGS LITERACY BY THE END OF THIRD GREAT.
AGAIN, OUR SCHOOL DISTRICT EDUCATES KIDS, RATHER THAN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT FAILING TO MEET --
>> RIGHT. >> JOHN, YOU'RE LOOKING UP TO THE LEFT, WHICH MEANS YOU'RE TRYING TO IMAGINE THIS.
>> SO THERE'S A COUPLE OF PIECES FOR ME.
ONE IS THE SYSTEMS DOING IT THING YET, AT THE END OF THE DAY THERE, IS AN OUTCOME FOR INDIVIDUALS.
SO IS IT THAT WE TAKE OWNERSHIP FOR THE SYSTEM BUT THEN WE ACTUALLY ACKNOWLEDGE THAT.
WE ACTUALLY HAVE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE HAVING THIS LEVEL OF ACHIEVEMENT BUT TYING TRAET BACK TO THE SYSTEM.
WE ACTUALLY HAVE INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE TYING IT BACK TO THE SYSTEM. SO INDIVIDUALLY THEY ARE NOT ACHIEVING PROFICIENCY. SO THAT IS AN IMPACT ON THEM INDIVIDUALLY. SO WILL IS THERE IS A WAY TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT, WHILE ALSO TYING IT TO THE SYSTEM? IS.
>> SO ANOTHER WAY TO LOOK AT THAT TIME -- AT IT IS THIS IS OUR SCHOOL SYSTEM'S SUCCESS. AND IT IS OUR DISTRICT BRINGS 40 PERCENT TO 50 PERCENT OF STUDENTS TOW LITERACY EFFICIENCY TO THE END OF THIRD GREAT. IT IS OUR SYSTEM FAILS TO BRING A CERTAIN PRO -- A CERTAIN PROFICIENCY TO THE END OF THIRD GRADE. SORRY.
I'M GOING TO HAVE TO TAKE MORE TIME TO THINK.
IT IS JUST HARD. >> WELL, I THINK WHAT WE'VE GOT HERE IS THE SAME WAY WE TALKED ABOUT EARLIER; WE TALK ABOUT WHAT THE SYSTEM HASN'T DONE.
AND WE TALK ABOUT WHERE THE FAILURE IS, AS OPPOSED TO WHERE THE SUCCESS IS. O SO THE FAILURE TO HELP THESE STUDENTS IS OUR FAILURE AS A SYSTEM, WHEREAS THE ACHIEVEMENT OF LITERACY IS REALLY THE STUDENTS, TO BE QUITE FRANK.
WHEREAS OF -- WE ARE PROVIDING THE BUILDING BLOCKS.
IT IS A QUESTION OF HOW WELL ARE WE BUILDING THEM FOR THE STUDENT? ARE WE GIVING THEM A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF BLOCKS? ARE WE GIVING THEM A SUFFICIENT NUMBER OF, YOU KNOW, MATERIALS SO THAT THEY HAVE THE TOOLS TO NEED WHAT THEY NEED TO DO.
>> I THINK THIS IS OUR NTSS WHEN IT IS IMPLEMENTED DISTRICT-WIDE. WE WILL SEE THEM AT THE SYSTEMS LEVEL WHERE THE SYSTEM CAN THEN HELP OR CORRECT.
>> I AGREE. >> SO, SIMILAR TO THAT.
>> I THINK, SARAH, YOU'RE MUTED AND THEN UNMUTED.
>> YEAH. FOR WHATEVER REASON, MY COMPUTER IS BEING VERY SLOW RIGHT NOW IN UPDATING ITSELF AND THROWING ME OFF. I THINK THAT SENTENCE ABOVE THIRD-GRADE LITERACY IS THE SENTENCE THAT WE NEED TOO HIT; RIGHT STP AND MEETING THE STUDENT LITERACY -- AND I'M NOT DOING A GOOD JOB STATING IT. AND AND THAT IS AN EXAMPLE.
CLEARLY, THERE ARE OTHERS THAT WE CAN UTILIZE.
>> I GUESS I'LL GO WITH A FEW MINOR THINGS REAL QUICK.
SO THE VERY FIRST WHEREAS, WHICH IS QUOTING FROM "PART OF OUR MISSION" THERE IS A CAMMA AT THE END OF THE QUOTE.
THE COMMA AT THE END OF THE QUOTE.
[00:55:02]
OKAY. YEAH.EVERYTHING ELSE IS FINE THERE.
I STILL THINK WE SHOULD REMOVE THE HEADINGS.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS ANY PROBLEM WITH THAT.
I'LL SAY IT AGAIN. >> WITH REMOVING HEADINGS?
>> I ASSUME THEY ARE PUT IN PLACE AS PLACEHOLDERS TO MAKE IT EASIER TOO DRAFT AND THINK THROUGH TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING
IS COVERED, BUT -- >> BECAUSE WE WERE MOVING THINGS AROUND. IT IS HELPFUL TO SAY WHERE
AND I THINK THE FINAL RECOMMENDING US MOVING THEM.
>> CAN WE GET A COLLECTIVE HEAD-NOD?
>> I'M NODDING, AND CHRIS, THUMBS UP, AND CASSANDRA IS NODDING AND MARK, TOO. OKAY.
GREAT. WE'RE OKAY ON REMOVING THE HEADINGS. I THINK I MADE A COMMENT AROUND THE ORDER. TO THE EXTENT THAT I SAID I DIDN'T LIKE IT I'M DISAGREEING WITH MYSELF NOW.
I THINK IT IS THE RIGHT ORDER.
>> OKAY. >> IN THE "ACTION" SECTION THE SECTION" WHEREAS" AND THE THIRD BULLET POINT, I DON'T KNOW.
