[This transcript was generated automatically from audio using AI and hasn't been reviewed by a person -- it can contain mistakes, including plausible-sounding sentences that were never actually said. Treat it as a starting point, not a verbatim record.]

[0:04] Commissioner Rae.
[0:08] Here. Commissioner Alexander. Here.
[0:13] Commissioner Weissman-Word.
[0:17] Commissioner Gupta. Here. Commissioner. This year. Here. Vice President Healy. Here. President Kim. Here. As if USC will provide child care, excuse me, for regular board meetings and monitoring meetings on the first floor in the enrollment center at 555 Franklin Street from 6.30 to 9 p.m.
[0:38] or the closes and meeting which ever comes first.
[0:41] Unfortunately, we do not have child care.
[0:43] Do we have child care thing?
[0:44] Unfortunately, we do not have child care tonight.
[0:46] SFUSD, we're working with our providers
[0:48] to ensure that child care is available in our coming meetings.
[0:50] Space is limited and we'll provide in our first come
[0:52] first serve basis for children ages four to 10.
[0:55] For questions, please contact the board office
[0:57] at 415-2416-427 or board office at SFUSD.edu.
[1:04] At this time, before the board goes into closed session,
[1:07] I call for any speakers to the closed session items listed in the agenda.
[1:09] They will put total five minutes for speakers.
[1:11] Are there any speakers for the comment?
[1:13] There are no speakers for public comment.
[1:15] Seeing none, I now resist this meeting at 507 PM.
[19:37] Infrancisco government television.
[1:00:01] SFGOV TV.
[1:00:05] San Francisco government television.
[1:17:35] Manfred Siscoe, government television.
[1:17:36] in.
[1:33:36] SFGov TV. San Francisco government television.
[1:35:20] Let me hear. Item 1, student AD versus SFUSD, in the matter of student AD versus SFUSD that board by a vote of seven I's, approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $8,500.
[1:35:37] In the matter of student FC versus SFUSD that board by a vote of seven I's, approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $46,273.
[1:35:48] In the matter of BK versus SFUSD, the board by a vote of seven eyes approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $42,964.
[1:36:00] In the matter of student AA versus SFUSD, the board by a vote of seven eyes approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $50,000.
[1:36:09] In the matter of student DS, first SFUSD, the board by a vote of six eyes, one nay fissure,
[1:36:19] approved the district to initiate proceedings.
[1:36:23] In the matter of student EH, first SFUSD, the board by a vote of seven eyes,
[1:36:29] approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $250,000.
[1:36:33] In
[1:36:39] the matter of student JG versus SFUSD, OAH case number 2026-01-0662, the board by
[1:36:50] vote of seven eyes approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount
[1:36:54] of $34,575.
[1:36:56] dollars. In the matter of student OGR versus SFUSD OAH case number 2026-0409-49, the board
[1:37:09] by a vote of seven eyes approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount
[1:37:14] of $3,000.
[1:37:16] In the matter of student DD versus SFUSD OAH case number 2026-020211, the board
[1:37:26] Board by a vote of seven I's approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $31,125.
[1:37:37] In the matter of student EVM, first SFUSD, OAHK's number 202512767, the Board by a vote of seven I's approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $43,500.
[1:37:54] In the matter of student LP, first SFUSD OAH case number 2025-020577, the board by
[1:38:03] a vote of seven eyes approved the settlement agreement between the parties in
[1:38:07] the amount of $22,306. In the matter of student JK, first SFUSD OAH case
[1:38:15] case number 2026-040942, the Board by a vote of seven I's approved the settlement agreement
[1:38:25] between the parties in the amount of $6,460.
[1:38:30] In the matter of student KD versus SFUSD, OAH case number 2026-041174, the Board by a
[1:38:40] vote of seven I's approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $7500.
[1:38:47] In the matter of student AL versus SFUSD, OCR complaint number 09251021, the board by a
[1:38:57] vote of 7Is, approves the settlement agreement between the parties and the amount of $5100.
[1:40:00] 840, the board by a vote of 7i's, approve the settlement agreement between the parties
[1:40:06] in the amount of $78,620. In the matter of student HB versus SFUSD, OAH case number 2026-070851,
[1:40:19] the board by a vote of 7i's, approve the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount
[1:40:23] of $64,000.
[1:40:26] In the matter of student SC versus SFUSD OAH case number 2026-071019, the board by a vote
[1:40:36] of seven eyes approved the settlement agreement between the parties in the amount of $87,500.
[1:40:42] dollars.
[1:40:55] In student matter 2026-2027-GCA1, the board by a vote of seven eyes denied the
[1:41:04] grade challenge.
[1:41:07] In TK student matter number 2026-20271, the board by a vote
[1:41:20] of seven
[1:41:30] By a vote of six eyes, one nay, Ray, approve the settlement and release agreement in the amount of approximately three weeks of pay.
[1:41:40] An employee matter 20262027
[1:41:47] number two, the board by a vote of seven eyes, approve the settlement and release agreement in the amount of approximately one week of pay.
[1:41:58] An employee matter 2026-2027 number three, the board by a vote of six I's 1-A-Ray,
[1:42:07] approve the settlement and release agreement in the amount of approximately $18,000.
[1:42:24] Moving on to our matters in front of us, the SFUC Board of Education is committed to effective
[1:42:30] school board governance that centers student learning.
[1:42:33] And based on community input, the board has adopted our vision, values, goals, and guardrails.
[1:42:38] In order to increase the portion of board meeting time we spend on student outcomes, every
[1:42:43] other regular meeting is a monitoring workshop like today.
[1:42:46] Our approach to governance also calls on the board to empower the superintendent to take
[1:42:51] full ownership of the strategies used to reach those goals within the guardrail set by the board.
[1:42:55] As we implement our governance framework, the board will continue to adopt new systems,
[1:42:59] routines, and policies aimed at improving student outcomes.
[1:43:02] We encourage the public to follow this work on our website at sfusd.edu slash governance
[1:43:07] as we commit to finding new and improved ways to more meaningful engage with staff students
[1:43:12] and families.
[1:43:15] Moving to item D, hello and welcome to members of the public to our regular meeting of the
[1:43:20] Board of Education of San Francisco Unified School District.
[1:43:23] Our public comment period lasts for one hour, today until 7.50pm.
[1:43:28] We look forward to hearing from members of the public before we conduct board business.
[1:43:36] Our goal is to conduct our work in an efficient effective and accessible manner during reasonable
[1:43:41] hours.
[1:43:42] We aim to respect staff, family, and community time by ensuring we move to board business
[1:43:47] as soon as possible.
[1:43:49] Each participant may speak for up to one minute, staff will think the participant at the one
[1:43:53] minute mark.
[1:43:53] At one minute and five seconds, I have asked interim clerk Chang to please turn off the
[1:43:57] and transition to the next speaker.
[1:44:00] I ask members of the public to please respect
[1:44:02] that one minute limit so we can hear from as many speakers
[1:44:05] as possible.
[1:44:07] I encourage speakers who are speaking on the same topic
[1:44:09] to collaborate and combine their comments
[1:44:10] so the board can hear all viewpoints during our limited time.
[1:44:14] Please also note that the board accepts written public comments
[1:44:17] via email to boardoffice.sfusd.edu.
[1:44:24] We will hear first from students in person
[1:44:26] the members of the general public in person
[1:44:27] beginning with agenda items
[1:44:29] than moving to Nanagenda items, regardless of whether in-person public comment is complete
[1:44:33] to be able to save 15 minutes for remote public comment, taking commenters in the same order
[1:44:39] as in-person. To members of the public on your right, you'll see signs that outline expectations
[1:44:44] for public comment and meeting conduct. We ask that all members of the public model the
[1:44:47] kind of tone, language, and behaviors that we hope to see from our young people respecting
[1:44:52] different viewpoints and allowing for all members of the public to participate. As a reminder,
[1:44:57] border, board rules, and California law did not.
[1:45:00] Allow us to comment or respond to comment. Do not allow us to respond to comments or attempt to answer questions during our public comment time. If appropriate, the superintendent will ask that staff follow up the speakers. Ms. Shane.
[1:45:16] We have two student speakers.
[1:46:04] I
[1:46:08] do not think everybody in the district is taking this lead seriously.
[1:46:13] We have lead in our school and they're peeling it right when everybody is in school.
[1:46:21] This is not safe for anybody.
[1:46:24] Some kids have already tested positive for a lead,
[1:46:28] and I've already had lung exposure.
[1:46:31] So as my sister and I do not want to have a second one.
[1:46:38] I think we should just move it to the summer
[1:46:42] and stop for a right now or move us to a different location.
[1:46:47] This is not safe.
[1:46:49] This is not fun for any of us. Me and my friends have sustained side for recess and PE
[1:46:57] and not be able to do fun activities like soccer or PE, like, PE events, like, for instance,
[1:47:10] let's say like,
[1:47:15] okay, for instance, like Frisbee Throw or something.
[1:47:32] I'm eight years old and I'm a third grader at CIS.
[1:47:35] I'm also a brownie.
[1:47:37] In Girl Scouts, we learned to take care of our community
[1:47:40] and legal place cleaner than we found it.
[1:47:43] There's been construction on my school
[1:47:48] and what it was found in places where kids play.
[1:47:51] I think if construction makes a mess,
[1:47:54] the people doing the work should clean it up really well.
[1:47:57] My friends and I miss being able to use all of our playgrounds.
[1:48:02] We like doing cartwheels and handstands and playing together.
[1:48:05] Please clean our play yards and do the like instruction in the summer when kids aren't at school.
[1:48:11] Thank you for listening to kids only and helping keep our school safe.
[1:48:24] Thank you very much.
[1:48:26] We have one agenda item, Rudy Gonzalez,
[1:48:45] self service.
[1:48:46] Good evening, commissioners and superintendents and the members of the public.
[1:48:51] I'm Rudy Gonzalez and I'm here in my elected capacity with the San Francisco Building and Construction Trades Council.
[1:48:56] I'm here to register our strong support for continuing the project labor agreement covered by San Francisco Unified School District's bond program.
[1:49:04] This month marks the 20th year that we have been partners in construction and to our young ones the message is received and our contractors owe the cleanest work environment.
[1:49:14] regardless of their affiliation under this PLA.
[1:49:18] We have clear rules of the road.
[1:49:20] We have access to a skilled workforce, labor stability, and a structure for resolving problems as they may arise on complex modernization work.
[1:49:27] These are important protections for both parties when we're talking about taxpayer dollars and construction happening in a school environment.
[1:49:35] I want to recognize that we have built into this new agreement together, jobs for today, but also for the future.
[1:49:41] focusing on local hire, apprenticeship, and workforce development that can be accessible to students at the school district.
[1:49:49] This is what public construction should do.
[1:49:50] It should invest in our communities.
[1:49:52] And I wanted to especially thank your bond program director, Lesignia Ibarra, and your head of operations, Katie Poil, without their hard work and dedication.
[1:50:00] Much of what we see in the built environment would not be possible, so a special thanks to them on your team. Appreciate it. Thank you.
[1:50:09] President Kim, that concludes the agenda items. Move on to a non-agent item. Okay, the first group for non-agent items. Nancy Chang, Thomas Sajje, Ranjit Chaco, Nick Hay, Laurie.
[1:50:30] Sorry, Laurie, I can't pronounce your last name.
[1:50:35] Renee.
[1:50:42] Can you please sit on your mic?
[1:50:44] Thank you.
[1:50:45] Okay, great.
[1:50:46] Much better.
[1:50:47] Hi.
[1:50:48] Good evening.
[1:50:49] I'm Nancy Chang, and I'm the parent of a first grader at Chinese Immersion School.
[1:50:54] Over the last two months, parents have been troubled by some gaps in how lead disturbing work is being managed.
[1:51:00] gaps between prioritizing safety versus liability, gaps between promise transparency versus
[1:51:07] without delayed downplay and test results, even gaps in the protective sheeting because
[1:51:12] after all, kids are crazy, workers make mistakes, and high winds have torn gaping holes.
[1:51:17] So we've seen progress for sure, but we are deeply concerned because the highest risk activity
[1:51:22] window replacement will begin October 9th, and we simply cannot afford any more gaps.
[1:51:28] We therefore stand here united tonight in asking for two common sense safety precautions.
[1:51:33] One, reschedule invasive window replacement work till the summer.
[1:51:38] Two, wet clean the play yards where elevated lead levels have already been found.
[1:51:43] Please help us close these gaps and protect our children's health and safety.
[1:51:47] Thank you so much.
[1:51:54] Hi there, I'm Thomas Saigan.
[1:51:56] I'm a father of a third grader at CIS.
[1:51:58] I'm also a chemical engineer, a biomedical engineer, and I have experience in industrial
[1:52:04] safety from the last 15, 20 years of work.
[1:52:07] I'm here today because I'm still concerned about the lead and the safety of the students
[1:52:11] and staff at CIS.
[1:52:13] We now have data that shows the elevated lead levels in the boys and girls' bathroom
[1:52:19] above the regulatory threshold.
[1:52:22] Based on this, it's reasonable to assume that other areas inside the school may have
[1:52:27] also been contaminated. So I have three common sense requests. One, let's do more testing
[1:52:34] inside, like in the hallways in and around the cafeteria and the TK classrooms. We shouldn't
[1:52:40] be afraid of testing with the results. Two, let's do wet cleaning, aka mopping inside
[1:52:45] and outside. Yes, I'm here today asking for mopping. This is quick, cheap insurance against
[1:52:52] It's permanent lead damage for 400 students.
[1:52:55] And it's the contractor's responsibility.
[1:52:57] Three, delay the lead windows replacement.
[1:53:00] The contractor's already does sloppy job.
[1:53:02] There's lead contamination in the yards.
[1:53:04] We can't let them again and again during the school year and just rub the classrooms.
[1:53:08] Thank you, thank you for all your previous work, too.
[1:53:17] Hi, I'm Renjith Chaco, hell he is dead, and I'm here to ask the district to move the planned window removal to the summer break when children are not in the building.
[1:53:26] The district originally told families that old windows would come out over the summer
[1:53:30] when kids aren't around because of the risks associated with lead dust, but now it plans
[1:53:34] to remove them during the school year despite those risks.
[1:53:37] In addition to the known risks of lead dust, removing the windows can potentially expose
[1:53:41] new hazards like asbestos.
