Meaning it's not regularly scheduled.
the time is 524 in the afternoon.
we are in room 500, the council chambers of the johny wilson
building. I'm phil mendelson, chair of the
council. We always begin our legislative
meetings with a moment of silence for reflection.
if we could have silence in the chamber and on the dais.
madam secretary, would you please determine whether we have
a quorum? Council member allen still here.
wonderful to see you. Councilmember bonds,
councilmember bonds, councilmember crawford here.
councilmember felder. Present.
councilmember frumin present. Councilmember henderson still
here. Councilmember louis.
george here. Chairman mendelson present.
councilmember nadeau here. Councilmember parker here.
council member pinto present. Councilmember robert white
present. Councilmember trayon white, sr.
present. Mr. Chairman, you have a quorum.
thank you, madam secretary. We have a consent agenda and the
consent agenda has three ceremonial resolutions on it,
which have to be adopted anyway by unanimous consent.
are there any changes to the consent agenda?
mr. Chairman? What's that?
councilmember parker, it's just a point of clarification.
so it is my understanding. Councilmember trayon white, sr.
sought to control but missed the deadline.
so he is co-sponsoring the lgbtq plus resolution.
so for the public, I just wanted I we had a discussion.
I said we would make sure it was public, but I wanted to make
sure as it's not represented on the agenda that way.
so no change. It's just a point of information
for the public. Okay.
I'm hearing yes, I would just like to.
reflect my concern of this. On all of our deliveries for the
bsa. But I'm not moving off consent.
I'm just I didn't mention it the last time.
and I just wanted to add it to the record.
there are three measures on the consent agenda.
there are ceremonial resolutions.
the only discussion with regard to the consent agenda is whether
something is removed from the consent agenda.
hearing that nothing is being removed from the consent agenda,
the vote will be on the consent agenda.
all those in favor of the consent agenda say aye I.
are there any opposed, madam secretary, you will note,
councilmember bonds is present. We have the non consent agenda.
the first measure is bill 26-659.
the fiscal year 2027 local budget act of 2026.
councilmember pinto, did you want to say something?
I want to express my unease about adding a an additional fee
to people ordering groceries and food at a time when costs are
skyrocketing across the district.
I'm not going to vote against the bsa or the lda today, but I
do have outstanding concerns about that.
okay. Further discussion on bill
26-659. Councilmember felder I'll be
brief and echo my sentiments of my ward two colleague on this
delivery fee. Just thinking about how it's
going to impact drivers as well as the restaurant industry.
I don't I won't speak against I know it's already in the bsa,
but I wanted to go on record just sharing my concerns as
well. Further on the local budget act,
we have bill 26-659 before us. All those in favor say I, I, I.
are there any opposed? Hearing none.
the bill is approved. First reading unanimously.
bill 26-661. Fiscal year 2027 budget support
act of 2026. So moved.
is there a discussion? The vote will be on the bill.
all those in favor say I. I, I.
are there any opposed hearing none.
the ayes have it unanimously. We have excuse me on page two of
the agenda. Proposed contract number.
gag2026c0049 with curriculum associates llc.
disapproval resolution of 2026. Council member henderson.
I wanted to move this. Yes.
thank you, mr. Chairman. This disapproval resolution is
for contract with curriculum associates, but for those who
might have children in the k-12 space is commonly known as
I-ready. My office has received countless
calls and emails from families, educators, state board of
education members frustrated by the use of ai by the use of
I-ready in classrooms, and concerned about the growing
reliance of gamified learning in our curriculum.
as a parent of two daughters in elementary school, I understand
the frustration. Dcps first entered the contract
for I-ready in 2014 as a tool to support math, diagnostics and
some personalized learning, but expanded its use to include
literacy, math, diagnostics, and personal learning.
in 2021, meaning that there are some elementary school students,
my daughters included, who have known I-ready for their entire
elementary school experience. I acknowledge that I-ready is
also used in the middle grades, but it is not used to the extent
that it is used in elementary schools.
so I think as legislators, it's important that we listen to
families and educators when they express concerns.