JUST SOMETHING'S WRONG THERE. I -- I THINK IT'S PROBABLY THE CREATION OF A DIRECTOR POSITION IS I MEAN, THE 2017 THROUGH, YEAH, CREATING A DIRECTOR POSITION.
I DON'T PARTICULARLY CARE HOW IT IS IT IS CREATED, BUT EVERYTHING ELSE GREAT. AND WHEREAS THE QUOTES FOR THE 2020 PROCLAMATION THE RESOLUTION, I CAN'T QUITE RECALL, THERE -- WAS THERE A TITLE -- WHAT WAS THE TITLE OF THAT PROCLAMATION? DOES ANYONE? SIRI, YOU PROBABLY RECALL.
I CAN'T HEAR YOU. >> I DO NOT REMEMBER THE TITLE. I --
>> OKAY. LET ME SEE IF I CAN FIND IT.
>> I WAS QUOTING -- >> I WAS HOPING IT IS FURTHER
DOWN. >> SO, IN THE CHAT, I JUST GAVE YOU A REWRITE OF THE THIRD-GRADE DATA.
>> COULD YOU SCROLL TO THE POLICY WHERE THAT ARE -- SORRY.
I APPRECIATE YOUR -- >> LET'S SEE.
I JUST PULLED UP CHAT SO I COULD SEE CHRIS' RECOMMEND TKWAEUGS. FIVE YEARS OF THIRD-GREAT LITERACY DATA SHOWS OUR DISTRICT ONLY BRINGS 30 PERCENT 240 PERCENT OF STUDENTS TO PROFICIENCY.
"ONLY BRINGS." >> I'M OKAY WITH THAT AND THE
OTHERS AS WELL. >> CHRIS, YOU'RE MUTED.
>> THANKS, JOHN. IF YOU COULD SCROLL DOWN BY A COUPLE OF PARAGRAPHS, WE COULD SEE THE BOTTOM, THE BULLET
POINTS OF THIRD GREAT. >> OKAY.
>> WHERE IT SAYS "THREE YEARS OF THE DATA SHOWS TO THE PREAMBLE" OF THE BULLETS THIS, IS WHAT I'M REPLACING.
>> DR. SAGE, YOUR HAND WENT UP, I THINK.
[01:00:08]
>> IT IS BUT IT IS OF AYE DIFFERENT PIECE SO IF YOU WANT TO FINISH THIS THOUGHT, GO AHEAD.
>> YES. WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU.
WHAT YOU SAID, I'M FINE WITH IT, BUT --
>> IT'S GOT JUDGMENT. 40% TO 50% IS NOT ENOUGH.
40 PERCENT TO 50 PERCENT IS NOT ENOUGH.
>> I'M GLAD YOU PICKED UP ON THAT, THE JUDGMENT.
I'M FINE WITH THIS. >> SO, ANYWAYS, JOHN, DOES THIS WORK FOR YOU AS A STRUCTURAL OWNERSHIP PIECE?
>> AND THEN, CHRIS, WHERE YOU HAVE IT'S -- WHERE YOU HAVE ET
CETERA -- >> IT JUST MIRRORED THAT.
>> YES, THAT TWO-PIECE STRUCTURE.
>> SO THE ONE THAT -- >> THE DRAMATIC ONE WAS --
>> FOR WHATEVER REASON, MY INTERNET IS REALLY SLOW RIGHT
NOW. >> YOU MIGHT JUST WANT TO TURN YOUR VIDEO OFF, TO SEE IF WE CAN --
>> YEAH, THAT MIGHT HELP. >> -- HEAR YOU.
ACTUALLY, THAT WAS A GOOD IDEA.
THANK YOU. AND WITH THE PREAMBLE, WE SPOKE ABOUT LANGUAGE AS A PROPONENT.
WE DIDN'T PUT PUT THE ELL, SPECIFICALLY, ON THESE STANDARDIZED TESTS, WE KNOW WHAT VERY TO TO LOOK AT WITH THE ELL PROGRAM. AND THE GAP DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE SO. HOWEVER, WITH THE OTHER ELL PROGRAM, THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT THERE ARE NOT OTHER BARRIERS WITH OUR SYSTEM THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS.
THAT IS PART OF THE REASON THIS COMPONENT WAS NOT PUT IN
THERE. >> THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME.
THANK YOU, DIRECTOR, FOR HIGHLIGHTING THAT.
>> COULD YOU RUN THAT BY -- COULD YOU SAY THAT AGAIN, SIRI? I'M NOT SURE THAT I UNDERSTOOD YOU.
>> SO WITH THE DATA, YOU HAVE STUDENTS CLEARLY IN THE ELL PROGRAM, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY ARE LEARNING THE ENGLISH LANGE LANGUAGE AT THIS TIME. AND WE HAVE THOSE WHO HAVE EXITED THE ELL DATA. AND WE LOOK AT THE ASSESSMENTS AND, OF COURSE, THIS IS TWO YEARS AGO.
WE HAVEN'T HAD ANYTHING SINCE THEN.
AND THEN A GAP IN PLACE. >> AFTER PARTICIPATING IN
ELL. >> UPON EXIT OF ELL OR HAVING
>> IT IS DIFFERENT WHEN YOU ARE LEARNING THE PROGRAM AND HAVE YOU TO TAKE A TEST IN ENGLISH, AND YOU ARE STILL
LEARNING ENGLISH TO DO SO. >> DO WE LOOK AT LOW INCOME
AND THIRD-GRADE LITERACY? >> YES.
>> JUST ON THE NUMBER SIDE. >> SEE? I DID IT AGAIN.