[1:53:43] A long weekend or a one week break leaves little time to remediate and clean up before children
[1:53:48] return.
[1:53:49] Even if the team executed perfectly, removing the windows during the school year is a risky
[1:53:52] move.
[1:53:52] But what we've seen so far is a team whose execution is far from perfect.
[1:53:56] For the exterior work done so far, the containment has been improved through a trial and error process with parents identifying obvious flaws.
[1:54:03] And as Thomas was mentioning, when elevated lead levels were detected in the bathrooms, the district did not notify families immediately.
[1:54:11] I could go on, but clearly given the strap record and the inherent risks in this work, the only prudent course of action is to move the window removal to the summer.
[1:54:21] Thank you.
[1:54:21] Good
[1:54:29] evening. My name is Nick K and I'm a parent at CIS. The district has repeatedly reassured
[1:54:35] families by claiming lead test results are well below regulations. But that judgment
[1:54:40] relies entirely on an obsolete 400 microgram per square foot standard created 25 years ago
[1:54:46] for dirty and accessible window troughs not school playgrounds. UCSF experts agree that 400
[1:54:51] is not a health protective level. The CDC and American Academy of Pediatrics confirmed that
[1:54:56] that no safe lead level exists for children.
[1:54:58] the car.
[1:55:00] The current EPA health clearance standard for indoor floors is only five micrograms per square foot, 80 times smaller than the level 400. Using Windertruff standard to declare a kindergarten yard safe without washing it makes no sense. We urge you to practice primary prevention, reschedule classroom window removal to summer 2027, and thoroughly wet clean the play yards. Thank you.
[1:55:28] Good evening. I'm Laurie, a parent at Chinese Immersion School at Diabola. Even though our PTA is holding a meeting right now,
[1:55:37] Tonight, we came here to formally submit a petition signed by over 100 members of our
[1:55:43] CIS community within just the past couple of days, along with a packet of supporting materials.
[1:55:50] CIS parents support campus repairs, but we refuse avoidable lead exposure.
[1:55:58] Scheduling hazardous window removal over short holiday breaks leaves zero margin for error
[1:56:04] within our children's classrooms.
[1:56:07] Tonight we urge superintendent Sue and the board to direct staff to implement our
[1:56:14] communities to straightforward request.
[1:56:17] First and foremost, re-schedule classroom window demolition to summer 2027,
[1:56:24] and second, professionally wet clean our play arts.
[1:56:27] Please protect our kids before October 9th.
[1:56:31] Thank you.
[1:56:31] Thank
[1:56:36] you very much.
[1:56:38] Reverend A. Miss Brown,
[1:56:42] Robert Schneider,
[1:56:46] Ashley A. Herne,
[1:56:51] Geirsten,
[1:56:55] Sarah,
[1:56:58] Philippe Marchon.
[1:57:24] Good evening, Mr. Chairman.
[1:57:26] Madam is superintendent.
[1:57:31] Members of our Board of Education,
[1:57:37] I'm very troubled tonight.
[1:57:39] I'm
[1:57:42] right and righteously
[1:57:50] disturbed that
[1:57:56] on the 4th of September, there was an incident
[1:58:02] at Lincoln High School,
[1:58:07] an incident that should shake all of you.
[1:58:13] Why?
[1:58:15] We have a problem.
[1:58:20] There's a mirror again and again of this incident,
[1:58:27] of black students
[1:58:32] being victims,
[1:58:37] racialized
[1:58:38] biggest, bigoted language which have incited unfortunate reactions on the part of black
[1:58:53] students. Let me make it as Richard Mealhouse, Nixon used to say, yes, he is. Public here,
[1:59:02] I do not as a representative of the Black Faith tradition are as President and
[1:59:16] Maritus of the National Association for the Advancement of Color People, condone,
[1:59:23] support,
[1:59:26] racialize language coming from in and mouth.
[1:59:33] However, I can share with you that I'm sad to say, in the 49 years that I've been in
[1:59:42] this seat of St. Francis, there have been far too many instances in which there was
[1:59:52] was expressed a double standard when it came to processing.
[2:00:00] Disciplining and bringing to restorative justice persons who have been found guilty, have been engaged in such activities as there were over at Lincoln High School. What's the point, Brother Brown?
[2:00:26] I will just suggest that the board has a moral ethical obligation. Thank you, Mr. Brown.
[2:00:33] the superintendent and calling out through public
[2:00:42] pronouncements.
[2:00:43] Thank you, everyone Brown.
[2:00:44] If you can.
[2:00:44] I have finished.
[2:00:45] This is serious.
[2:00:48] Calling out the fact that on us television station,
[2:00:54] there was broadcasted a parent who called black children
[2:01:04] animals and that has taken on the life of his own and it is not fair it is not
[2:01:13] just for if in 1869 Frederick Douglass stood up and spoke up against the
[2:01:24] Chinese exclusion act though he had been asleep I feel that all serious
[2:01:35] is, honest, just Asian leaders from the Chinese community,
[2:01:44] should stand up and speak out against the incidents in which
[2:01:50] black children are victimized by evil language.
[2:01:55] Wrap up your comments, please.
[2:01:56] And bad activities.
[2:01:57] Thank you.
[2:01:58] Thank you for hearing me.
[2:01:59] Thank you.
[2:02:00] But I want you to get behind the superintendent
[2:02:02] it and speak up yourself as members of this board. For you and more to your children,
[2:02:10] your grandchildren, are your nieces and nephews to be victims of the kind of vulgarity that
[2:02:16] I have facts of and not hearsay. Thank you for the time given, but it's time for us to
[2:02:23] act. For this problem is like dishes in a sink. The more you leave those dishes there and
[2:02:30] don't wash them, they will attract and collect pests.
[2:02:36] And in this district, bigotry and racism
[2:02:39] against anyone around is like those unwashed dishes.
[2:02:45] So let's get to washing.
[2:02:59] Good evening.
[2:03:00] We are Tech and Jack.
[2:03:02] We're back.
[2:03:03] We are San Francisco families, educators,
[2:03:06] and community members advocating for intentional technology
[2:03:12] and age-appropriate parameters in San Francisco schools.
[2:03:17] Today, we have around 275 members around San Francisco,
[2:03:23] where in 56 public schools and we have a petition
[2:03:27] with well over 1,000 signatures,
[2:03:31] and you'll each receive your own copy very soon.
[2:03:34] Some of what our petition supports, one,
[2:03:37] A moratorium on student-generative A.I. use to grade level limits on one-to-one devices
[2:03:45] and no recreational screen exposure at school, three social media-free schools.
[2:03:52] Please find our petition at tinyurl.com-bakslash-tic-petition.
[2:03:59] We look forward to partnering.
[2:04:01] Thank you.
[2:04:10] Hi, I'm a parent and educator.
[2:04:12] And it's time to stop committing to edtech and the false narrative that AI and screen-based
[2:04:18] learning is inevitable, and the same as introducing calculators into school.
[2:04:23] We need to ask the following questions.
[2:04:26] What is the science that shows screen-based learning improves educational outcomes?
[2:04:30] How are edtech products evaluated, vetted, and tested, independent of corporate interests
[2:04:36] before students have access to them?
[2:04:38] What do tech companies do with our children's sensitive data, including their voice recordings,
[2:04:45] and why is there no parental consent to this data collection?
[2:04:49] Why are organizations like UNESCO and the ACLU warning that ed tech is increasing the equity
[2:04:55] gap and what will be done to accommodate families who aren't comfortable with their
[2:05:00] Children using these apps. Why are we letting our students shortcut their understanding and learning at the expense of billionaire tech interests? I ask you to please pass a tech resolution as soon as possible. Thank you.
[2:05:19] Good evening. My name is Robert Schneider. This is not the first time that I've spoken to the board. I'm a physical education teacher in the district and I'm growing increasingly concerned about my students' ability to engage academically and
[2:05:34] and creatively, previously I've spoken to the board about the need for technology to not
[2:05:41] replace the experiences that students have, especially that of elementary school.
[2:05:48] I would push it further tonight, and I would say that we need to create a protected space,
[2:05:56] a guard-readed space in elementary school because to me, there's actually no reason that
[2:06:02] that we should have kids in elementary school on devices, certainly not the amount that we have them on.
[2:06:09] They need to have opportunities to write by hand, to grow, to learn together, to think creatively, to really explore and just be a kid.
[2:06:21] Thank you.
[2:06:30] I am Philip.
[2:06:32] Actually, I did, I wasn't interested in to the superintendent's parallel with calculators.
[2:06:38] Because I remember all they were actually quite regulated and age-gated when I was in school and ETI-83 was nothing near as good as a distraction and cheating device as what kids have access to now.
[2:06:55] But I want to say something about Emira and stop. I've seen communications parents saying that it all performs on its own tutoring.
[2:07:05] This is not true.
[2:07:07] Don't copy the manufacturer's claims.
[2:07:09] Like read the studies.
[2:07:10] The studies don't substantially that partial claim.
[2:07:13] They don't show anything as good as Amira says their product does.
[2:07:18] And it undermines informed consent.
[2:07:20] It also undermines your own partners
[2:07:22] or providing actual idols of tutoring.
[2:07:24] A coalition with usage and performance can just me that the students
[2:07:29] are doing well can do more practice
[2:07:31] with Amira or with any other tool.
[2:07:33] Hi,
[2:07:39] my name is Ashley, I'm a parent of my first grade assistant back there.
[2:07:44] My predecessor Philippe spoke eloquently about some of the concerns related to Amira,
[2:07:49] so I won't belabor the points around privacy and student voices being recorded and
[2:07:55] students forming parasocial relationships with the chatbot.
[2:07:59] But I just want to say that for me, the most distressing aspect about Amira has been the lack
[2:08:04] of transparency around it, and around its introduction and presence in the classroom
[2:08:09] of our youngest learners.
[2:08:10] I have lost track of how many parents I've talked to who told me I didn't know anything
[2:08:15] about this, and my kid was using it all last year, and I found out about it at the end of
[2:08:20] the year when they asked me where their voice was going.
[2:08:23] And I know that this board and this district has some really big decisions to make around
[2:08:27] how tech is going to show up in our classrooms, and I just ask that you keep communication
[2:08:32] Citation with parents and transparency as a central aspect of whatever policy you land on.
[2:08:37] Because parents deserve to know what technology their kids are using and we deserve to opt out.
[2:08:43] Thank you.
[2:08:46] Thank you very much.
[2:08:49] Virginia Marshall, Alex Lugos, Lawrence Lee.
[2:09:00] Good evening, President Campbell or Commissioner of Superintendent Seal, student delegates, ladies and gentlemen.
[2:09:06] I join President Merrill's Reverend Dr. Amesie Brown and urging you to keep all students safe.
[2:09:15] We want them to have a strong academic education.
[2:09:18] We want them to have an excellent academic education, but we also want to keep our students
[2:09:23] safe.
[2:09:24] It seems that the last couple of weeks it looks to us in the NAACP that the district needs
[2:09:30] to do more parent involvement, more parent workshops, because whether it's a kidney garden
[2:09:36] child or 12 great child in the home. Whatever he or she hears at home they're
[2:09:40] going to bring it to school and some time it's very very negative. All of my
[2:09:45] students need to have a safe environment free of racism, free of academic harm.
[2:09:51] And some of my students have been harmed in the past couple of weeks, particularly
[2:09:56] after the American students. So we urge you we
[2:10:00] I encourage you to find a way to keep all students safe away from racial harm. Thank you so much.
[2:10:15] Hello. My name is Alex Lugash. I'm a grade school parent in District 3. Last year, the new school, which is a charter school in District 3, enrolled to kindergarteners mid year. But because the kindergarten programs at new school were full, the new school chose instead to matriculate the students into their first grade classrooms.
[2:10:35] Neither a child met the school.
[2:10:36] the September 1 cut-off date set forth by the state of California for first-day
[2:10:40] grade enrollment.
[2:10:41] And this amounts to defrauding the state and the city taxpayers who fund this school.
[2:10:46] And I would like to know how the board is coordinating with the city and the State Department of Education
[2:10:51] to ensure that charter schools are following the law.
[2:10:53] They are not abusing their charters and ask that the board investigate this as a matter of accountability around public funding.
[2:10:59] Thank you.
[2:11:08] Good evening, I'm Lawrence Lee.
[2:11:11] I'm a licensed general contractor.
[2:11:12] here and a Seabuck Citizens Bond Oversight Committee Vice Chair, speaking for myself tonight.
[2:11:19] On October 10th, three members of the Seabuck will have their terms ending, and then we will be outside of state law.
[2:11:28] We need seven members by then.
[2:11:31] The next meeting will be in November.
[2:11:33] Our volunteers have spent years reviewing audits, visiting schools, and following construction spending.
[2:11:39] Last week at our bond oversight meeting, I flagged a $7.8 million item which was a duplicate entry.
[2:11:48] Staff acknowledged it and responded constructively.
[2:11:51] That's useful oversight.
[2:11:54] Tonight's labor agreement, item G1, and the building automation work in the consent items,
[2:12:00] show how much lies ahead, as well as these other comments from other people tonight.
[2:12:04] These decisions affect our schools for decades.
[2:12:07] Please act before these terms expire.
[2:12:11] This is about $1.5 billion, $1.5 billion of construction spending.
[2:12:17] Thank you.
[2:12:22] Thank you, members of the public.
[2:12:24] President Kim, that concludes our in-person public comment period.
[2:12:28] May I move to virtual?
[2:12:32] Okay, we will begin our virtual public comment.
[2:12:36] Students, go first, raise your hands.
[2:12:39] If you're a student, if you're not a student, please wait.
[2:12:42] We will move on after the students to agenda items and then non agenda items.
[2:12:56] We will begin with autumn.
[2:13:03] Hi, this is Embrillie.
[2:13:07] Hi, Embrillie.
[2:13:08] Hi, Embrillie.
[2:13:12] Hi, my name is Embrillie Getty-Bite and I was six today at James Lake Middle School.
[2:13:16] I just wanted to give a shout out to my school and all of those awesome teachers.
[2:13:20] I was definitely nervous about starting middle school because it felt like a really big change.
[2:13:25] But honestly, it has been so much better than I expected.
[2:13:28] My teachers have made me feel really welcome and supported and I know that they really care about all of us.