I had a conversation with the chief of technology, excuse me,
the teach the chief learning on friday to discuss dcps response
to concerns raised by school communities to better understand
the data surrounding the platform's use and
effectiveness. One thing is clear kids are
spending a lot of time on devices during the school week,
and parents are asking whether or not we are striking the right
balance, especially given external research and data on
screen time. Dcps recommends that students
spend 30 to 45 minutes per week on the platform.
however, there are schools throughout the district that are
using the platform almost double the recommended time, year to
date data shows that 17 schools exceed dcps recommended I-ready
usage levels. 49 schools are using the
platform more than the base recommendation of 30 minutes per
week. In math, 40 are using the
platform beyond the 30 minutes per week in literacy.
some school campuses, like lasalle, backus, thomas
elementary, john jay wilson, drew elementary, mlk elementary
and beres elementary are using the platform for over an hour
per week as part of their literacy and math instruction.
yet when I spoke to dcps, there were no clear guardrails on for
how to address schools that were overusing the platform or clear
data to support that usage beyond the recommendation of
whether it was more effective for student outcomes.
there's also a lack of credible, peer reviewed research
supporting its effectiveness. This, coupled with litigation
regarding data privacy and collection, warrants intentional
deliberation of the contract. I filed this notice to agendize
in part because when we filed the notice of disapproval to
extend the review timeline. Mr. Chairman, if I have one more
minute, I requested a meeting with dcps.
now, interestingly enough, no one at dcps was available to
have a conversation with me until june 15th, which would
have been after, well, two days before the contract would have
been deemed approved. So I put this on the agenda and
lo and behold, I got a meeting. And also, lo and behold, we got
a letter from the chancellor finally addressing some of the
issues that families have been raising.
now, I don't think it's necessarily specifically around
iready. I think it's around there is a
mounting frustration around the use of technology altogether in
our schools, which is interesting because a couple of
years ago, everybody wanted every kid to have a a laptop and
a device and all those other things.
and yet it feels like the pendulum has swung in a
direction, particularly in our k to two space that is making some
families feel very uncomfortable around the usage, not just
iready, but also youtube and not just youtube during the school
day, but definitely in the wild wild west of aftercare.
I, mr. Chairman, I'm going to stop here.
I know that there are some colleagues who have some
thoughts about this as well. We have had some conversations
too. I do want to acknowledge that.
I do believe the votes are here, but I understand that the
central office also is concerned about where things land in terms
of next school year. The chancellor made a number of.
or I wouldn't even call them promises because he won't
necessarily be here to fulfill them.
but I guess plans of what dcps plans to implement prior to
school year 2627 around providing some specific guidance
to schools that, frankly, they should have been doing for the
last five years, but nonetheless, here we are.
so I'll stop there. Mr. Chairman.
thank you. Council.
george, do you want to be. And then council member allen,
then council member. Robert white and then frumin and
then me. Councilmember lewis.
thank you. I understand that this
disapproval resolution will be withdrawn, but I appreciate the
important conversation that it has raised.
our youngest learners deserve a classroom centered on human
connection and strong instruction.
reading, creativity and engagement with teachers, and
not excessive screen time. My experience and belief is that
to achieve the best student outcomes, our public schools
should set clear limits on screen time.
in the early years and reduce overreliance on edtech for test
preparation, and develop guidance with teachers for
appropriate technoogy use by grade, with transparency for
parents on what tools are being used and why.
I also remain concerned about renewing the iready contract
with curriculum associates. While the platform faces the
ongoing federal class action litigation related to student
data privacy and security, dcc families deserve confidence that
student information is being protected and handled
responsibly, even without moving forward on this resolution
today, I hope this moment creates an opportunity for dcps
to reassess whether continued reliance on this platform or any
other aligns with healthy child development, student well-being,
data protection, and the best interests of children and
families. And I look forward to hearing
more discussion at the hearing that you will be hosting.
chairman. Thank you.
thank you, councilmember. Councilmember allen, thank you.
with an eighth grader about to have her promotion celebration
next monday night and headed to high school.