I DIDN'T SEE IT IN NUMERIC FORM.
>> SIRI, I AGREE WITH TKW -- SIRI, I AGREE WITH YOU.
AND NOT THAT IT DOESN'T EXIST AND WE'LL CONTINUE TO MONITOR IT. IT IS INDISTINGUISHABLE AND I USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE OF SOMETHING WE'RE DOING FOR EQUITY
THAT WORKS. >> DIRECTOR STEWART?
>> YES. THIS JUST ISN'T ABOUT THIS ARGUMENT, TO BE QUITE FRANK. I'VE HAD TROUBLE WITH THIS PHRASE OVER THE YEARS. I WANT TO TO BE SURE THAT
[01:05:01]
WE'RE -- AND IN A PROGRAM I MIGHT SAY I EXITED ON THE BEST OF TERMS OR IF I -- IF I SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED AND -->> AND NOT THIS -- NOT QUITE THIS DOCUMENT BUT ALL OF THE
REFERENCES TO ELL. >> SO I WILL TRY TO BE MORE CLEAR WITH, THAT YES. EXITED AS SUCCESSFUL
COMPLETION OF THE PROGRAM. >> I AGREE.
I HATE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN. >> YES.
I BELIEVE THAT IS AN OSP TERM THAT WE PROVIDE TO STUDENTS THAT HAVE SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED AND TESTED TO TAKE THEIR NEXT STEP OF THEIR EDUCATIONAL SKWROURPBO BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY DO PROVIDE FOLLOW-UP SUPPORT WHICH IS DIFFERENT THAN ELL SERVICES BUT FOLLOW-UP SUPPORT TO STUDENTS THAT NO LONGER ARE PARTICIPATING
IN THE ELL PROGRAM. >> AND A PHRASE.
IT IS FUNNY. THAT NEVER OCCURRED TO ME, MARK BUT I DON'T THINK YOU ARE WRONG.
THAT IS JARGON WITH OSPI BUT WHEN WE'RE SPEAKING TO THE PUBLIC WE WOULDN'T NEED TO USE THAT PERM PER SE.
>> YEAH. THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT BOTHERS ME. IS I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO THINK THEY HAVE FAILED OR BECAUSE THEY HAVE RUN OUT OF TIME IN THAT PROGRAM; THAT THEY'VE REACHED A CERTAIN AGE AND THEN YOU'RE BOOTED OUT. SEE WHERE I'M GOING?
>> YEAH. IT NEVER OCCURRED TO ME THAT I LOOKED AT IT THAT WAY BUT WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT IN THE HR WORLD,
>> AND I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING ELSE ON THAT TO MOVE ALONG.
BUT MAYBE JUST THE PARTNERSHIPS.
>> CAN I ADD A TO THIS REAL QUICK? CAN I ADD A PIECE TO THIS REAL QUICK? SIRI HAD PUT IN THE BRACKETS I WANTED TO RECOGNIZE FOR DIRECTOR SAGE AND BLIESNER THAT I ADDED THIS PIECE, JUST TO BE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHO WE ARE PARTNERING WITH AROUND OUR INCLUSIVE PRACTICES WORK.
>> I WAS THINK BIG THAT BECAUSE MINNESOTA.
GOT IT. >> IS THAT ON A DIFFERENT
>> THE REFERENCE TO THE -- NEVER MIND.
NOW WE ARE SEEING IT. >> OKAY.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION WOULD THIS COUNT -- AT OUR LAST MEETING SOMEONE BROUGHT UP THE RYE VIEW FOR DECISION-MAKING.
THEY BROUGHT UP THE EQUITY ANALYSIS TOOL.
THE EQUITY-ANALYSIS TOOL. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS AOFPLT I'LL TAKE A RUN AT IT. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S OTHERS ON THE CALL. I THINK I SAW DR. ROSS AND SALLY ON THE CALL AS WELL IF THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL FEED -SBACK. ONE OF THE -- LET ME GIVE A HISTORY TO -- AS A SCHOOL DISTRICT, WE ACTUALLY WERE REQUIRED FROM OSPI LAST SPRING TO ADOPT AN EQUITY ANALYSIS TOOL. AS WE CONDUCTED THE SCHOOL YEAR AS WE RETURNED TO IN-PERSON LEARNING FOR STUDENTS, WE WERE REQUIRED TO, ALSO IN THAT, REQUIRE AN EQUITY ANALYSIS TOOL. ULTIMATELY WHAT IT DOES, IT PROVIDES A STRUCTURED WAY FOR INDIVIDUALS OR GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHO, IN A STRUCTURED WAY, HAVE QUESTIONS THAT CAUSE YOU TO THINK ABOUT HOW IS THIS IMPACTING THOSE THAT WE ARE MAKING DECISIONS ABOUT? SO IT MIGHT ASK QUESTIONS OF WHO'S
[01:10:03]
IMPACTED BY THE DECISION THAT YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE? WHO IS PART OF THE PROCESS IN DETERMINING THE ULTIMATE DECISION AND OUTCOME THAT'S BEING DECIDED? WHO WASN'T REPRESENTED THROUGH THIS DECISION? SO IT JUST -- IT CAUSES YOU TO JUST REALLY THINK THROUGH IN A STRUCTURED PLANNER -- A STRUCTURED MANNER AND THE THEORY OF ACTION, IF WE USE AN EQUITY TOOL IT WILL BE MORE IN LINE WITH OUR VALUES, HAVE BETTER OUTCOMES. AND, IN TERMS OF THIS, IT WOULD BE -- SUPPORTS OUR OPERATIONAL EXPECTATION FOR OURTHANK YOU. >> I'LL TRY TO PUT IT IN OUR
EQUITY ANALYSIS TOOL. >> OKAY.