[2:13:34] I've made new friends, I like switching classes and learning different things throughout the day.
[2:13:38] I'm also really happy to get to keep learning Spanish and our immersion program.
[2:13:42] I'm really grateful to get to go to James Lake. I am excited for the rest to escape.
[2:13:46] Thank you so much.
[2:13:47] Thank you, Emily.
[2:13:52] Kristen Coleman.
[2:14:00] Hi, my name is Cody and I'm a third grader at Lafayette Elementary School.
[2:14:03] But
[2:14:06] I am here to talk about how last year my teacher always did a bunch of like reading
[2:14:15] a mirror program that I just really didn't like and it was kind of annoying because when
[2:14:23] she doesn't hear us we have to just say it so many times and that is just not very fun.
[2:14:30] So I would just really rather learn it through a teacher because I would rather not be just
[2:14:39] always looking at screens for reading when we could do the actual book.
[2:14:46] And my sister also wants to say something about this.
[2:14:49] Hi, I'm Hanna and I'm six years old and I got a lot for it, and I'm just eight and
[2:15:00] And last year, we had to do this thing, like, go to mirror, and we have to, like, read books on it. But it, like, couldn't hear me, so I had to sit in the closet the whole time, like, on my classroom just, like, like, yelling at it, because it was too loud in the classroom. It was almost like it needed hearing.
[2:15:25] Thank you. Thanks. Thank you, Chloe and Hannah.
[2:15:36] Okay.
[2:15:37] Okay, we can move on to agenda items.
[2:15:42] You may raise your hand if you want to speak on an agenda item.
[2:15:54] Elliot Kent, your turn.
[2:16:01] Good evening commissioners.
[2:16:03] My name is Elliot and I'm speaking on behalf of SF Parent Coalition.
[2:16:07] We appreciate that SFUSD has adopted a new K-8 math curriculum and is encouraging to see
[2:16:13] some improvement in math outcomes, including an increase in eighth grade proficiency.
[2:16:17] At the same time, the district remains off track on its math goal, and the persistently
[2:16:22] low outcomes for African-American students require particular attention and a clear plan
[2:16:28] for improvement.
[2:16:30] We also continue have a major information gap around elementary math.
[2:16:34] The district rolled out a new curriculum across K through five last year, but families still
[2:16:38] do not have a clear picture of how that implementation went.
[2:16:41] As we move into your two families, need to know what work, what didn't, and what SFUSD is changing a result.
[2:16:48] We urge the board to keep pressing for that transparency and accountability.
[2:16:52] Thank you.
[2:16:54] Thank you.
[2:17:00] Tina, producer?
[2:17:12] Hi, good evening.
[2:17:13] My name is Tina Pradesh-Sus, and I am the current membership chair of the Community Advisory Committee on Special Education.
[2:17:20] It is my pleasure and privilege to officially welcome and congratulate our newest member, Lisa
[2:17:28] Borghez, whose appointment is expected to be formally approved by the board tonight.
[2:17:33] I have already learned so much from Lisa, and she has made many contributions to our community.
[2:17:39] In fact, she will be presenting at the CAC General Meeting this Thursday evening, from 6
[2:17:45] six to eight p.m. on the topic of restorative justice.
[2:17:48] Please join us then and get to know Lisa a bit more.
[2:17:52] Thank you.
[2:17:54] Thank you.
[2:17:58] Laura Kennedy.
[2:18:04] Okay.
[2:18:05] Now I can help.
[2:18:06] What happened to Frater?
[2:18:08] Hi, can you hear me?
[2:18:09] Yes.
[2:18:10] We can hear you.
[2:18:11] Great.
[2:18:11] Hi, my name is Laura Kennedy.
[2:18:13] I'm a parent to a student at Geekwell Alternative Elementary
[2:18:16] where I also serve on the school site council.
[2:18:19] As a member of the school site council, we, like all of you, look at test data while
[2:18:24] I'm encouraged to see the improvements in our new roll-out of the math curriculum and
[2:18:29] I'm grateful for the new math curriculum.
[2:18:32] One thing I would love to introduce and suggest is to be able to look at cohorts of students
[2:18:36] over time because what we see is a bunch of eighth graders that have moved forward and I think
[2:18:43] it would be really insightful for us to understand what is happening beyond eighth grade through
[2:18:47] their high school years, what is happening with third grade literacy beyond that for each
[2:18:51] cohort of students so that we can connect the dots across three academic goals for the
[2:18:56] district. Thank you so much.
[2:18:59] Thank you.
[2:19:04] Kristen Coleman?
[2:19:17] Hi, sorry about that. Thank you. So I'm with a group tech and check and I have the third
[2:19:23] and first grader who spoke earlier. I'm also an educator with over 20 years of teaching
[2:19:29] experience that I'm currently teaching at SFD School, which is an independent K-8 school.
[2:19:34] And I've always been incredibly proud of the public school education my children have been
[2:19:38] getting, but I'm increasingly concerned about how much of their school day is moving on to screens
[2:19:42] in early and elementary. And this is beyond just a mirror. This is just for instruction and
[2:19:47] gamified educational apps and brain breaks and classroom rewards. And starting in fourth grade,
[2:19:54] the students get take home Chromebooks for homework. And when I pick my own kids up at school,
[2:19:58] Oh, I see a group of younger...
[2:20:00] Students crowding around one of the older ones watching them play video games on their school devices. And where I work, students don't get individual take home devices until seventh grade. As both parents and educators, clearly see the negative impacts the devices have on the student's attention span and on critical thinking. And just when I'm at my own kid's school and I feel like classroom should be full of interaction.
[2:20:25] Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you for listening. Thank you.
[2:20:35] Vanessa Moreiro.
[2:20:41] Good evening everybody. My name is Dr. Vanessa Moreiro. I'm the president
[2:20:44] of Parents of Public Schools of San Francisco. We've been a public school champion for the last
[2:20:51] 30 years with a launch here in San Francisco for 20 years. There's two things that I want to talk
[2:20:57] about one is an agenda item. It is a focus on the monitoring questions. We went ahead
[2:21:05] and evaluated the board's monitoring questions on August 25th. And we found that there was
[2:21:12] some improvements that were needed. We sent the board our full evaluation and the public
[2:21:18] can see that on our website. One thing I'd like the board to consider today as it goes through
[2:21:23] it's work is how do we make this purposeful for the community?
[2:21:29] Because what I'm hearing from parents is that this is really not that purposeful.
[2:21:35] And we know that that is not the case.
[2:21:37] So one way you guys can do that is to make sure you're following your own rubric and that
[2:21:43] you are assessing yourself and self-assessing.
[2:21:47] Thank you for your time.
[2:21:48] Thank you.
[2:21:52] Ms. Dalu.
[2:22:02] There we go.
[2:22:03] Can you hear me?
[2:22:03] Yes, we can hear you.
[2:22:05] Thank you.
[2:22:06] I'm a 27 year veteran in SFUSD.
[2:22:08] I do not want AI screening my students for reading.
[2:22:11] That's my job that I am trained in.
[2:22:14] Amira has been particularly perplexing
[2:22:16] as it was first introduced as an intervention
[2:22:18] for our lowest performing students
[2:22:20] who at the time were AAPI and African American students.
[2:22:24] And then suddenly that sell away and the district became,
[2:22:28] it became a tutor, a reading screener.
[2:22:30] and now they called her a she during my training,
[2:22:34] which was really insulting.
[2:22:36] I'm teaching a K-1 split
[2:22:37] because of poorly-managed enrollment practices,
[2:22:40] district-wide, and pre-K is under enrolled district-wide.
[2:22:44] 13 students total at my site,
[2:22:46] yet it is fully staffed with two teachers and two aides.
[2:22:49] I'm really concerned about fiscal irresponsibility.
[2:22:52] Only six months after we went on strike
[2:22:55] when we were told we did not have enough money
[2:22:57] to pay our workers.
[2:22:58] I'm hearing massive amounts of mispending that went out tonight for settlement, I'm concerned that you're laying off real workers and replacing them with computers, and that you're not fully staffing schools with students, and you're just not using your money appropriately, and that really impacts everybody.
[2:23:18] So, I really encourage you guys to look at what's needed, where, and that's usually humans
[2:23:24] teaching children and books in their hands. Thank you.
[2:23:30] Thank you.
[2:23:32] Gretchen, Talon,
[2:23:49] Gretchen, Talon,
[2:23:53] we can come back to you.
[2:23:55] Oh no, I can, there you are.
[2:23:57] Hello, sorry, thank you so much.
[2:23:59] Hi, I'm a parent of a third grader at Francis Scott Key.
[2:24:03] And I urge, I'm also a member of the Tech InCheck.
[2:24:06] I urge San Francisco Unified School District to put our students first and
[2:24:11] actually listen to them as you heard them speak tonight. Science shows
[2:24:15] definitively one-to-one tech harms learning and brain development. Let's join
[2:24:21] Seattle Public Schools as well as a number of other public schools throughout the
[2:24:25] country rather than using our children to be beta testers for AI. Let's put the
[2:24:32] the students first, not the companies,
[2:24:34] follow the science, not the marketing campaigns,
[2:24:38] adopt age appropriate tech in San Francisco Unified.
[2:24:42] Thank you so much.
[2:24:45] Thank you.
[2:24:46] As a reminder, let's, we're talking on agenda items
[2:24:49] and then raise your hands for the non-agenda items
[2:24:53] when that section is called.
[2:24:55] So agenda items, please.
[2:24:58] Thank you.
[2:24:59] Yeah.
[2:25:00] Thank you. Brandy Markman.
[2:25:13] Hi, my name is Brandy Markman. I am a parent of a high schooler. One of the problems with a hyperfocus on eighth grade mass scores is that a lot of things do not get discussed. Those are our faulty payroll system. It is absolutely inexcusable that our school district for over four years has a payroll system that it isn't working. Other things don't get heard when there's a hyperfocus on
[2:25:40] math scores for one grade. That is the overuse of tech to teach. It is absolutely embarrassing
[2:25:49] that other schools like L.A., New York, Seattle, Portland, the list goes on and on, are far
[2:25:56] ahead of SFUSD in getting in lowering the amount of minutes students spend on devices when
[2:26:04] And we're not even scheduling a meeting about tech until March.
[2:26:09] This is the problem with the student outcomes focus governance.
[2:26:12] It got rid of monthly program and curriculum meetings that were in place before this
[2:26:18] government governance was, program was instituted four years ago.
[2:26:22] Please bring back the monthly program and curriculum meetings.
[2:26:26] Parents should not have to wait until March to get their concerns heard.
[2:26:30] Thank you.
[2:26:31] Thank you.
[2:26:34] Okay. Moving on to Don agenda items.
[2:26:44] Carly, Danielson.
[2:26:51] Hi there. My name is Carly. I am the parent of a first and third grader at Clarence
[2:26:56] and Elementary. We are new to San Francisco Unified School District. The second we give
[2:27:00] school my third grader was sent home with the first contract she's ever been asked to
[2:27:05] sign. It was a very cute Chromebook contract. If an eight-year-old is expected to sign a
[2:27:10] contract to participate in her own education, it seems obvious and necessary that the district
[2:27:15] should have an intentional, highly transparent policy of contract, if you will, outlining
[2:27:20] at a minimum what specific proven benefits has a given technology intervention in the
[2:27:26] classroom shown and let these be studies not funded by the company whose product they are
[2:27:30] evaluating as is the case with the independent study Amira provided in Louisiana.
[2:27:35] To how are the children being protected from what these devices give them access to and
[2:27:40] three, what is the district requiring of tech vendors to protect students data in privacy?
[2:27:46] Technology distracts teachers, presents equity issues in the classroom, and it limits much
[2:27:51] needed human to human student teacher interaction.
[2:27:55] I am requesting that the district establish clear policy, that restricts screen time and
[2:28:00] the use of AI tools, disabling all generative AI tools,
[2:28:04] chatbots, and search engines on all student devices.
[2:28:07] Thank you.
[2:28:07] Thank you, Carly.
[2:28:20] That concludes our virtual.
[2:28:25] Thank you very much.
[2:28:28] I appreciate the members of the public,
[2:28:29] especially our students who joined us tonight
[2:28:31] to show you experience and perspectives.
[2:28:33] As a reminder, board rules in California law do not allow us
[2:28:37] to respond to comments or answer questions
[2:28:39] during public comment time.
[2:28:41] But we appreciate you being here tonight to share with us in person and virtually.
[2:28:47] Move to item E, consent calendar.
[2:29:09] The next item on the agenda is the consent calendar.
[2:29:12] President Kim has a standing recusal from the consent calendar due to his employment with the city and county of San Francisco, which is a frequent contractor with SFUSD to avoid any appearance of impropriety.
[2:29:24] Do any board members have a personal, professional or business relationship with any individual who is a subject of or has an ownership interest or financial interest in the subject of any consent items, where as a result of that relationship, the ability of the board member to act for the benefit of the public could reasonably be questioned and thus the relationship should be disclosed in the minutes?
[2:29:48] Seeing
[2:29:52] none, superintendent Sue, do you have any changes to the consent calendar?
[2:29:56] There are no changes to the consent calendar.
[2:29:59] Thank you.
[2:30:00] Thank you. Is there a motion to approve the consent calendar?
[2:30:04] So moved. Second. Thank you. It's been properly moved and seconded that the board approve the consent calendar. Items E1 through E45. Can I have a roll call vote please?
[2:30:26] Student delegate, Ms. Nellie, folks, men.
[2:30:30] Apologies correction. Items E1.
[2:30:34] One through 46, so I didn't mean to interrupt you, student delegates.
[2:30:39] Student delegate, Nellie Foxman?
[2:30:41] Yes.
[2:30:43] Student delegate, Anna Nguyen?
[2:30:46] Yes.
[2:30:47] Commissioner Ray?
[2:30:48] Yes.
[2:30:50] Commissioner Alexander?
[2:30:51] Yes.
[2:30:52] Commissioner Weissman Warren?
[2:30:54] Yes.
[2:30:55] Commissioner Gupta?
[2:30:57] Yes.
[2:30:58] Commissioner Fisher?
[2:30:59] Yes.
[2:31:00] Vice President Healing?
[2:31:02] Yes.
[2:31:02] Yes,
[2:31:09] agenda passes and we can retrieve President Kim.