I've gone through the dcps. I'm not my pre-k years anymore,
but I certainly remember with my fourth grader, I already is
something that we heard lots of complaints about.
but as a parent, not just a council member, when we dig in,
we'd see and hear about not just 5 minutes or 8 minutes a day.
we would hear about long periods of time on a lot of these
platforms. And so as a parent, I also share
these concerns. I really appreciate the
resolution that's in front of us and the conversation and
hopefully the action, more importantly, that it prompts.
I'm also not here not just hearing, though, from parents.
I also want to be clear, I've actually heard from a lot of
educators with concerns around I-ready and an overreliance on
it, both what it can do and what it doesn't do.
as an educator, I've heard from teachers who have talked about
how the tool actually hides the questions and the answers that a
student would get wrong from the teacher and educator.
so the frustration that I hear from the educator is, if the
goal is to help me figure out what skill is this kid missing,
this test does not help me with that.
it will provide some kind of vague kind of responses.
back on common core standards, but it doesn't allow a teacher
educator to be specific to that student, to that student's
needs, or the skills they're trying to be working on.
and so that tells me that this tool from the educator side is
also not hitting what it is that it needs.
I, as often with our school year and contracts that feel almost
always timed for late spring, early summer, be it a food
contract or anything else, it puts us in a very difficult
position where if we were to disapprove, a contract, what
would dcps have ready for the fall?
and so I've heard from teachers who are both sharing
frustrations with I-ready, but also saying, how would dcps be
able to actually find a new tool this summer, getting folks
trained up and ready and educated, and then be able to
implement this for the first day back in the year.
at some point, we've got to get so many of our school contracts
off of this schedule that it all is coming in june and july.
I remember just a couple of years ago with the food services
contract that was in july, and the options were just extend the
contract that had problems or kids don't eat, which is not a
position we're going to put ourselves in.
so I think that's that's an overall frustration I will add
to the technology. And counselor henderson talked
about this as well. What I see and hear in addition
to this, and it should prompt the larger conversation, is kids
who in after care, youtube is just turned on and not the ad
free version, but the students are just watching lots and lots
of youtube with lots and lots of ads.
for everybody who's put a political ad out there, pretty
much your dcps students have seen those things, but I don't
know why we can't have dcps move to just ad free youtube
subscriptions to help work with aftercare.
I think there's more guidance needed.
I think that I want to be careful that we do not swing a
pendulum too far back the other way as well, because I do think
technology is incredibly important for our students.
and the equity of that technology and equipping
students with those tools is really important.
so I want us to be thoughtful and careful, but I'm really
grateful for the resolution that prompted conversation and action
that needed to happen, and I appreciate it.
thank you. Thank you, councilmember
councilmember robert white thank you, chairman, I have I'm also a
dcps parent whose kids use I-ready.
and the concerns are, are, are not just the technology, but
whether I-ready is actually helping them grow.
I got stopped at a school event this morning by a parent who,
who said, you know, it is repetitive and then asked me to
look at the data showing that there really is not evidence
that this is helping. There are other ways to do
testing. So I'd be concerned about
overreliance on that as a reason to continue this.
but I do recognize that at this point, it seems dcps can't get
an alternative contract or program in place for next year.
but my understanding is that dcps has committed to re that
this contract is only for next school year, and that dcps is
committed to reevaluating it. Is that.
does anybody else have that same.
yes, yes. Okay.
so so that is something I see as good news.
and we'll we'll have to hold their feet to the fire through
the committee of the whole. Thank you.
chairman. The education or, or the or the
standalone education committee. We gotta try.
are you picking a fight right now?
council member frumin. Thank you very much.