I WANT TO ASK WHAT WE ARE COMMITTING? OF IT IS A QUESTION FOR THE BOARD. IS IT FOR -- TO BE ADOPTED BY THE DISTRICT OR JUST TO UTILIZE --
LET ME TRY TO ASK IT MORE ARTICULATELY.
IS IT THE THINKING THAT WE ARE GOING TO USE THE EQUITY-ANALYSIS TOOL PER OSPI RECENTLY OR THAT WE'RE GOING TO SEEK OUR OWN?
THINK THOUGHT ON THAT? >> CAN I OFFER COMMENT REAL
QUICK? >> THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE
HELPFUL. >> SO AS I WAS JUST DOING SOME SIR -FPING OF 10 TO 15-MINUTE LITERATURE OR TERMS THAT SCHOOL BOARDS ARE USING IN TERMS OF WEAKTY ANALYSIS THERE ARE SOME.
AND I KNOW THAT NSBA HAS SOME EQUITY-ANALYSIS TPRA*EUPL WORKS THAT THEY'VE -- FRAMEWORKS THAT THEY'VE DEVELOPED AND I THINK I GOT A LINK THE OTHER DAY FROM NSBA, SO I LOOKED INTO THAT.
SO I THINK THAT THERE'S SOME FRAMEWORKS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO BOARD WORK, THAT WOULD BE VERY SPECIFIC TO KIND OF THE OUTCOMES AND THE DISCUSSIONS THE BOARD WOULD BE HAVING.
>> OKAY. >> SO, FOR ME, I WOULD WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WORD THAT IS ADOPTED IS TRULY ALIGNED WITH
I CONCUR. >> DIRECTOR CARLSON AND THEN
DIRECTOR LALIBERTE? >> SO THE SECOND I WOULD PROPOSE WE BREAK INTO THREE BULLETS.
IF YOU GO TO A PERIOD AFTER "CITIESA PHREUPB" CITIESA PHREUPB IS AN -- IF YOU GO TO A PERIOD AFTER" DID ISA DISCIPLINE," "DISCIPLINE" IS WHERE WE CARE.
AND THEN THE THIRD BULLET WOULD BE TO EXPAND EQUITABLE ACCESS. SO WE'RE TRYING TO ADDRESS DISPROPORTIONALITY APPLIES TO DISCIPLINE.
IT IS NOT SOMETHING, IN GENERAL, THAT APPLY TO THE VERB "ACADEMICS" AND ACADEMICS IS IMPORTANT AND DISCIPLINE IS IMPORTANT AND I WOULD FEEL VARYING THEM IN THE SAME BULLET GIVES EACH OF THEM TOO LITTLE WEIGHT.
>> SO DISDISPROPORTIONALITY IS JUST -- SO DISPROPORTIONALITY IT MADE ME THINK WHERE ARE THE OTHER PLACES DISPROPORTIONALITY IS USED. AND SO WE CURRENTLY HAVE SIGNIFICANT DISPROPORTIONALITY IN TERMS OF OUR HISPANIC/LATINO STUDENTS QUALIFYING AT A DISPROPORTIONATELY HIGHER RATE THAN OUR PEERS. WE ARE WORKING ON THAT.
PO*RGS -- DISPROPORTIONALITY IS USED BUT I DON'T THINK IT WAS THE BIGGEST VERB OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.
>> AND DISPROPORTION IS IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO HAVE ITS OWN BULLET AND DISPROPORTIONATE EVEN IF IT IS IN THE SAME BULLET.
[01:15:08]
>> THAT MAKES SENSE TO ME. >> CHRIS, IF YOU HAVE A SUGGESTED EDIT FOR THAT ENTIRE BULLET, WOULD YOU MIND --
>> I'LL SEND YOU ONE BY E-MAIL.
>> THANK YOU. >> CHRIS, IF YOU HAVE TIME, CAN YOU SLOW IT IN THE CHAT TODAY.
I'M -- I'M STILL STRUGGLING WITH THE -- I UNDERSTAND THE TOOL AND -- THE (INAUDIBLE) TOOL AND WHY WE NEED ONE OR SOMETHING OF ASSISTANCE IF WE'RE DOING WHAT WE WANT TO DO.
ARE WE ACHIEVING ANYTHING? BUT, AT THE SAME TIME, BECAUSE OF THE TRANSPARENCY BUT ALSO BECAUSE OF A TIP FOR A PARENT THAT DOESN'T SPEAK EDUCATIONEASE OR COMPUTEREASE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF IT IS IT IS A FOOTNOTE TO THE WEBSITE.
I DON'T CARE. IT EXPLAINS WHY WE'RE USING IT, WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE BY USING IT.
I THINK WE'RE TRYING TO SUCCEED AT USING IT, QUITE FRANKLY. IN EVERYDAY LANGUAGE, I'M WONDERING IF THE HE PERSON OFF THE STREET IS THE ONE WHO IS GOING TO UNDERSTAND IT WHEN THEY HEAR IT.
>> I DON'T WANT TO MISS A LINK TO THE TOOL THAT WE'RE USING.
>> NO, NO. BUT WE STARTED THE CONVERSATION -- I STARTED THE CONVERSATION SAYING, "I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS" AND I AGREE.