[2:31:28] Okay, so we have several items on the agenda that do require direct action from the board, stand alone action from the board to commissioners, you'll see three items on here.
[2:31:42] I'm going to request that we move, if no objection, item three up before the progress monitoring meeting so we can just take all our actions at once.
[2:31:49] So
[2:31:54] we'll go from item public hearing and adoption to action item 1, 3, and then 2, okay?
[2:32:05] G, G, 1, 3, and then 2.
[2:32:09] Okay.
[2:32:10] We'll start with the public hearing and adoption.
[2:32:14] I now call item F1, public hearing and approval of resolution regarding the sufficiency of textbooks and instruction materials
[2:32:20] as required by education code section 6-0-1-1-9.
[2:32:25] Colin, Dr. Sue, to be the resolution.
[2:32:29] Thank you, President Kim.
[2:32:30] I'm going to hand this over to our Assistant Superintendent
[2:32:32] of Curriculum and Instruction, Devin Cooper.
[2:32:36] Good evening.
[2:32:37] We are bringing forth this resolution in compliance
[2:32:40] with Williams to ensure the sufficiency of textbooks
[2:32:43] and instructional materials in alignment
[2:32:45] with California ed code section 6-0-1-1-9
[2:32:49] Within the resolution you can see the areas of insufficiency of materials that have been
[2:32:58] cited by survey completion across elementary, middle, and high schools.
[2:33:03] All of those requests have been met with the ordering and delivery or pending delivery
[2:33:10] of additional instructional materials to ensure sufficiency.
[2:33:13] Thank
[2:33:16] you. I will not open the public hearing at 7.39 p.m. We'll take public comment on this item as a reminder.
[2:33:23] Speakers have one minute to speak. Ms. Chang, are there any speakers for this item?
[2:33:29] There are no speakers on this item.
[2:33:32] Thank you at this time.
[2:33:34] Commissioners, any questions or staff for any comment?
[2:33:40] Seeing none, I will not close this public hearing at 7.39 p.m. Can I have a motion in a second?
[2:33:48] So moved.
[2:33:49] Second.
[2:33:49] It's been properly moved and seconded to the Board to approve item 269-22SP1 public hearing on resolution regarding the sufficiency of textbooks and instruction materials.
[2:33:59] President Kim, I just want to clarify were you asking for a motion to close the hearing or were you asking for the motion so that we can vote on the motion to.
[2:34:08] I closed the public hearing at 7.39 p.m. so the motion was to vote.
[2:34:12] The motion was on 269-22SP1.
[2:34:17] Just for clarification for the records, just-
[2:34:19] That's correct.
[2:34:21] Yeah.
[2:34:22] It has been probably moved in second.
[2:34:24] It's board approved this item.
[2:34:26] Roll call vote please.
[2:34:28] Student delegate, Nellie folksman.
[2:34:31] Yes.
[2:34:32] Student delegate, Anah Nguyen.
[2:34:34] Yes.
[2:34:35] Commissioner Ray.
[2:34:37] Yes.
[2:34:38] Commissioner Alexander.
[2:34:40] Yes.
[2:34:40] Yes.
[2:34:42] Commissioner Weissman-Word.
[2:34:44] Yes.
[2:34:45] Commissioner Goepta.
[2:34:46] Yes.
[2:34:47] Commissioner Fisher.
[2:34:49] Yes.
[2:34:49] Vice President Hewling.
[2:34:51] Yes.
[2:34:52] President Kim.
[2:34:53] Yes.
[2:34:53] It is so moved.
[2:34:55] Moving to item G1, the first action item is 269-
[2:35:00] So, thank you, staff. Sorry, no Williams is a lot. So, much appreciation. The first action is item 269-22SP2 approval of the Stamps School Unified School District, 2026 Project Labor Agreement for SSU's Deep Bond funded projects. Can I have a motion and a second? I move item 269-22SP2. Second. I've spent properly moved and seconded that the board approve this item. I ask Dr. Sue to bring this item forward. And I'm going to hand it over.
[2:35:29] to the very capable hands of Liciniate Iberi.
[2:35:33] Thank you, Superintendent Good evening, commissioners.
[2:35:37] SFUSG, some of you may know, we have a longstanding partnership with the San Francisco Building
[2:35:40] and Construction Trades Council.
[2:35:42] Our Project Labor Agreement is an important tool for delivering high quality school facilities
[2:35:47] through the bond program with the skilled local workforce.
[2:35:50] Thank you to Rudy Gonzalez, Secretary and Treasurer of the San Francisco Building Trades
[2:35:54] Council for his public comment earlier in support of the item.
[2:36:00] We have been working together for several months negotiating collaboratively towards
[2:36:05] this 2026 PLA.
[2:36:07] The purpose of it is to ensure efficient project delivery, to expand apprenticeship and workforce
[2:36:12] development opportunities, interest strength and labor stability through the bond program,
[2:36:17] which of course is a voter-approved measure.
[2:36:20] Together with the new student career pathways and workforce development policy that you've
[2:36:25] just approved on the consent calendar, this PLA really allows us to leverage voter dollars
[2:36:31] or bond investments to improve school facilities while creating meaningful career opportunities
[2:36:37] for our students, for San Francisco residents and for our other partners in the building trades.
[2:36:42] So we're pleased to present this tonight and if you have questions, I'm available.
[2:36:47] Any comments or questions from the board?
[2:36:49] Thank you, Mr. Victor.
[2:36:51] Thank you, Mr. Berry.
[2:36:52] And I appreciate your answers in the Q&A document for those who haven't seen it, certainly.
[2:36:57] I recommend one of the answers you provided was the 2013 policy that was written in such a way to make tracking
[2:37:02] and accountability difficult and was not aligned with current CCR or college and career readiness offerings.
[2:37:08] There's just one of the many reasons we amended the language.
[2:37:12] I appreciate that answer to a question that one of my colleagues may have asked.
[2:37:15] I'm curious if you have something just following up on that.
[2:37:20] How does the amended language now evaluate effectiveness of the existing policy in providing
[2:37:25] our students workforce experience or meeting our college and career readiness goals?
[2:37:31] Sure, yeah, and I think that really is reflected in the workforce policy that is on the consent
[2:37:37] item, less so in the PLA, although the PLA is enacting agreement with the building trades that
[2:37:41] in support of that but the language that was in the prior local higher policy as it was called
[2:37:48] really referred to the college and career readiness department from before and didn't have the
[2:37:54] language of the current pathways that we have or the opportunities that the college and career
[2:37:58] readiness division is able to offer to students through the CTE programs and so really in trying to
[2:38:05] implement that in partnership with our bond contractors or you know other people who fell and under the
[2:38:12] The purview of the local higher policy was really sort of like square-pegged round-hole situation where CCR was just feeling like, you know, we're getting this sort of infusion of investment, but we can't really use it in this way.
[2:38:25] So that's in part because it was written in 2013 and here we are in 2026.
[2:38:30] And so just it was kind of a modernization of the policy to make it match so that our contractors have a clear pathway to participating in our student development through CCR.
[2:38:47] Thank you. No questions. And I don't want to take a lot of time just to say thanks. And I think this is really important coming from a labor family and labor household. I think the fact that we can be so committed to working with labor locally is key not just for the district for the community and we know they're intertwined. So really appreciate this.
[2:39:06] All
[2:39:15] right, seeing no other comments from the board.
[2:39:17] Thank you to staff for your presentation.
[2:39:19] Debate is now closed on the motion to approve item 269-22SP2, approval of the San Francisco Univite School District, 2026.
[2:39:27] Project labor agreement for SFUSD-Bahn-funded projects, roll call vote, please.
[2:39:32] Student delegate, Nellie, folks, man.
[2:39:35] Yes.
[2:39:37] Student delegate, Ms. Anandouin.
[2:39:40] Yes.
[2:39:41] Commissioner Ray.
[2:39:42] Yes, Commissioner Alexander. Yes, Commissioner Weissman Norton. Yes, Commissioner Gupta. Yes, Commissioner Fisher. Yes, Vice President Newing. Yes, President Kim. Yes, so
[2:40:01] Thank you, commissioners. Thank you very much, staff, and thank you very much, labor partners, for all your work and partnership.
[2:40:12] As I mentioned before, I'm going to move to item three to vote on student disposal matters, just so we can get all our actions out of the way, and then we'll spend the rest of our time in discussion. So I'll move to item three, student expulsion matters. I move for the approval of stipulated expulsion agreement for student matter,
[2:40:29] Are 2026-2027 number three for the remainder of the spring, 2026 semester, and the fall, 2026 semester.
[2:40:38] During this suspended expulsion period, the student will attend a comprehensive high school.
[2:40:42] Can I have a second?
[2:40:45] Second.
[2:40:46] We'll call please.
[2:40:50] Commissioner Ray?
[2:40:51] Yes.
[2:40:52] Commissioner Alexander?
[2:40:54] Yes.
[2:40:55] Commissioner Weissman Ward?
[2:40:57] Yes.
[2:40:58] Commissioner Gupta?
[2:40:59] Yes.
[2:41:00] Commissioner Fisher?
[2:41:02] Yes.
[2:41:03] Yes, Vice-President Hewley?
[2:41:05] Yes, President Kim.
[2:41:08] Yes, so moved.
[2:41:10] I move approval for the stipulated expulsion agreement for student matter 2026-2027 number four for the spring 2026 semester in fall 2026 expulsion period.
[2:41:21] During the suspended expulsion period, the student will attend civic center's secondary.
[2:41:26] Can I have a second?
[2:41:27] Second.
[2:41:28] Roll call please.
[2:41:30] Commissioner Ray?
[2:41:32] Yes.
[2:41:32] Yes, Commissioner Alexander?
[2:41:34] Yes.
[2:41:35] Commissioner Weissman Ward?
[2:41:37] Yes.
[2:41:38] Commissioner Gupta?
[2:41:39] Yes.
[2:41:40] Commissioner Fisher?
[2:41:41] Yes.
[2:41:42] Vice President Hewling?
[2:41:44] Yes.
[2:41:44] President Kim?
[2:41:45] Yes.
[2:41:46] So moved.
[2:41:47] I move approval of the stipulated expulsion agreement
[2:41:49] for student matters, 2006, 2007 number five,
[2:41:53] the remainder of the spring, 2026 semester,
[2:41:55] in the fall, 2026 semester.
[2:41:58] During this suspended expulsion period,
[2:42:00] the student will tend to comprehensive high school
[2:42:01] We have a second.
[2:42:03] Second.
[2:42:04] Roll call please.
[2:42:06] Commissioner Rae.
[2:42:07] Yes.
[2:42:08] Commissioner Alexander.
[2:42:09] Yes.
[2:42:10] Commissioner Weissman Ward.
[2:42:12] Yes.
[2:42:13] Commissioner Gupta.
[2:42:14] Yes.
[2:42:15] Commissioner Fisher.
[2:42:16] Yes.
[2:42:17] Vice President Healing.
[2:42:18] Yes.
[2:42:19] President Kim.
[2:42:21] Yes.
[2:42:22] So moved.
[2:42:23] I moved to item four.
[2:42:26] Approval of the stipulated
[2:42:27] The expulsion agreement for student matter 2026-2027 number 6 for the remainder of the spring 2026 semester and the fall of 2026 semester.
[2:42:38] During this expended expulsion period, the student will attend Civic Center High School. Can I have a second?
[2:42:44] Second.
[2:42:44] Roll call please.
[2:42:47] Commissioner Ray?
[2:42:49] Yes.
[2:42:50] Commissioner Alexander?
[2:42:51] Yes.
[2:42:52] Commissioner Weissmann Ward?
[2:42:54] Yes.
[2:42:55] Commissioner Gupta?
[2:42:56] Yes.
[2:42:56] Commissioner Fisher?
[2:42:58] Yes.
[2:42:58] Yes.
[2:42:59] Vice-president Hewley?
[2:43:01] Yes.
[2:43:02] President Kim.
[2:43:03] Yes.
[2:43:04] So moved.
[2:43:06] I move approval of the stipulated expulsion agreement
[2:43:08] for the student matter 2026-2027 number seven
[2:43:12] for one calendar year from the date of approval of the expulsion.
[2:43:16] During the suspended expulsion period,
[2:43:18] the student will attend Civic Center High School.
[2:43:20] Can I have a second?
[2:43:22] Yes.
[2:43:24] Is it a second?
[2:43:27] Roll call please.
[2:43:29] Commissioner Ray?
[2:43:30] Okay.
[2:43:30] Yes.
[2:43:31] Commissioner Alexander?
[2:43:32] Yes.
[2:43:33] Commissioner Rice Wing-Mord?
[2:43:37] Yes.
[2:43:38] Commissioner Gupta?
[2:43:39] Yes.
[2:43:40] Commissioner Fisher?
[2:43:42] Yes.
[2:43:43] Vice President Healy?
[2:43:44] Yes.
[2:43:47] President Kim?
[2:43:49] Yes.
[2:43:50] So moved.
[2:43:56] For student matter 2006-2002 sorry, I move for the approval of the stipulated expulsion
[2:44:02] The motion agreement for student matter 2026-2027 number eight for the remainder of the spring 2026 semester and the fall 2026 semester.
[2:44:10] During the suspended expulsion period, the student will attend double a high school.
[2:44:14] Can I have a second?
[2:44:17] Second.
[2:44:18] Roll call please.
[2:44:20] Commissioner Ray?
[2:44:21] Yes.
[2:44:22] Commissioner Alexander?
[2:44:23] Yes.
[2:44:24] Commissioner Weissman Ward?
[2:44:26] Yes.
[2:44:26] Commissioner Gupta?
[2:44:27] Yes.
[2:44:28] Commissioner Fisher?
[2:44:29] No.
[2:44:30] Vice President Hewling?
[2:44:34] I move approval of the stipulate expulsion agreement for student matter 2026 2027 number 9 for the remainder of the spring 2026 semester and the fall 2026 semester during the suspended expulsion period, the student will attend civic center.
[2:44:50] Can I have a second please?
[2:44:52] Roll call please.
[2:44:53] Commissioner Ray.
[2:44:55] Yes.
[2:44:56] Commissioner Alexander.
[2:44:57] Yes.
[2:44:58] Commissioner White.
[2:45:13] Thank you very much, commissioners. We are going to return to item F public hearing and adoption in part because we have missed a public commenter who did indicate their desire to speak.