chairman mendelson thank you, council member henderson for
bringing forward this resolution and and pushing forward this
conversation. We have been hearing from a lot
of people also about a number of different issues in questions
about the role of ai in schools, questions about how much time
kids spend on screens in schools, questions about I-ready
and its role in the classroom, but also questions about how do
we stay true to getting to digital equity so that
everybody, to the extent that technology is a benefit to
learning, that everyone gets to enjoy the benefit to to learning
that it can provide. This has been a chapter in a
conversation. My hope and maybe somebody
suggested that maybe the chairman had already agreed, but
I think we need to have a hearing in the fall.
on the subject of technology in schools and hear from lots of
people about what the issues are, what's the science, what
are the what are the best practices in other
jurisdictions? Because the pendulum does seem
to be swinging and there is a fair amount of concern that we
may be putting too much weight on these tools, and it's worth
it for us as a body to step back and hear from a cross-section of
people on this topic and think about policy recommendations
going forward. So while I share, I understand
that the abrupt termination of the termination of this contract
would leave us without tools for the coming year, and that the
contract will be rebid, as I understand it, next year.
in any case, I think letting it go forward, but moving towards a
better approach in this area is the right, right solution.
so I thank you for bringing it forward.
and I thank you for withdrawing it hasn't been withdrawn quite
yet. Councilmember.
nadeau. Thanks.
echoing the concerns of some of the other parents here about
technology and screen time, but also acknowledging that, you
know, technology can be a good tool in the classroom if it's
used properly and there are proper guidelines.
my hope is that through this exercise, dcps has understood
that we want them to be more thoughtful and purposeful in
their rollout of tech, in schools and in the contracts we
sign. We spoke to teachers and
advocates, and they echoed these sentiments.
but when the discussion shifted to whether I-ready should be
canceled immediately, the response from teachers was
largely no. Many educators indicated that if
I-ready is going to be phased out, a replacement plan should
be developed first, so my concern with moving forward is
that we'd be removing a tool that schools are currently
using, without clear guidance on what comes next.
that said, it's crucial that we use the remainder of the current
contract period to evaluate I-ready and review broader
technology to use in classrooms and develop alternative
strategies with meaningful teacher input.
tech in schools should be used as a way to increase equity in
bridge gap gaps in resources, but not without adequate
safeguards and regulations. So I support the chairman
holding a a hearing this fall so dcps can present a plan and
stakeholders, including educators, parents and school
communities can weigh in. We definitely need more voices
to be part of this discussion. Thanks to my.
co movers of the disapproval resolution for getting this
conversation going, and I support council member
henderson's plans to withdraw today.
thank you. Thank you, councilmember nadeau.
so, as has been intimated, the disapproval resolution was
introduced by myself and councilmembers henderson and
nadeau. And it was introduced because we
have heard for months, if not years, a complaint about too
much testing in schools and more recently, more specifically,
complaints about the I-ready testing.
I would say this year we heard demands that our oversight
hearing and budget hearing that the I-ready contract be
canceled. It is interesting.
empower ed represents a lot of teachers or speaks for a lot of
teachers. Had.
had, I believe, initially advocated that the contract be
canceled, but they sent a an email more recently saying that
the opinion is mixed and that. In fact, I'm reading from this
to preferences to cancel the I-ready math delay.
the cancellation of I-ready reading for one year, which is
not an option we have. It's a yes or no on the
contract. I do think that, and this is
echoing what actually others have said, that by having the
disapproval. And then council member
henderson, you putting it on the agenda has actually forced the
executive to take the criticism or complaints more seriously.
and I want to read into the record a piece of the
chancellor's letter that we received last week.
dcps is taking several steps to respond to families feedback on
students screen time. First, before the start of the
2026 2027 school year, central services will provide schools
with clear grade level specific guidance about technology usage
during instructional and non-instructional times,
including time limits for I-ready instruction.
second, starting with the new school year, students will use
new, shorter diagnostic assessments provided by
curriculum associates. Third central services will
closely monitor schools I-ready usage and respond when usage is
approaching the recommended levels.
fourth, before the start of the new school year, central
services will provide teachers with recommended and approved
alternatives to I-ready personalized instruction.
fifth, during the 2020 627 school year, central services
will issue guidance on the expectation of I-ready usage
outside of school time. Six at the beginning of the new
school year, the office of external affairs will hold a
parent university for interested parents to provide information
and solicit feedback about dcps approach to education
technology. There are actually four more.