AT LEAST I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND NECESSARILY WHAT THAT MEANT WHEN
>> SO, YES. I UNDERSTAND I SHARE MARK'S
CONCERN. >> SO WHAT IF WE CALLED IT SOMETHING LIKE A FORMAL DESIGNIFICANT-MAKING TOOL FOR ANALYSIS AND DECISION-MAKING RELATED TO POLICIES DOES THAT
HELP? >> YOU SEE HOW IT MAKES IT CLOUDIER? AGAIN, THE IDEA OF PUTTING IT INTO PLAIN, SIMPLE ENGLISH. ALL OF THE TERMS ARE VERY MUCH THE JARGON IN THE ACADEMIC/EDUCATION WORLD.
BUT I'M AFRAID THEY'RE NOT IN THE EVERY-DAY WORLD.
IF WE COULD, SOME WAY, PUT THAT DOWN TO A READING LEVEL THAT EVERYONE UNDERSTANDS .... YOU SEE WHERE I'M GOING? IT IS NOT A MATTER OF MORE WORK BUT YOU SHOW HOW IT IS.
YOU SEE THE PROBLEM, WE HAVE PROBLEM "X" WE APPLIED THIS TOOL TO PROBLEM" X" AND THIS IS WHAT WE CAME OUT WITH AND THIS IS HOW WE FOUND OUT INFORMATION. YOU SEE WHERE I'M GOING?
>> ARE YOU SAYING SOMETHING INSTEAD OF SYSTEMATICALLY ANALYSIS TOOL, ARE YOU SAYING TO SYSTEMATICALLY REVIEW AND --
>> WHAT WE ARE COMMITTING TO, WE ARE COMMITTED TO UTILIZING A -- YOU KNOW, A TOOL. A TOOL.
A DEFINED FLAMEWORK FOR A METHODOLOGY FOR DOING THIS.
>> INSTEAD OF THE EQUITY TOOL YOU'RE USING A FRAMEWORK FOR DECISION REVIEW AND DECISION-MAKING, FOR A REVIEW AND DECISION-MOVING. I THINK I LIKE WHAT YOU'RE --
>> YES. YOU JUST GAVE US MORE WORDS, YOU GAVE US CLEAR WORDS. AND I THINK THAT THAT IS
[01:20:01]
CLEAR. >> CAN YOU REPEAT THAT,
I'M PUTTING IT IN THE CHAT RIGHT NOW.
"USE A TRANSPARENT FRAMEWORK FOR DECISION-MAKING FOR THE POLICY" AND USE A TRANSPARENT EQUITY FRAMEWORK FOR REVIEW.
SO BASICALLY WE ARE REPLACING EVERYTHING BEFORE THE WORD "REVIEW" THAT THESE ARE A FRAMEWORK FOR REVIEW ANALYSIS AND DECISION-MAKING RELATED TO POLICIES.
>> WHAT WE'VE COMMUNICATED AND DONE AND THE OESC EXPECTATIONS I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SINCE WE'VE SPENT ALL OF THIS TIME, EFFORT, AND AEUPBGST OF THE PUBLIC AND -- AND ANGST OF THE PUBLIC AND OUR OWN ANGST, I WOULD LIKE TO GO THROUGH AND SAY, HERE IS WHAT CAN BE ACHIEVED AND ON THE WEBSITE, EXPLAIN THE PROCESS, HOW THIS WILL BE ANALYZED AND HOW WILL THIS BE TAKEN CARE OF? I KNOW THAT THE EXPECTATION WILL HELP AND HOW WE ARE DOING THIS IN OUR WORK. IT IS GREAT THAT WE ADOPTED A POLICY BUT IF YOU DON'T LOOK AT WHAT YOU'VE ADOPTED, YOU HAVEN'T
ACCOMPLISHED ANYTHING. >> WOULD THIS BE MORE OF A FAMILY AND COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT ON THEIR PAGE?
>> YES. IT WOULD BE A ENGAGEMENT PIECE THAT WE COULD USE AS -- (INAUDIBLE) NOT ONLY HAVING A MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY BUT, ALSO, EVEN BEFORE THEY MEET, PEOPLE COULD SAY, OKAY. HERE IS WHAT THEY -- THEY'VE SET UP A PROCESS. THINK ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH X. THEY ARE DOING WHY -- THEY ARE DOING Y. AND THEN AS WE ARE GOING THROUGH, WE ARE LOOKING AT THE DATA. AS WE ARE GOING THROUGH THAT DATA IS A, B, C, D. SO WHEN WE ENGAGE THE PUBLIC WE CAN SAY, OKAY, DID WE ACCOMPLISH A, B, C, AND D IN YOUR MIND? IF YOU KNOW IT AND NO ONE USES IT, WHAT HELL GOOD
IS IT? >> AND I KNOW CONTINUING TO WORK ON THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THIS POLICY IS GOING TO BE YOU KNOW, BASIC LIT NEXT FEW MONTHS.
AND IT WILL BE POSTED AND WE'LL BE HEARING A LOT ABOUT IT
AND WE NEED THAT PROCESS. >> WE'LL NEED TO BE ABLE TO PUT IT IN THE NEWSPAPER, IF YOU WILL, ENGLISH AS POSED TO ACADEMIC -- IN ENGLISH AS OPPOSED TO ACADEMIC TERMS.
>> AND I THINK WHAT WE HAVE DONE IS HELD THE SUPERINTENDENT ACCOUNTABLE FOR POLICIES AND PROCEDURES.
THAT IS HOW WE'VE CONTINUED TO DO THOSE THINGS.
EITHER WE CAN HOLD THEM ACCOUNTABLE THAT WE WILL HOLD THE SUPERINTENDENT ACCOUNTABLE ACROSS THE BOARD BUT IT IS NOT JUST THAT ONE PIECE THAT IT IS APPLYING TO.
THAT IS MY CONCERN WITH THE WAY IT IS WRITTEN.