[2:45:24] Okay. Council, do we need to revote on this item or simply open up the public comment
[2:45:30] period?
[2:45:32] We will revote.
[2:45:33] Commissioners, are there any questions about the procedures that were about undergo?
[2:45:37] I will just redo this item.
[2:45:40] Okay. This is for item F1, public hearing and approval of resolution regarding the sufficiency
[2:45:46] of textbooks and instruction on materials as required by education code section 6-0-1-1-9.
[2:45:53] We will take public comment on this item as a reminder.
[2:45:56] Speakers have one minute to speak.
[2:45:58] Mr. Chang, are there any speakers for this item?
[2:46:01] Vanessa Moreiro.
[2:46:07] Hi, good evening.
[2:46:08] I want to thank Hung May and Alita for giving me the opportunity
[2:46:14] to speak today.
[2:46:16] This is an item that relates to instructional materials,
[2:46:20] which I know you all know is very important.
[2:46:22] I wanted to speak to the true sufficiency that it required, rather than just a physical book on a DEX.
[2:46:32] It requires full accessibility for every student.
[2:46:35] So true access means this, delivery, modify text and assistive technology for special education
[2:46:42] students on day one, and we have passed that day, providing robust ELG materials for
[2:46:49] English language learners, adopting curricula,
[2:46:52] built around the universal design for learning
[2:46:55] to support our neurodivergent students.
[2:46:58] With the schools that are reporting shortages
[2:47:01] and compliance numbers alone aren't enough,
[2:47:04] we need to make sure that you all are bored,
[2:47:08] is going to make sure that there is a transparent process
[2:47:11] and reporting missing and inaccessible tools.
[2:47:15] And to keep equity at the heart
[2:47:17] of all future curriculum decisions, and I will email this to the board as well.
[2:47:22] Thank you.
[2:47:25] Thank you.
[2:47:26] There
[2:47:34] are no other public comment.
[2:47:36] Thank you.
[2:47:37] I now re-close this public hearing at 7.53 p.m.
[2:47:44] Commissioners, can I have a motion in a second?
[2:47:47] So moved.
[2:47:49] Second.
[2:47:50] It has been properly moved in seconded, the board approved item 269-22SV1, roll call vote,
[2:47:55] please.
[2:47:55] Students delegate Miss Nellie-Foxman.
[2:48:01] Yes.
[2:48:03] Students delegate Miss Anna Nguyen.
[2:48:06] Yes.
[2:48:08] Commissioner Rae.
[2:48:09] Yes.
[2:48:11] Commissioner Alexander.
[2:48:12] Yes.
[2:48:13] Commissioner Weissman Ward.
[2:48:15] Yes.
[2:48:15] Commissioner Gupta.
[2:48:17] Yes.
[2:48:18] Commissioner Fisher.
[2:48:19] Yes.
[2:48:20] Vice President Hewling.
[2:48:21] Yes.
[2:48:22] President Kim.
[2:48:23] Yes.
[2:48:24] So moved.
[2:48:25] Thank you.
[2:48:26] We're moving to item two.
[2:48:28] Oh, thank you very much, staff.
[2:48:30] I can't wait for any.
[2:48:31] She'll probably ask that.
[2:48:32] You never know.
[2:48:34] You just get comfortable, yes.
[2:48:36] Feel free to grab some water, get comfortable.
[2:48:39] We are moving to item two, two, six, nine, dash, two, two,
[2:48:43] S.P. three, progress monitor during workshop
[2:48:45] on student outcomes, goal two, summative.
[2:48:49] Can I have a motion in a second?
[2:48:51] I move item 269-222-SP3, Progress Monitoring Workshop on Student Outcomes Goal 2.
[2:49:00] I will second the Progress Monitoring Workshop on Student Outcomes Goal 2.
[2:49:04] This amendment properly moved in second to the board approve this item.
[2:49:08] For some context, commissioners, thank you for your participation in our border treat recently
[2:49:14] where we have the opportunity to go through some effective question asking exercises with our
[2:49:20] governance coach, AJ Crebo, who I believe is on Zoom with us, AJ, are you there?
[2:49:27] I am.
[2:49:28] Thank you.
[2:49:30] You'll see in front of you a few items that are hopefully going to help you facilitate
[2:49:36] in a more effective time.
[2:49:38] One is a technical versus tactical versus strategic document handout for tips for effective monitoring
[2:49:45] question development.
[2:49:47] That is a one-pager.
[2:49:49] Here the second is a stapled packet BOE progress monitoring reference sheet.
[2:49:54] This reference sheet was developed by staff to help us facilitate a more effective question.
[2:50:00] Asking time. You'll see on our procedures to vote on the report before we monitor and vote to accept the report at the end of our monitoring sessions along with tips on the second page.
[2:50:13] I want to acknowledge that this is our first time engaging in this particular style. I have reminded staff that moving forward we do want to be sitting at a table so that will happen for our next monitoring session. But for today,
[2:50:29] Today, as part of our student outcomes focus governance model, we will be doing our
[2:50:35] best to hold each other and ourselves accountable to effective question asking.
[2:50:40] We may hit a few bumps on the road and student delegates, I know you weren't there with
[2:50:45] us on Sunday, but I encourage you to review the documents with us and please do join us
[2:50:49] in participating in this conversation.
[2:50:52] We will vote on whether to approve the report at the end, and I'll provide additional
[2:51:00] context at the end for that.
[2:51:04] And then I have some framing for us to begin with.
[2:51:09] As part of our student outcomes focus governance model, the board is committed to monitoring
[2:51:12] the district's progress towards achieving our goals and honoring our guardrails.
[2:51:16] guardrails. Tonight we'll be monitoring goal two, eighth grade math proficiency. Before we begin,
[2:51:22] we need to confirm that the progress monitoring report is complete. Effective progress monitoring
[2:51:27] reports have the following four characteristics. One, it states the goal. Does it clearly show which
[2:51:33] specific goal or interim goal is being monitored? Two, it shows the data. Does it clearly show data
[2:51:39] for the three previous reporting periods, preferably on a line graph? Does it clearly show the direct
[2:51:45] the current reporting period, does it clearly show the target reporting periods and
[2:51:49] your targets and deadline targets?
[2:51:51] Three, it shares the interpretation.
[2:51:54] Does it clearly show the superintendent's current view via defined set of indicators
[2:51:58] of system performance relative to the goal?
[2:52:01] And four, does it present the evidence in plan?
[2:52:04] Does it clearly show the supporting documentation that evidence is the
[2:52:08] superintendent's understanding of system performance?
[2:52:10] If the school system is not at target or the superintendent's understanding of
[2:52:14] the system performance indicates implementation is not on track, does the monitoring report
[2:52:19] clearly describe systemic root causes, strategic responses, including rationale, initiative
[2:52:24] statuses, and any meeting next steps?
[2:52:29] I believe all the criteria for an effective report have been met,
[2:52:32] but I will open up to the floor for other commissioners. Does anyone have any evidence that the
[2:52:36] elements are not present?
[2:52:42] Seeing none, we will turn the floor over to the superintendent for her
[2:52:46] presentation.
[2:52:49] Great thank you president Kim and good evening commissioners student delegates
[2:52:53] community members tonight I will be sharing with you a summative view of our progress
[2:53:01] on goal to eighth grade mathematics for school year 2526 as you know you
[2:53:12] know a lot as you know
[2:53:17] So we have chosen to govern ourselves using the student outcomes focused governance framework.
[2:53:24] And that means that it is all of our jobs to stay laser focused on student learning.
[2:53:30] We do this by tracking data.
[2:53:33] And when the data tells us that things are working, then we should look into it and
[2:53:38] understand why and to perhaps do more.
[2:53:40] And then when data tells us things are not working, we really need to then double down an
[2:53:45] examine why it's not working, because the only way for us to get to the student outcomes
[2:53:50] that we know our students and our families deserve is by making sure that the adults
[2:53:54] in the system change their behaviors to make that happen.
[2:53:59] Tonight, we will review preliminary grade 8 SBAC math results to understand where we are
[2:54:06] making progress and where more supports are needed.
[2:54:10] From there, we will review what we learned from implementation last year and share plans
[2:54:18] for how we are going to strengthen the instructional systems and practices that support mathematics
[2:54:28] across our schools.
[2:54:30] I'm really happy to be joined by John Davis, our Deputy Superintendent of Ed Services, Dr.
[2:54:36] to Moonhawk Kim, just raise Dr. Jen Steiner, Devin Kugman, and then Latisha Irving in
[2:54:47] the back.
[2:54:49] Together we'll show you what we've learned last year about our instructional systems,
[2:54:54] where we are making progress and where more supports are needed, and then we'll show you
[2:54:59] the plans for...
[2:55:00] How we are planning to strengthen that. Next slide please.
[2:55:05] So we'll start with our goal to data, beginning with the overall goal and then progress towards, and our progress towards that. Then we'll look at the data across student groups, across student groups and our within year measures to better understand where, where we are seeing progress and where we need to focus. I also want to remind everyone that you can access our public
[2:55:32] available dashboard on our website at sfusd.edu.
[2:55:38] Just go to the about sfusd tab on the top of our website.
[2:55:44] Click into it, and then you'll see on the left hand side for the menu bar you'll see
[2:55:51] there's a link that's called sfusd public data dashboard.
[2:55:56] You can click on to that to see the data that we are looking at and please note we will
[2:56:03] be updating that data with the 2526 data soon after the state updates their data, which
[2:56:13] we are projecting to be in mid-October.
[2:56:17] So again for goal two, we are focusing on increasing eighth grade math proficiency as measured
[2:56:24] by the SBAC math exam to try to achieve 65% of our eighth graders being proficient in
[2:56:35] the SBAC score SBAC exam by 2028.
[2:56:42] Here when we review our preliminary 2526 results for eighth graders we saw a 4% increase compared
[2:56:52] to last year, sorry, one slide back.
[2:56:55] There you go, we saw a 4% increase compared to last year.
[2:57:01] This is an encouraging sign that we are beginning to turn the curve for eighth grade math.
[2:57:08] From pandemic, learning recovery to reestablishing conditions for success, including implementing
[2:57:15] our new math curriculum, increasing professional learning opportunities for our educators,
[2:57:20] and of course our work on developing and implementing the secondary
[2:57:25] math policy. We are looking to continuing to build on that momentum that we saw
[2:57:31] or that we saw last year and to this year.
[2:57:36] When
[2:57:41] we look across our student groups, we see encouraging gains among
[2:57:47] several groups including our Latinx and Filipino students. At the same time,
[2:57:52] The results for our African-American and Pacific Islander students have remained relatively
[2:57:58] flat.
[2:57:59] Highlighting an opportunity for us to strengthen our support and accelerate progress and
[2:58:05] more importantly to focus our energy and our attention on these two populations.
[2:58:12] When looking at our program groups, we see small but consistent gains among our English learners
[2:58:21] students and students receiving special education services.
[2:58:26] That said, we will continue to focus our efforts on targeted supports that can help accelerate
[2:58:33] their math outcomes for these students.
[2:58:39] And then just a reminder, we shared the fall and winter star results for interim goals
[2:58:46] 2.1, 2.2, and 2.3 in last year's progress monitoring reports.
[2:58:52] efforts. And we are resharing them here to show how our within year measures help us monitor
[2:59:01] our progress throughout the year. When we layer in the preliminary as-back results,
[2:59:08] we see continued gains across the three interim goals. And with a particular noticeable increase
[2:59:16] for the interim goal 2.2, which is the group for our seventh grade students, both within
[2:59:23] year and across years.
[2:59:30] Even though I just talked about the significant increase that we are seeing for this year,
[2:59:37] we remain optimistically encouraged by this progress and this reflects meaningful work
[2:59:46] that our entire school community is moving towards.
[2:59:52] Under any other scenario,
[2:59:54] this would be significant improvement
[2:59:56] and definitely a reason to celebrate.
[3:00:00] However, we continue to not meet and be on target for the very bold and audacious goals that we have set for ourselves. And as a result, we as a school community have decided to rate this particular progress monitoring status as off track. Because we believe that it is going to take much more than 4% to get us
[3:00:29] to goal to target of 65% by 2028. However, our focus is going to continue to work really hard
[3:00:41] with our school community to build the conditions for high quality math instruction and sustain
[3:00:47] a consistent pace of improvements that hopefully will extend beyond 2028, but we'll definitely be
[3:00:56] focusing very intentionally on our focal population and our program groups for this year.
[3:01:03] So now I'm going to hand it over to John and the team to provide a little bit more context
[3:01:09] for the evidence that we are concluding and our plans for how we are going to move forward.
[3:01:18] And then we will engage in a strategic conversation about how we, as a governing team, will work
[3:01:25] together to continue to move the need for our students.
[3:01:29] So with that, John, I'm going to hint over for the technical and technical aspect of this report.
[3:01:36] Thank you, Dr. Sue.
[3:01:37] Good evening, everyone.
[3:01:39] Before we get into the evidence, probably some high-level things I want to point out, right?
[3:01:44] When we're talking about eighth grade math and when we think back to last year,
[3:01:48] there were a number of pilots with algebra and eighth grade math.
[3:01:52] and doing all of that, we needed more math teachers.
[3:01:57] Usually that is a huge, herculean task,
[3:02:01] and I think we have to call out our human resources team
[3:02:04] for making sure that we had not just all the math teachers
[3:02:07] in middle school, but extra math teachers
[3:02:10] for the different classes that our scholars took.
[3:02:14] And even though I know this progress monitoring report
[3:02:18] or it is not about this year, right?
[3:02:21] As we've implemented the math placement policy,
[3:02:24] the same thing has happened.
[3:02:26] That, you know, just being staffed may scenes,
[3:02:30] kind of small, but when it's math teachers
[3:02:33] and it's all throughout middle school,
[3:02:35] a lot of teachers would say they would never teach middle school,
[3:02:38] but as a former middle school math teacher.
[3:02:44] Yes, the idea that our human resources team
[3:02:47] was able to staff all of our schools with mostly double the amount of map
[3:02:52] teachers in eighth grade is a huge testament to their work and should not be
[3:02:56] overlooked in any of this. We always need HR to be top-notch and they
[3:03:01] completely were in this endeavor. I think the second thing to point out is right
[3:03:07] when you think of the pilots from last year or again has were moving into this
[3:03:12] year. A lot of students will be receiving two math classes. Since we've been looking
[3:03:18] at student performance, I don't know, the last 20, 30 years in education and going deep,
[3:03:24] you can think of no child left behind. There's always been an idea and a ton of different
[3:03:29] times when school districts and schools have double blocked things. Devin Krugman and
[3:03:36] and I were talking about this today,
[3:03:38] but it doesn't always work, right?