I won't read all of them, but they are.
in this letter dated june 6th from the chancellor to.
council members, all council members.
so the committee of the whole will have a hearing this fall
on. It won't be specifically or
solely on I-ready contract, but on technology and I-ready
contract will be part of that hearing with pressing dcps on
the need to evaluate and consider an alternative to
I-ready. With a year from now, I thought
I was the last one on line. Councilmember parker I'm sorry,
councilmember louis george was distracting me.
I, I plan to support this measure and I know it's being
withdrawn. I appreciate the sensitivity to
the matter. I just would also acknowledge a
while ago we cut the a net contract.
I actually thought annette was a superior product to I-ready, but
I digress. And so all that to say, as we're
having hearings, I hope we can just think globally about the
impact of various contract decisions on the agency.
and it's worth noting dcps has been making progress, and they
continue to grow. And I just think that shouldn't
be lost. Yes, changes are necessary.
I think we're prudent to lean in here and technology use.
when I read the chancellor's letter, about 30 minutes a day,
I kind of chuckled because I know for a fact, and we probably
all have evidence of students on computers and I-ready in
particular much longer than that.
so I know that's a little bit all over the place, but I just
wanted to register, as you're having that hearing, mr.
chairman, I think it's worth thinking globally about the
agencies assessment strategy and the consequences of decisions
like this. So thank you.
thank you, councilmember henderson.
thank you, mr. Chairman. I just want to say for the
record, there are some people who have suggested that
opposition to I-ready means that we're somehow not in favor of
accountability or checking in. Actually I am we used to have
these things called textbooks, and once you got to the end of
the unit, there was a quiz, and then you could check your
answers. But we don't do textbooks
anymore in the same way. Which, you know, we can have a
conversation about what we need to bring that back.
but nonetheless, I do think overall, we need to be more
thoughtful about how we integrate technology so that it
remains a tool to enhance. Not supplant.
core instruction. I appreciate, mr. Chairman, your
commitment to convening a hearing on this topic in the
fall. If I think through, though, all.
everyone who has said, I'm going to work on this in the fall, the
fall is going to be busy. I hope everybody coming to work
come september, but I hope that when we return to this issue,
we'll be discussing concrete changes.
you know, there is proposed legislation.
it hasn't been introduced, but that's an avenue as well.
so I don't want dcps to think that my withdrawing this today
ends the conversation, nor that we will forget.
I hope that the interim leadership of dcps takes it very
seriously over the summer and hopefully sets up students and
teachers and our contractors that we're working with in our
schools up for success for the beginning of school year 2627.
and so with that, mr. Chairman, I withdraw.
the measure has been withdrawn. That's going to conclude the
business before people jump up. So I was very, very poorly
behaved at the end of the committee.
the whole meeting, I was thanking folks and I forgot to
turn the page. And so I didn't think anybody in
my office. So I'll take this occasion to
thank the committee, the whole staff.
blaine storm, evan cash, john verlin, aaliyah mcneely.
hannah kozak and christian tea, all of whom I'm not quite sure
if they were working for me or working for the budget office
the last couple of weeks, but a lot of they put in a lot of
time, a lot of hours. And so I regret that I
overlooked them at the committee of the whole.
but maybe the legislative meeting is a more important
venue to thank them. There being no further business,
the council will meet in an additional meeting on june 23rd
and the regular meeting on june 30th.
the time is 5:53 p.m. This meeting is adjourned.