>> YOU'RE RIGHT IN THE TR-F EXPLICITNESS I WOULD JUST TACK
THAT CLAUSE ON TO ALL THREE. >> SURE.
I'M FINE WITH THAT. NOT AS PRETTY BUT IT IS CLEAR
[01:25:03]
AND EXPLICIT. I THINK THAT'S FINE.>> JOHN, DID YOU CATCH THAT? I KNOW YOU'RE READING.
>> SO WHAT I HEARD IS "CONTINUING TO ADDRESS DISPARITIES IN ACHIEVING ACADEMIC OUTCOMES BY HOLDING THE SUPERINTENDENT ACCOUNTABLE FOR THE POLICIES AND PROCEDURES FOR THE POLICIES SPECIFICALLY RATED IN OE-14" AND THEN JUST ADD THAT CLAUSE TO THE NEXT STATEMENT" EXPAND ONGOING OF EFFORTS TO ADDRESS DISPARITIES AND PO*RBS AND DISCIPLINE -- AND DISPROPORTION KWRALTS -- DISPROPORTIONALITIES FOR WHAT IS THERE." IS THAT ACCURATE?
>> THAT IS ACCURATE. AND I DROPPED IT INTO THE
COMMENTS, TOO. >> AND WHEN WE GO OUT WITH THIS AND WE MEET ON THE LINKAGES OR ANY OTHER THAT WE HAVE WITH ORGANIZATIONS, WE NEED TO REMEMBER THAT, JUST AS WE TRY AND ADAPTED IS -- OR WE TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT VISUALLY IMPAIRED, OR THOSE THAT ARE NOT ENGLISH FIRST-LANGUAGE PEOPLE, ARE -- WE HAVE LANGUAGE -- THAT THEY'LL UNDERSTAND AS WELL THAT IT IS EASILY COMMUNICATED. WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU'VE -- YOU'VE DONE SO. IS OTHERWISE, YOU HRO*EZ (INAUDIBLE) OF THE PUBLIC. I HAVE NO OTHERS TO ADD.
AND AFTER "INEQUITIES" THERE IS A PERIOD THAT SHOULDN'T BE THERE. I WOULD BE COMFORTABLE EXCLUDING EVERYTHING AFTER THE PERIOD.
AND I THINK THAT IS A LEFTOVER OR APPENDIX THERE WAS SOMETHING
PREVIOUS THERE. >> SO JUST RECOMMENDING TO STRIKE WHAT I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED THERE; RIGHT?
>> YES. ISN'T THAT COVERED SOMEWHERE
ELSE? >> I'M NOT SURE THAT YOU CAN
SAY IT OFTEN ENOUGH EXPLICITLY. >> NO.
AND IF YOU CAN'T SAY IT EXCLUSIVELY IN THESE BULLETS,
MAYBE IT NEEDS ITS OWN BULLET. >> EXACTLY.
I WOULD RECOMMEND TAKE OUT THE PERIOD.
TAKE OUT THE PERIOD AND LEAVE THAT IN BECAUSE YOU CAN'T SAY IT
IT'S A PRETTY CLUMPINGY SENTENCE.
>> YOU COULD SAY, "ADDRESSING SYSTEMATIC PRACTICES" AT THE END
OF THAT FIRST BULLET. >> YEAH, THAT WORKS.
>> YEAH. I JUST SUPPORT STRIKING THAT
HIGHLIGHTED TEXT. >> CHRIS IS RECOMMENDING TO MOVE IT TO THE FIRST BULLET. ARE YOU RECOMMENDING TO JUST
STRIKE IT? >> THAT'S MY OPINION, BUT
CONSENSUS ON THAT? >> YOU HAVE A CONSENSUS OF ONE SO FAR. .
[01:30:28]
>> ARE YOU OKAY WITH IT? >> I'M FINE WITH IT.
>> I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING TO MOVE IT TO THE FIRST BULLET.
>> SO WHAT WOULD IT BE? >> "RACISM AND TO THE RACISM, SYSTEMATIC BIASES IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT" AND IT HAS A NEW HOME AND I GOT TO USE MY OXFORD COMMA.
>> IS THAT A NEW BULLET OR? >> NO.
THAT IS JUST REPLACING THE FIRST BULLET.
>> AND THAT IS THE REST OF IT.
>> I AGREE. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS?
>> SO IN THE I WISH THEY WERE NUMBERED.
>> AND JUST TO TALK ABOUT THAT, ARE WE SAYING "BURDENS" IS
THE RIGHT WORD THERE? >> JUST TO -- YEAH.
ONE IDEA IS -- INSTEAD OF -- I MEAN, IF YOU JUST READ "REVIEW, ANALYZE BOARD POLICIES AND PRACTICES WITH THAT LENS TO MAKE SURE THEY DO NOT ENFORCE EXISTING POLICIES" --
>> AND I WOULD MAKE IT REALISTIC TO ENSURE THAT --
>> "TO ENSURE THAT BOARD PRACTICES AND POLICIES" FINE.
>> REVIEW THE CHALLENGES THROUGH THAT LENS TO ENSURE THAT THE POLICY'S BOARD -- BOARD'S PRACTICES TO NOT INTERFERE WITH THOSE POLICIES. SO IT IS EXPLACEET.
AND CLEAR ENOUGH. >> AND THAT ADDS CLARITY.
ANY OTHER -- OKAY. THANKS, CHRIS, FOR DOING
THAT. >> AND THE LAST BULLET HERE, I'M GOING TO PROBABLY LOWER-CASE ACCOUNTABILITY.