[3:03:41] A lot of times, schools, high schools,
[3:03:44] middle schools, elementary's,
[3:03:46] the natural thing is more, more, more.
[3:03:48] But there's a lot of data that will show
[3:03:50] more doesn't always work.
[3:03:52] So I think we have to, in this year, in the coming years,
[3:03:56] kind of get a little bit more under the hood
[3:03:58] and see what that difference is.
[3:04:00] One possible explanation is,
[3:04:03] A lot of times double blocking periods is the same teacher for twice the amount of time.
[3:04:10] And this is just different, right?
[3:04:11] A student goes to two different classes, has two different teachers.
[3:04:15] And in the end, it is two different math subjects.
[3:04:19] And when you think about algebra, you're going to use a lot of your eighth grade math.
[3:04:23] So you're kind of doing application.
[3:04:26] Those are just conjectures on my part.
[3:04:28] But to some degree, it seemed to be working.
[3:04:31] I think when you combine that with the new curriculum there's some mix there that has been
[3:04:36] positive and we're just going to need to look at that more and more as we look at how
[3:04:41] schools implement this work moving forward. Again I just want to point out those big picture
[3:04:46] topics because I think we're going to dive in a little bit deeper now and Devon will start us off.
[3:04:52] Thank you so much next slide. So for this first section related to evidence we are going to present
[3:04:59] and on to
[3:05:00] Two different items. So one is a series of summary points associated with what we did as strategic actions in the 25, 26 square, as well as some high-level takeaways in terms of what we learned from those strategic actions. From that point, we are going to lead into the plan section,
[3:05:22] which are how we are applying these learnings into the updated plan section.
[3:05:31] strategic plan for the 2627 school year. So in this first section, it may seem somewhat
[3:05:37] simple in bullet point, but we adopted new K8 math curriculum. And we did so across
[3:05:45] grades K through eight, while they are different vendors in terms of imagine learning an illustrative
[3:05:51] math and amplify Desmos math. They do show the same pedagogical spine of illustrative math,
[3:05:57] so we do feel excited about that K-A alignment.
[3:06:01] In terms of year one implementation, we actually had
[3:06:06] really strong, extensive use which was related
[3:06:09] to an overall positive perception of the materials.
[3:06:12] What is not surprising is that within year one
[3:06:17] we do have a lot of room for growth in terms of quality of use.
[3:06:21] So again, what is unsurprising is that in initial years
[3:06:24] of implementation, we do see teachers learning
[3:06:26] learning the materials and often struggling to hold up that student ownership and potentially
[3:06:32] defaulting towards more direct instruction which are all pedagogical strategies that we are
[3:06:37] working with staff on in terms of professional development. Next slide please.
[3:06:42] In terms of that teacher professional development, again another very strong shout out to our HR team,
[3:06:49] whose exemplary work related to sub-coverage rates allowed us in 2526 to do professional
[3:06:56] development release days for both our general and special education middle school math teachers.
[3:07:03] That work supported cross-site collaboration with a series of release days focused on
[3:07:08] different strategies such as differentiation to support students with IEPs or integrated
[3:07:14] English language development in the math classroom to support multilingual learners.
[3:07:18] While those were incredibly successful, we did see two pieces emerge, which was one
[3:07:24] a need for increased site support in between those release days, which we'll see as part
[3:07:28] of our instructional coaching work this year.
[3:07:31] In addition, we did see the need for more explicit professional development around math intervention,
[3:07:36] particularly tier two and tier three math intervention, which again, you'll see as part of our plan
[3:07:42] for this year.
[3:07:43] Next slide.
[3:07:46] running concurrently to teacher professional development. We also engaged in
[3:07:51] robust administrator professional learning and so as part of a really strong
[3:07:54] partnership between lead and curriculum and instruction we provided monthly
[3:07:59] training for assistant principals on calibrating around high quality instructional
[3:08:05] practices in the math classroom. We worked with them on lesson and unit
[3:08:10] internalization, understanding the pedagogical backing of certain instructional
[3:08:14] like students explaining and justifying their thinking and looking for evidence and guidance of those practices in the math curriculum as well as looking for evidence of it in instructional videos.
[3:08:26] That was followed up on with principles as part of lead supervisors working with those principles on classroom observations and learning walks and one-to-one checking and supervision.
[3:08:38] We saw a lot of growth come out of that strand, particularly related to instructional
[3:08:45] leadership, so we are building on it this year and continuing to deepen that partnership
[3:08:50] between lead and CNI, which we are very excited about next slide, please.
[3:08:55] Related to those professional learning and curriculum strategies, we also, as John spoke
[3:09:01] to implemented a new secondary math policy in the 2526
[3:09:06] school year, which came out of a partnership around a
[3:09:10] multi-year research project with Stanford around student
[3:09:12] outcomes in a series of different models, and then that
[3:09:16] policy was formally adopted in the spring. In terms of what
[3:09:20] we learned, as it was the first spring of the implementation
[3:09:25] or operational was, thank you, I'm not going to be able to say yeah thanks, putting the
[3:09:36] plan to work.
[3:09:40] What we did see was some complexity come out of that policy. There are a number
[3:09:45] of choice points for students and families that led to somewhat unpredictable enrollment
[3:09:50] patterns impacting master scheduling budgets as well as staffing. Again, as John spoke to
[3:09:56] with just an incredibly strong partnership across the H.O.
[3:10:02] We did do sort of heroic work associated with staffing for math teachers. However, that complexity led to a number of operational quandaries that needed to be dealt with across the spring that does provide some learning for how we might move forward, given that was year one of the policy. So across all of those different endeavors, as I spoke to, there were a number of learnings that came out that informed the
[3:10:29] plan that we had for this coming school year and I will pass it to Dr. Steiner.
[3:10:38] Hi everyone, nice to see you again. I'm going to talk a little bit about the plan and of
[3:10:42] course I'm going to start with our very tiny little theory of actions to get out
[3:10:45] your reading glasses. But what we know about our theory of action, just for those of us that
[3:10:50] don't quite remember, if we really want student outcomes to change then we need what's
[3:10:55] happening in classrooms to change. We need the interaction between content, teacher and
[3:10:59] and student to shift, and we've really done a lot of work
[3:11:02] in partnership with curriculum and instruction at RPA
[3:11:04] and really thinking about what that means,
[3:11:05] and then if we want teachers to change what they're doing
[3:11:08] in classrooms so that student outcomes change,
[3:11:10] then in turn we need to support our school leaders
[3:11:14] and to support our structures in schools,
[3:11:16] and then going backwards even further,
[3:11:18] we need to support professional learning at that level.
[3:11:21] So across our departments, we need to really work together.
[3:11:24] And so that's what we're gonna talk about.
[3:11:25] No, you can go to the next slide.
[3:11:29] I was just saying to Devon right before the started, I always really want to start with
[3:11:33] 2.2, so you'll see why in a second.
[3:11:35] But in 2.1 we're really looking at a focal population of African-American students in
[3:11:39] our AAPI students.
[3:11:42] And what I would say is that something that we learned last year and when we were really
[3:11:47] debriefing what happened with 2.1 last year and you can see this in our African-American
[3:11:51] data is that I don't think we called out as clearly what we wanted to do with African-American
[3:11:55] students.
[3:11:56] We had a strong plan for tier one in that first roll out of the curriculum, but we didn't
[3:12:01] do as good of a job at saying who are our focal students, and how do we support them.
[3:12:04] And so this year, we're working closely with our OLE partnership, RPA, CNI, and LEAN to
[3:12:11] really say, what specifically are we going to do in addition to really teaching very high
[3:12:16] quality tier one, which I'll talk about in 2.2?
[3:12:20] We really want to say what else are we going to do?
[3:12:22] And so identifying focal students, making sure that every single leader and educator teacher in the classrooms know who their focal students are,
[3:12:31] and that that becomes part of what happens in common planning time and department meetings when they're really looking in grade level,
[3:12:37] in grade level collaboration when we're looking at what students need.
[3:12:40] And then additionally, for part of 2.1, we're going to do some identification of lab schools.
[3:12:45] And you heard us talk about this for 1.1 as well.
[3:12:48] that TNTP and SFUSD are partnering to examine how we can improve our map instructions specifically for our focal students and we've identified six schools where we're going to do that in partnership with them and really learn.
[3:13:01] Hey, what are we doing with leaders, teachers, coaches, and how are we aligning what happens in the leadership team with what happens in professional learning and how can we continue to learn?
[3:13:12] And so we'll be looking at that in 2.2 on the next slide.
[3:13:17] This is really about, are we ensuring that there's high quality instruction happening
[3:13:22] in every single classroom?
[3:13:24] Number one is the curriculum and use to be see it in use.
[3:13:27] And I will say that having just gone on a learning walk last week in my first middle school
[3:13:31] learning walk of the year, I was really excited to go into multiple math classrooms and really
[3:13:36] see both a veteran math teacher implementing and the kinds of amazing things veteran teachers
[3:13:41] can do and a brand new teacher doing it, but because the curriculum is clear, they could
[3:13:46] do it well as well, developing.
[3:13:50] And so I think that that's really important, that both our brand new teachers and our
[3:13:53] veteran teachers can really support our students.
[3:13:56] Then during the teacher collaboration time, we really want the coaches and the assistant
[3:14:00] principals to work with those teachers.
[3:14:02] So going back to what Devon said earlier, during our principal meetings and during our
[3:14:06] assistant principal meetings, we're going to be getting better this year at what we did
[3:14:11] leaders to know what they're looking for.
[3:14:13] Our new learning walk tool is really clear.
[3:14:15] It's the interplay between curriculum,
[3:14:17] what the teacher is doing, and what the student is doing,
[3:14:20] and we're using that in our learning walks
[3:14:21] to lift up what do we need to do better
[3:14:23] during that teaching collaboration,
[3:14:25] what needs to happen during coaching cycles,
[3:14:28] what do we need to do to address professional learning
[3:14:30] in every aspect of the school,
[3:14:33] and then how can we continue to adjust?
[3:14:36] And then finally, in 2.3, we're gonna go back
[3:14:38] to a focal population.
[3:14:39] So, this is really about our English learners.
[3:14:42] I think I mentioned this in the last meeting that I like to think about ELD for our English
[3:14:46] learners as being like the on ramp to a highway, right?
[3:14:49] So, if we want every student to be on the highway, go on along at 65 or 75 miles an hour,
[3:14:55] the ELD course gets them to get into the car that speeds up and goes faster.
[3:15:00] So what we're looking there is we're looking specifically at both integrated language development
[3:15:05] and math professional development. So how are we giving students the language scaffolds that
[3:15:09] they can access the math? Do we see sentence frames? Do we see word banks? Do we see ways
[3:15:15] that English learners can engage in the math? And then also in their designated ELD, are we
[3:15:19] seeing some of those things? And so we're going to be looking at that with our learning walk
[3:15:24] tools as well.
[3:15:27] That might be it.
[3:15:28] Hang on the next slide.
[3:15:29] That's it.
[3:15:30] And now we'll take your questions.
[3:15:32] Thank you.
[3:15:34] Appreciate the presentation.
[3:15:36] At this time, we will move to Commissioner Questions.
[3:15:40] As a reminder, there are various types of questions board members can ask about the monitoring
[3:15:44] report, including questions that are technical, tactical, and strategic in nature.
[3:15:48] To clarify the difference, technical questions are questions about how something is measured.
[3:15:53] Tactical questions are about how or by whom something is done, and
[3:15:59] strategic questions are questions about how something aligns to our goals and
[3:16:02] guardwails. It's part of our governance model and effective monitoring practices.
[3:16:07] Commissioners have asked technical and tactical questions in advance of the
[3:16:10] meeting. These questions and staff responses are available in the Q&A doc,
[3:16:14] published on the agenda. Because our tactical and technical questions have been
[3:16:18] asked in advance, we will focus the conversation on strategic issues. In
[3:16:22] In practice, this means that commissioners will ask
[3:16:24] your questions of the superintendent,
[3:16:26] who is a strategic leader of the district,
[3:16:28] as a guiding framework commissioner question should
[3:16:30] align to our smart acronym, which states
[3:16:32] that effective questions are strategy-focused,
[3:16:34] measure-focused, ask-oriented, result-focused, and time-bound.
[3:16:40] I'd also like to share a couple of other reminders for commissioners.
[3:16:43] Please ensure that your questions are related to the data
[3:16:45] that's in the monitoring report.
[3:16:47] Please don't give opinions.
[3:16:49] I will cut you off.
[3:16:51] with this file.
[3:16:53] As the facilitator, I will try to ensure that our conversation stays strategic and I encourage commissioners to reformulate the questions if it is not.
[3:17:01] These practices will help ensure that we are conducting our progress monitoring most effectively and help us understand how the reality of our students aligns with our vision for them.
[3:17:12] At this time, I will open the floor to commissioner questions.
[3:17:19] Commissioner Alexander.
[3:17:22] Thanks, President Kim.
[3:17:23] I'd like to start with a follow-up to one of the questions that my colleagues asked
[3:17:29] on the Q&A document.
[3:17:32] It was a question that referred to slide six and the differences between the performance
[3:17:40] of all students in our focal groups or end or particular, there were increases in some
[3:17:48] some groups of students, but then not in our focal groups.
[3:17:51] And I think that's reflected in the data on slide six.
[3:17:53] And so one of my colleagues asked in the Q&A document, does this suggest the strategies aren't working for some of our focal groups?
[3:17:59] And then there was a staff response that said that the overall strategies were working or
[3:18:07] seemed to be starting to take root, but that we would need additional supports like the each and every initiative and
[3:18:13] here's two and three as necessary for focal students
[3:18:17] to fully receive the benefits of the overall strategies.
[3:18:20] And so I guess I wanted to understand that a bit more
[3:18:23] about not about what we're planning in the future,
[3:18:27] but what we're seeing now based on the data
[3:18:29] or in the past year, based on the data,
[3:18:32] where are we seeing success for our focal students,
[3:18:37] understanding that we're not overall,
[3:18:38] but where are the places where we are seeing success
[3:18:41] and what are we learning from that
[3:18:42] about which strategies are working for focal students.