FOR SOME REASON, "ACCOUNTABILITY" IS
>> AND THE FEEDBACK TO THE SUPERINTENDENT H. AND THE MONITORING OF THE POLE SEU WITH FEEDBACK PROVIDED TO THE SUPERINTENDENT. OF THE POLICY WITH FEEDBACK
PROVIDED TO THE SUPERINTENDENT. >> OKAY.
SO I -- I READ IT TO "WE'RE COMMITTING FOR THE TRANSPARENT ACCOUNTABILITY OF THE MONITORING" -- I GUESS IT WOULD
BE BOARD POLICIES, PLURAL. >> OKAY.
AND OF WE'RE COMMITTING COMMITTED WHEN WE'RE MONITORING THE BOARD POL STHAEUZ IT'S TRANSPARENT AND THE SUPERINTENDENT IS ACCOUNTABLE AND THAT ON THE POLICIES, IT IS TRANSPARENT AND EVERYONE CAN SEE THE WORK THAT IS GOING ON AND IF AND WHEN WE DO COME UP SHORT, IT IS CLEAR.
[01:35:09]
CHRIS, IS IT CLEAR? >> I THINK WE MUDDY THE WATER FOR THE STANDARD PRACTICE OF MONITORING BOARD POLICY.
I WOULD JUST STRIKE EVERYTHING OF AFTER "MONITORING OF POLICY" AS DEFINED BY THE GOVERNANCE SPROES." AS OPPOSED TO "DEFINING ACCOUNTABILITY TO THE GOVERNANCE
PROCESS." >> WHAT ABOUT -- SO WE HAVE MULTIPLE BOARD POLICIES, SO I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE PLURAL.
>> I STILL THINK WE HAVE ONGOING CONFUSION WITH THE PUBLIC AS TO WHAT OUR PROCESS IS FOR THE GOVERNANCE AND TO REFER
TO IT MIGHT BE -- >> DO WE -- DO WE HAVE A PAGE ON OUR WEBSITE THAT DISCUSSES WHAT COHERENT GOVERNANCE IS? WE
DO? OKAY. >> IF WE DO, IT IS NOT COHERENT ENOUGH FOR MOST FOLKS TO UNDERSTAND IT BECAUSE THEY
>> -- EITHER THEY DO NOT CALL IT OUT WELL ENOUGH OR PULL IT OUT WELL ENOUGH OR CAN'T FIND IT.
I DON'T KNOW. >> MAYBE WE CAN LINK TO THE PAGE THAT DISCUSSES OUR GOVERNANCE TYPE.
>> GOOD IDEA. >> DID THAT MAKE SENSE TO
>> YES. I CAPTURED THEM AND THEY MADE SENSE. SO BONUS THERE.
>> OKAY. >> I GUESS WE COULD -- WHEN THIS IS POSTED ONLINE, COULD WE INSERT LINKS INTO THE DOCUMENT? IT WOULD -- I THINK HAVING A LINK TO OUR GOVERNANCE POLICY OR PROCESS, IT IS SOMETHING -- THERE IS SOMETHING FOR
EXPLAINING IT WOULD BE HELPFUL. >> SO UNDER OUR GOVERNANCE PROCESS, DO YOU WANT ME TO PUT A LINK TO WHAT DESCRIBES THE ROLE
>> ANY OTHER -- >> SO PROPOSED EDIT ON THAT LAST ONE IS NOW IN THE COMMENTS. 0.
>> AND I DON'T KNOW IF I LIKE THE FEEDBACK.
>> TO ME -- TO ME IT SEEMS LIKE THE POLICIES ARE JUST PUT IN PLACE AND WE'RE MONITORING BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE.
>> , SO OTHER THAN OF THAT, IF YOU WERE TO STRIKE "OF
>> -- THERE, I THINK IT MAKES SENSE.
>> CAN YOU SAY -- YOU CAN SAY IMPLEMENTATION OF --
>> THAT IS NOT GOOD ENGLISH, MARK.
>> WELL, IT IS MONITORING OF THE POLICIES IS WHAT HE IT SEEMS TO ME. WHAT CHRIS JUST PUT IN THE KHRAT. .
>> OR MONITORING THE POLICIES.
I LIKE WHAT CHRIS SAID BETTER.
>> I JUST THINK THAT "SUPERINTENDENT" MADE IT UNCLEAR
WHO WAS MONITORING. >> YEAH, I -- I AGREE.
>> WELL, IF WE GO WITH CHRIS' VERSION, DO WE -- AT THE END OF THE WORD, "PROCESS AYE," DO WE SAY "TO KEEP THE SUPERINTENDENT ACCOUNTABLE," OR TO OF" ENSURE ONGOING" ....
[01:40:07]
>> NO. KWHROPBG WE FEED TO HAVE THAT
BUT I KNOW WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. >> OKAY.
>> AND YOU ARE RAISING AN INTERESTING QUESTION, MARK.
IT IS WHO ARE WE KEEPING ACCOUNTABLE? IS THIS ABOUT
KEEPING OURSELVES ACCOUNTABLE? >> YES.
>> OR IS THIS JUST US KEEPING US ACCOUNTABLE?
>> IT COULD BE BOTH. >> IT COULD BE BOTH.
AND I WOULD ARGUE THAT "BOTH" MUDDIES THE WATER.
>> I WOULD ARGUE THAT THIS IS ABOUT US AND OUR GOVERNANCE PROCESS IS ABOUT THE ACCOUNTABILITY WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT SO IT IS CAPTURED.
>> ALL RIGHT. I KNOW IT IS NOT IN LAY-ENGLISH, BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS A WAY THAT WE CAN TRANSLATE THIS FOR CASHAL CON-- CASUAL CONSUMPTION.