[3:18:44] I mean, whether those are getting to your one
[3:18:45] or two or two or three, what are we seeing
[3:18:49] in terms of success and what are we learning from that?
[3:18:58] Well, just, so a couple of things.
[3:19:01] One is just that I think when we shifted
[3:19:05] to a state-aligned state-standard curriculum,
[3:19:11] we were able to train our teachers
[3:19:14] around using the curriculum and also the curriculum from what we have experienced is actually
[3:19:23] very teacher friendly and so there are some clear cadences on lesson planning and sequencing
[3:19:30] of lessons. Because of that we were able to see that the curriculum is being implemented
[3:19:38] more to its fidelity. It doesn't fully speak to the difference that we're seeing by our
[3:19:45] focal population but I think in general we are seeing that more teachers are feeling
[3:19:51] more comfortable using our curriculum and therefore correct students are actually being
[3:19:58] and push to...
[3:20:00] To learn and to engage in the curriculum more. In terms of very specific strategies that we are using for our focal population, I will have to admit that we don't have specific strategies at this moment in time. This is why the staff is proposing to use some of our best practices that we're seeing and learning from our each and every student by name strategy.
[3:20:29] which is to have very focused and targeted interventions for students who need additional
[3:20:36] supports. So we're going to try that and we're going to see how that works and if it works
[3:20:44] we'll do more of it. If it doesn't, we'll figure out how to pivot. I think the other strategic
[3:20:50] move that we did last year was allocate additional coaching staffing, additional coaching support
[3:20:59] supports, instructional supports to schools, and we're hoping that that is also going
[3:21:05] to yield the result that we're projecting for it to have.
[3:21:11] So having additional supports for our educators, having additional professional development
[3:21:15] for our educators, we'll be able to target some of the supports to move the need of our
[3:21:23] of our local population.
[3:21:28] And we know staff can add more, yes.
[3:21:32] I was just gonna say that I wanted to reference something
[3:21:34] that John brought up earlier,
[3:21:35] which was this idea of additional math teachers.
[3:21:38] So when we were first thinking about how to implement
[3:21:40] the secondary math policy to ensure that students who
[3:21:44] were wanting to take algebra, could take algebra,
[3:21:46] what we ended up noticing,
[3:21:47] and we'll talk about this later when we review our data
[3:21:50] around algebra.
[3:21:51] We noticed that lots of students opted
[3:21:53] it's to take both algebra and math eight even though there were options to either just
[3:21:57] take math eight or in some cases just take algebra. And so in some cases we didn't have
[3:22:03] a lot of extra FTE in schools like in some places we really used the entirety of the FTE
[3:22:09] assigned to the school to cover the algebra need. But I would say that in many schools and
[3:22:14] many of the schools where a large percentage of our focal populations live we actually
[3:22:18] to have some FTE kind of wiggle room per se, we needed to hire whole FTEs because otherwise
[3:22:23] we were going to have not just hiring a math teacher, but hiring a point four math teacher
[3:22:27] was going to be impossible. And so what we're excited about this year that has not been true
[3:22:31] in years past, failure like this, is that we have a number of math labs which is our tier two strategy
[3:22:37] and two or three strategy of math lab A and B. Still getting the terminology right. And we
[3:22:42] really are excited about the number of students both that have double math and eighth grade,
[3:22:47] but also the number of 6th and 7th graders in a number of our schools that serve large
[3:22:52] percentage of our focal populations that are able to take a math A or a math B lab class.
[3:22:56] And we're excited to see where this goes.
[3:22:58] Is that going to make more students eligible for algebra?
[3:23:01] Is that going to improve the math proficiency for our students?
[3:23:05] In addition to what we're going to do with each and every,
[3:23:07] because I think the point is, is that the tier one instruction does need to improve
[3:23:12] and the presence of a strong curriculum will help it improve.
[3:23:16] But then we also, as we've talked about in the past, need to actually address implicit bias and expectations for teachers, right?
[3:23:22] We have to have everyone in every classroom expecting students to be able to engage and
[3:23:28] not to shift the math for particular student groups because otherwise they're never going to be able to achieve at the levels we expect them to.
[3:23:35] So those are just a couple of the other things that we're examining and I know that this week in my conversations with my lead colleagues as we start our evaluations for principles as we roll out the lap process.
[3:23:45] We specifically said, all right, so how are we incorporating focal student conversations in the conversations with principles about their in their roles, right?
[3:23:54] How do we make sure that we're not just waiting till the end to be like this is working or not working?
[3:23:57] So those are just a couple of additional thoughts on Commissioner
[3:24:08] Weissmord.
[3:24:11] Thank you.
[3:24:12] It's a similar issue, but different take on the question.
[3:24:17] And so we saw that eighth grade Filipino students demonstrated a significantly statistically
[3:24:25] significant 10 percentage point, growth rate.
[3:24:30] And so I won't want to know what do we know, maybe the question is do we know, hopefully
[3:24:34] we do, but what do we know about the specific conditions or effective practices in those
[3:24:40] classrooms that accounted for that, I mean that was massive progress.
[3:24:44] And I don't, maybe I'm making, I don't, I'm wondering, presumably those students are amongst different classrooms in different schools.
[3:24:55] Like, is it just random, but that it seems very statistically.
[3:25:00] Any significant, so do we know anything about those conditions that would allow us to have insight and allow us to replicate in other places? I mean, it looks like such different numbers compared to the rest.
[3:25:16] I know, I think we had a moment of conversation about, like, what is this that we're seeing and why are we seeing it? So- To be clear, it's great. Oh, absolutely, absolutely. It's great.
[3:25:31] And it could be great because the group of students who entered middle school were fantastic, right?
[3:25:42] So we need to actually do a good job at seeing how did they do in fifth grade?
[3:25:48] How did they perform in sixth grade and seventh grade so that we can understand?
[3:25:53] Is it a grouping? Is it a cohort of students that is kind of, that's the reason why we're seeing this?
[3:26:00] is it because there's a certain level of differentiation
[3:26:06] that is happening in the school,
[3:26:08] in the school environment that's happening now,
[3:26:12] or is it because we change the curriculum
[3:26:17] and we're providing deeper professional development
[3:26:20] for our educators.
[3:26:22] We won't be able to answer, unfortunately,
[3:26:25] fully answer that particular question
[3:26:27] until we do more of our learning walks and collect that data.
[3:26:35] This year, it's part of the plan moving forward,
[3:26:39] is for us to go into the classrooms and really observe and ask those types of particular questions
[3:26:45] so that we can then, you know, I know the team were redesigned the learning walk tool
[3:26:51] so that we can collect that type of information.
[3:26:57] Yeah, I just wanted to add a couple of things.
[3:26:58] I mean, it's a great question.
[3:27:01] And as we were looking at those at the data,
[3:27:04] we were also pretty curious about that.
[3:27:07] So I did have staff look more deeply into it,
[3:27:10] but I think it kind of gets at the,
[3:27:12] I think at some of the response that was in the RFI,
[3:27:15] which really kind of gets at the small numbers
[3:27:17] and how difficult it is to pinpoint conditional types of things.
[3:27:21] One of the things we noticed when we looked
[3:27:22] at the 121 students that we're talking about
[3:27:25] is that there were only like five or six sites that had 10 or more students and the rest of them were very kind of like disparate, like five or six students.
[3:27:34] And given the nature of how schools have their classes and the periods that they have them in, it's the likelihood that they're very spread even across the periods.
[3:27:44] And so while at the same time we want to be able to look at it more deeply to think about those conditions, it's also tricky because of the volatility of the small numbers to get at that.
[3:27:54] So we'll continue to look at that more deeply, but I just wanted to talk about how the
[3:27:59] challenge of looking at specific student groups where the group sizes are really small
[3:28:03] kind of comes into play.
[3:28:05] We want to obviously make sure that we're continuing to uplift where that's happening,
[3:28:09] but it's also kind of thinking through, is there something that's happening with a particular
[3:28:13] cohort as you mentioned?
[3:28:14] So continued inquiry that we'll have on our end and we'll hopefully try to nail down kind
[3:28:19] of something that might be a significant threat for us moving forward.
[3:28:24] So maybe just a follow up. I guess this is where I find myself challenged and maybe we're all
[3:28:31] challenged in terms of like the when is there value in having these sort of the numbers
[3:28:38] parts so carefully. I mean I think there's value there but like when are we assigning too much
[3:28:43] value to it because if there's not actual conditions here that are allowed for this and it is another
[3:28:49] And I think that's really important because then I wouldn't want to, yes, learning walks
[3:28:54] are good, but if the learning walks aren't going to share any insight, that just seems
[3:28:57] like a lot of resources that are not, maybe well, as well spent as we might want them to
[3:29:02] be.
[3:29:07] I think one piece I just wanted to parse out a little bit was clarifying the difference
[3:29:13] between two separate data sets.
[3:29:15] So I think on one hand, when we look at the data that's in the slides and that just spoke
[3:29:20] to, and we're focusing on student outcome data on the assessment.
[3:29:24] If we go back to the theory of action, our learning walk data is sort of like a step
[3:29:29] before that piece, which is the quality of classroom practice that we observe for.
[3:29:34] And so, what we want to try to parse out in that regard is like where we see strong examples
[3:29:40] of correction one around curriculum and content to teacher, strong teacher instructional practice
[3:29:45] and three strong student ownership, where we see evidence of that, do we then see growth
[3:29:51] in terms of strong gains in student proficiency. So that is a little bit of the tension,
[3:29:56] which is a slightly different way maybe to hold those data sets.
[3:30:00] What I would say is just to make a plug for the learning walk data, is that we do see it as highly
[3:30:06] impactful both for, you know, understanding how to design and proactively respond with shifts
[3:30:12] in professional development. I was literally, I was in a classroom observing a kindergarten
[3:30:18] math lesson today. I was looking at the dashboard. One of the things I had noticed in the kindergarten
[3:30:22] learning walk also showed up in the dashboard around an area of growth, district wide. So immediately,
[3:30:29] There's a follow-up conversation around like how do we target this in professional development or coaching?
[3:30:33] I think the same is true for sites as well, and so our hope in that data set is to be able to think about how to
[3:30:41] improve engaging continuous improvement on a quicker and more proactive cycle. So we're not just waiting until the
[3:30:47] student outcome data hits, but we're trying to continuously improve as we're watching practice develop.
[3:30:53] And one additional plug, I'll just say, for the strong work that lead has taken on in working with educators in the strong work that
[3:31:01] site administrators and their instructional leadership teams and teacher leaders and coaches have all taken on is four September.
[3:31:09] Again, I was just checking the numbers.
[3:31:10] We have close to 500 observations logged across K-8 just for the month of September.
[3:31:16] So it is a pretty robust data set for us to work with for
[3:31:20] or engaging in continuous improvement around instructional quality.
[3:31:26] Thank you, and I appreciate the reminder to sort of not complete data sets and understand their different values and their different purposes, so I appreciate that.
[3:31:33] Thank you.
[3:31:36] Commissioner Fisher, the Commissioner Ray.
[3:31:40] I appreciate some of this framing, and I'm going to ask my colleagues to help me stay strategically focused.
[3:31:47] Happy to.
[3:31:50] But I think, like, looking at slide, looking at the theory of action slide, I think my question
[3:31:57] is just about, do not come focused progress monitoring in general and what we call inputs
[3:32:03] versus outputs versus outcomes.
[3:32:06] Like, so that's a question for another day to make sure, because my real questions really
[3:32:12] are around like what we're naming as strategies, right, because to me and I took the year-long
[3:32:21] training, so I'm kind of geeked out on some of this, but to me some of what we're naming
[3:32:25] as strategies actually are more like inputs or outputs in the student outcomes focus definitions.
[3:32:33] So I'm really struggling to understand the specific outcomes here and what we're actually going
[3:32:41] to be measuring and monitoring, and like specifically to use the data point of our African-American
[3:32:46] students and how we actually saw a drop, yet strategically we've got each and every
[3:32:53] and we have a lot of, but I think to me when we say strategically we have each and every,
[3:32:59] that seems more like a program and an output and so I'm struggling to understand like what
[3:33:04] What is the actual strategy we've named the structural racism in the past, right, in
[3:33:11] our Q&A document?
[3:33:13] But when we say things here, like, you know, that we need more supports in each and every
[3:33:19] and more tier and tier two and tier three resources, and we name that in the same question, the
[3:33:23] same answer, like strategically, what does that look like, like, what does a tier two and
[3:33:32] tier three strategy, I think, and I recognize we're only in year one of this adoption, but
[3:33:36] I'm still struggling to understand what that's going to look like, and how families are
[3:33:41] going to hold us accountable to doing it, what data we're going to be monitoring, and where
[3:33:45] we're going to see that in our reports.
[3:33:47] So I don't know if that was a strategic question, but that's still where I'm still stuck noodling
[3:33:51] through all of this.
[3:33:53] I'm going to attempt to answer it as a strategic response, and if I don't then please help me.
[3:33:58] I think that if you actually look at the slide 15 under the plan, you'll start seeing
[3:34:07] how staff is thinking about what we did last year under the evidence section and what
[3:34:14] we learned from last year.
[3:34:15] We learned that providing additional professional development for our educators was yielded really
[3:34:22] positive improvements.
[3:34:23] It allowed our educators to feel much more confident in delivering the curriculum.
[3:34:30] And what Devon was alluding to, which is that instructional core, this kind of trifecta
[3:34:35] connection between the curriculum, which we all did, we fired in a new curriculum, and
[3:34:41] the educator who's going to be implementing that curriculum.
[3:34:44] So that means we have the strength and the professional development for our educators.
[3:34:48] and then that third leg is as student ownership.
[3:34:54] I'm learning all my actions.
[3:34:57] The student ownership piece where
[3:35:00] We're educators when they are comfortable in delivering the curriculum, they're going to be able to push our students to really engage in the learning and to own that instruction and make it their own because that's when true learning happens. So, we're going to try to create that condition for learning moving forward through more professional development. And what you're hearing from the team is not only
[3:35:29] only professional development at the educator level but bringing in site leaders, the administrators
[3:35:37] into this so that our administrators know what they're looking for and seeing and ways
[3:35:43] for them to support teachers when they're walking into the classroom to observe.