>> WELL, THERE GOES UNDERSTAND ABILITY -FPBLT --
UNDERSTANDABILITY. >> WELL, THIS IS WHERE YOU HAVE TO DO RESEARCH ON WHAT OUR GOVERNANCE PROCESS IS TO UNDERSTAND IT. 6.
>> AND THIS IS WHERE THE LINK IS GOING; RIGHT? THE PAGE ON
I THINK THAT WOULD BE PERFECT TO MAKE IT HOT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> NOTHING SPECIFIC.
I'M MUCH MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE LANGUAGE OF O OE'S OBJECTIVE. THIS I FEEL LIKE I NEED TO SLEEP ON IT AND DO ANOTHER RUNOVER TOMORROW.
SO I APOLOGIZE IF WE NEED TO MAKE SOME AMENDMENTS ON THE FLOOR BEFORE WE MAKE THE PROCLAMATION.
>> OKAY. IF YOU HAVE ANY IN ADVANCE,
COULD YOU DISTRIBUTE -- >> YES.
I'LL COMMUNICATE ANY IF I DO. I NEED TO SLEEP ON IT.
I'M NOT SURE I DON'T HAVE ANY YET.
>> I APPRECIATE THAT. >> SO PROCESS-WISE I'LL UPDATE THIS AND GET THE BOARD A COPY FIRST THING IN THE MORNING, SO YOU'LL SEE AN UPDATED RESOLUTION.
IF THERE ARE COMMENTS, DEFINITELY LOOP ERIC IN, AND WE
CAN MAKE CHANGES IF NEED BE. >> YEAH.
YOU KNOW, I THINK EVEN IF THERE'S COMMENTS AHEAD OF TIME, WE'LL STILL BRING THEM FORWARD. I MEAN, THIS WILL BE -- WHAT WE HAVE AFTER TONIGHT IS WHAT WE'LL COME FORWARD AND WE CAN MAKE EDITS THROUGH MOTIONS -- I GUESS, THROUGH A MOTION AT THE
MEETING. >> SOUNDS LIKE A GREAT PLAN.
>> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS ON THE RESOLUTION? THANK YOU, EVERYONE, WHO WORKED ON GETTING -- TURNING THIS AROUND IN UNBELIEVABLY FAST TIME.
AND CASSANDRA, THANK YOU. >> COMPANY JUST BOTH ARE RECOGNIZE THAT BOTH DIRECTOR SAGE AND TKROEBGTER BLIESNER I BELIEVE THEY MET WITH ME -- DIRECTOR BLIESNER I BELIEVE THEY MET WITH ME FOUR TIMES LAST WEEK ON THE RESOLUTION SURROUNDING OE AND IN EACH OF THOSE MEETINGS I THINK THE SHORTEST ONE WAS 45 MINUTES, BUT THE OTHER THREE WERE 60 TO 90 MINUTES, SO IT'S A LOT OF TIME THAT THEY PUT INTO THIS, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE
THAT, THE SUPPORT OF THIS WORK. >> THAT'S INCREDIBLE.
>> THANK YOU. >> ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE
ADJOURN FOR TONIGHT? >> AND I RECOMMEND SLEEPING ON IT, CHRIS. I KNOW I WOKE UP AT 2:00 A.M.
THINKING, OCK, MAYBE THIS IS THE ANGLE WE NEED TO GO THROUGH.
SO THINK ABOUT IT. I WOULD ENCOURAGE TO EVERYBODY IS THERE A PIECE GLARING THAT WE DIDN'T THINK ABOUT? I KNOW THAT, STILL; OUR WORK FORCE AND THE VALUE OF LIVING IN A MULTI CULTURAL WORLD AND A DIVERSE WORLD AND IN THAT SHIFT, THE VALUE OF HAVING A VERY DIVERSE AND MULTI CULTURAL STAFF IN WHICH TO BE AND I'M NOT SURE THAT WE HAVE THAT IN THE POLICY BUT THAT WE RECOGNIZE THAT AS A OVERVALUE FOR OUR STUDENTS NOT
[01:45:08]
JUST FOR OUR STUDENTS BUT ACROSS THE BOARD.SO THOSE ARE THE THINGS I WOULD SAY IF YOU SEE SOMETHING
>>> IF I MIGHT MAKE A SUGGESTION, ERIC? JUST TAKE ABOUT 30 MINUTES OF THE STUDY TIME AND MAKE SURE WE'RE CLEAR WITH THE RESOLUTION AND THEN DIANE CAN GET THE FINAL AND
UPLOAD IT FOR THAT MEETING. >> I'M FINE WITH THAT.
I'M FINE WITH THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF I SHOULD SAY THESE WORDS ALLOWED, ARE WE OKAY WITH ADDING THOSE IN TERMS OF
THE OEA COMPLIANCE? >> I'LL CHECK WITH DIANE AFTER THE MEETING TO MAKE SURE WE ARE OKAY.
ASSUMING WE CAN DO IT, LET'S DO IT.
OKAY. 6:48, WE ARE AT THE END OF OUR AGENDA. ANY LAST QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM ANYONE? OKAY. SO SINCE THEN THERE ARE NO OTHER ITEMS, THE SEPTEMBER 12TH, 2021 STUDY SESSION IS ADJOURNED. WE MEET TOMORROW STARTING AT 4:00 P.M. FOR A STUDY SESSION, FOLLOWED BY OUR BUSINESS MEETING AT 7:00 P.M. BOTH ARE BEING HELD REMOTELY USING THE TEAM'S PLATFORM AND BROADCAST ON THE DISTRICT WEBSITE UNDER THE -- IT'S AVAILABLE UNDER THE "BOARD" TAB. SO THANK YOU, EVERYONE, AND HAVE A GOOD REST OF YOUR
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.