[3:35:51] Well the other part is us being more intentional in our learning walks, I know we keep talking
[3:35:57] about this but more intentional in our learning walks so that we can then be able to collect
[3:36:03] data so that we can then use that data to inform ourselves on how to move forward.
[3:36:09] Let me try asking a different way and I'm going to put up my notes from our board retreat
[3:36:15] and to quote AJ, there's a danger in asking quote unquote, is this happening in the classroom?
[3:36:21] That's a question that gives a false sense of security.
[3:36:23] We actually want to know that we are making progress on outcomes and strategies in place
[3:36:27] are effective and that we have data that shows us so.
[3:36:31] So I'm not seeing that for our African-American students.
[3:36:35] So that would lead, so I won't make any assumptions, but how do we get to the point of having the
[3:36:42] data that shows us that the progress is happening and strategies are in place when it's not there
[3:36:49] right now?
[3:36:49] I think that's really what I want to know.
[3:36:54] I was thinking about something that Dr. Conn, I used to say when she was here, she used
[3:37:00] to say that every data set has an implementation, data set, and then an impact.
[3:37:06] And that those implementation impact kind of like shift as you go along, so if you look
[3:37:10] at our theory of action, a lot of these are implementations and then impacts, implementation
[3:37:15] and then impacts, right? So if the ultimate impact is improving outcomes for African American
[3:37:20] students, for all students, but specifically for African American students, then we're saying
[3:37:24] that the implementation data there is that teachers are going to do something different in
[3:37:28] the classroom, right? And it's not just doing it, but doing it well. And so I think in year one,
[3:37:33] what we were doing is let's get everybody doing it. Great. We're all doing it. We're all going to
[3:37:38] try it. And then in year two, as we go into the classroom, like one of the things that I think
[3:37:43] Dr. Sue is alluding to is when we go in and we're seeing if students are not owning
[3:37:48] their learning, right, in its co-action three, if we're not seeing student ownership,
[3:37:53] why not?
[3:37:54] Is there an action the teacher could be taking that's different?
[3:37:59] So for example, as I mentioned, I was in two classrooms this past week during a learning
[3:38:03] walk and in one of the classrooms, when the teacher had them all practice, right, I saw
[3:38:08] that the teacher paused, and every single kid wrote something down on a whiteboard.
[3:38:13] And then the teacher counted back, and then they all held up their whiteboards.
[3:38:16] And then the teacher did something, looked around, and then made a note, and then asked
[3:38:21] the next question where they were now working on their Chromebooks to per person, and then
[3:38:25] they had to have it between them and enter the thing.
[3:38:28] And then he looked and said, okay, now he made a note when he looked at the whiteboards.
[3:38:32] He made a note when he looked at the data that was coming up in the Chromebooks.
[3:38:34] And then what I saw him do was pull a group of students.
[3:38:38] That's strategic.
[3:38:40] Now, is that happening everywhere?
[3:38:41] Is the question, and how do we use this learning walk data
[3:38:44] to say, okay, this is where we're seeing it happen?
[3:38:46] This is where we need to improve,
[3:38:47] and is it happening specifically for our focal populations?
[3:38:51] And I think that, like, I'm not going to lie to you,
[3:38:53] that, oh, we have that all down.
[3:38:54] But I think that the fact that we have, how many?
[3:39:01] Yeah.
[3:39:02] 500 already, and it's the middle of September,
[3:39:05] means that we'll gather enough data
[3:39:06] to be able to pause and say, what are we noticing in particular schools and can we learn
[3:39:11] from one school to the other? Can we learn from one classroom to the other? Because I could
[3:39:15] see that right away. So I do think it's going to be a second before we can say, I mean,
[3:39:21] I think that Commissioner Weissman-Oward brings a good point. If we can't figure out why did
[3:39:25] the Filipino population go up and the African-American population go down, then we're just like,
[3:39:29] they're on spaghetti at the wall and hope it all sticks. We're not unaware of that. So we are deep
[3:39:35] diving into it, but we don't know the answer to that question yet, but we hope to have it soon,
[3:39:39] right? Because I think that like the revision of the learning walk tool, the implementation of this
[3:39:45] curriculum with fidelity, the focus on our students that are not meeting our expectations,
[3:39:51] because we need to be doing something different for them means that we have to be adjusting over time.
[3:39:56] And hopefully, between what we're doing with administrators and what
[3:40:00] We're doing with teachers, we're going to see some of those changes, so I don't know, Devon, if I covered it or if you want to add.
[3:40:12] Can I just add that I think that was what I was trying to get at my question is presumably I'm assuming there are places in the district where focal students are doing well. And that you so that was what I was trying to get at my question of like where are they doing well and what are you learning. Not because again, it's it's really easy for all of us to project toward the future. And I think one of the less one of the teachings of this to now comes focus governance is to really try to stay focused in the
[3:40:36] current and past practice, so where are we seeing it work and what are we learning about
[3:40:41] that, that's what I was trying to get at, that then we'll inform that conversation moving
[3:40:47] forward.
[3:40:49] I want to open up to student, oh sorry, would you let me share something.
[3:40:54] No.
[3:40:56] Student delegates, do you want to share before I turn it over to Commissioner Ray, or anything
[3:41:01] Would you like to add, or just do, and great.
[3:41:05] Commissioner Rae?
[3:41:10] Thanks, President Kim.
[3:41:12] What I would like to ask is, to what extent are we seeing any of our students struggling with academic stamina, endurance, persistence?
[3:41:24] And if this is a challenge that's impacting our progress toward our student goals,
[3:41:31] then what is our strategy for supporting the students who need the support?
[3:41:39] Thank you, Commissioner Rae, for the question.
[3:41:42] I think in general, the strategy that we're using to support our students is one,
[3:41:48] implementing a new curriculum.
[3:41:50] That's a big strategy that was resource-rich.
[3:41:55] And then what folks here have already alluded to is making sure that we hire
[3:42:01] qualified math teachers. Those are both things that we did last year and then, lastly,
[3:42:12] is focusing in on deep professional development for the teachers to get them ready to deliver
[3:42:23] the curriculum. Because this is going to be our second year in implementing this curriculum,
[3:42:32] it is going to be interesting to dive deeper into the data that we will see
[3:42:38] for last year, where some of our students are doing really well and why,
[3:42:44] and where some students are struggling and why. So we won't be able to answer that particular question
[3:42:50] right now but it is definitely something that the team is really curious about and we've had a lot
[3:42:59] of deep conversations around. But again it's just those are the big strategies that we have taken
[3:43:07] on and we truly believe that with now a curriculum in place we need to do more professional development
[3:43:15] and support our educators and support our site leaders.
[3:43:25] I mean, I feel like I want to add a little bit to this.
[3:43:29] A, I feel like I don't hear that very much because I think that was your question, do we hear that?
[3:43:35] I would also say, you're always going to want students to persevere through anything that is difficult.
[3:43:43] If you're challenging students and we've talked about that as high expectations quite often,
[3:43:49] if you don't have the high expectations, then they're obviously not going to make it.
[3:43:54] So you've got to have the high expectations and you have to work with kids to persevere
[3:43:58] through tough times and through tough problems.
[3:44:01] Yes, sometimes math can be really difficult, but at the same time that is part of the student
[3:44:07] ownership that I feel like we are looking at, right?
[3:44:11] Student ownership isn't just time for students to work, it is what the teacher is doing when
[3:44:17] someone is struggling, or when someone does feel like they want to quit.
[3:44:22] I feel like I don't hear that in mass, right, from your question.
[3:44:27] But at the same time, it does happen in classes.
[3:44:29] And the ability of a teacher to work with students,
[3:44:33] give them some help and not give them the answer, and have them persevere.
[3:44:37] Even if at times they're wrong, but
[3:44:41] give them the encouragement that you actually have to work hard
[3:44:47] too often in math, like we get excited when they get the right answer.
[3:44:51] The truth of the matter is that if students are persevering through something that's really hard,
[3:44:55] even if they get it wrong, right, those are some of the skills that we want to...
[3:45:31] From our calibration guidance as part of our math learning walk tool, which does have a specific indicator related somewhat to this question but to build on deputy superintendent Davis's point, which is the idea that students actively engage in productive struggle by using strategies to persevere when faced with solving challenging mathematical problems. Strategies to persevere such as but not limited to writing, speaking, questioning, rereading, revising strategies using representations and or
[3:46:01] discussing their thinking. All of those moves are supported by teacher practice. So where
[3:46:07] we see perhaps those things not coming in the classroom is a question of the quality
[3:46:12] of teacher practice. To what degree when a student is struggling is that teacher entering
[3:46:16] into that small group or that pair and asking probing questions suggesting the use of different
[3:46:22] representations and where we see a lack of that particularly in classrooms with high percentages
[3:46:28] as a focal students is due to educator mindset and potentially a lack of belief in rigor
[3:46:34] or high expectations for that students. So for us, the push is actually around both the
[3:46:40] mindset shift for the teacher but also the pedagogical strategies of questioning and
[3:46:46] probing as opposed to just answering or focusing on solution.
[3:46:51] If I can add real quickly and I think that's why it's been brought up several times about
[3:46:56] the learning walks now excited we are because part of this is really thinking about that instructional
[3:47:01] core that Dr. Sue alluded to earlier and the fact that those core actions 2 and 3 really kind
[3:47:06] of get at what the teachers are doing in relation to fostering those practices that we want to see
[3:47:13] kind of displayed in our students that same perseverance the way to grapple with the mathematics and the
[3:47:18] And the, you know, basically having the, you know, the understanding that it's okay to grapple with the mathematics, not necessarily get it right, but then learn from that process.
[3:47:31] And I think that's all part of that perseverance piece. And so, you know, to the points that John and Devon have made, our excitement in this is really because we are in that second year of our curriculum.
[3:47:42] We are now really trying to hone in on kind of like the pieces that dig deeper under the hood of like teacher practice and curriculum how those pieces map together and how they manifest themselves in the classroom so that students are in the position to do the kind of success that we're hoping, hoping that they'll be able to do.
[3:48:04] Thank you. Thank you. I will I'll wait before I see if anyone else anything else. Thank you.
[3:48:11] Thank you. And I agree. I mean, how much more do we learn from our failure? So we learn from our successes.
[3:48:17] Well, I'll speak for myself. No comment, please. On that one.
[3:48:22] But I will say that I think we are all really excited to see some of the the SEL
[3:48:30] our social-emotional learning survey results from students as well as learning walk results
[3:48:35] this year because we are asking and looking for students who talk about I was able to work
[3:48:44] through my struggles because we really believe how important that is. We really believe
[3:48:49] that struggling through instructional, like the instructional challenge is important.
[3:48:55] And so it's going to hopefully we'll be able to yield some more insights for us at the
[3:49:02] next progress monitoring meeting so we can share with you what students are really sharing
[3:49:07] with us and like what John is saying, we're not hearing a lot of this type of feedback
[3:49:14] but we'll see from the survey.
[3:49:22] If we can go to slide five, or I guess we don't need to project it, but my
[3:49:32] question, so we know that yeah you know, I guess it takes anywhere from one to
[3:49:39] three years for things like curriculum implementation to actually take off. I
[3:49:45] like to call it the steeping years like T. And so when we're looking at 45% in
[3:49:52] in 2026 for grade eight. I'm trying to go back to three
[3:50:00] 4 years, and ask ourselves, were there things that we did that we believe have contributed
[3:50:08] to what we are now experiencing around games?
[3:50:15] And as I was trying to formulate this question
[3:50:18] in my head, I couldn't help but wonder, so then 45% is still 5% below the 2019 level that
[3:50:25] or kind of level that we were at, at 50 percent.
[3:50:28] And there's this gap in the middle of COVID.
[3:50:33] So related to that question would be,
[3:50:35] how do we know that the gains that we're experiencing now
[3:50:37] are just not a recalibration back to our pre-COVID days?
[3:50:40] How do we know that the strategies that we're deploying today
[3:50:43] are actually the ones that are contributing
[3:50:45] to the gains that we're experiencing now?
[3:50:48] I guess with my question.
[3:50:52] That's a great question.
[3:50:54] I mean, it's a great question.
[3:50:57] And I think again, something that we were also grappling with, because if you look at
[3:51:01] and think of 2020, which would be where all the fifth graders were in 2020, and in 2021,
[3:51:08] they'll be sixth grade in 2022, they'll be seventh grade, and then 2023, when we started
[3:51:13] doing this, they're at fourth grade, at eighth grade, and you can see the struggle.
[3:51:18] And you can see them continuing, these groups of students continue to struggle.
[3:51:22] and by 2026, this is where our first group of fourth graders, third of fourth graders.
[3:51:32] So there is, perhaps, it could be a rebound, it could also be our strategic investment
[3:51:39] in the curriculum and in doubling down on professional development.
[3:51:45] But we have to go back into the data and comb through and dive through and look and understand
[3:51:52] and that, but I think you're raising a very, very important question for us.
[3:51:56] Is this just the amazingness of our students being able to quote unquote rebound, and we're
[3:52:02] rebounding from the learning loss of the pandemic?
[3:52:04] Or is it a combination of that plus a new curriculum, plus intentional focused professional
[3:52:12] development that we're putting into educators?
[3:52:16] I'm sure the team has some thoughts on this.
[3:52:19] Would you like to share?
[3:52:23] I think the only thing that I can say is that time will come, right?
[3:52:30] So assuming that the pre-COVID baseline is about 50%, I think the question is, will
[3:52:35] we not only reach back to that level, but surpass it, right, and by how much?
[3:52:41] I think the other questions that I'm curious about for the next two, three years as the curriculum
[3:52:47] implementation as fully implemented and we get to see the full impact of that.
[3:52:55] Are there other things that we have learned from other districts during that same period
[3:53:02] that we are taking away as part of our own learning and understanding for context?
[3:53:16] I mean, I just, you know, stopping sort of saying COVID kind of impacted everyone and
[3:53:20] we saw the declines there, but I mean, I guess my question would be, from a long-range perspective
[3:53:32] of the data that we're seeing in front of us, right? If every district is kind of having this
[3:53:37] experience where they're having a significant dip of learning loss during COVID and then kind of
[3:53:42] a gradual increase afterwards, that's actually quite illuminating in terms of kind of our own
[3:53:47] performance as a district, and what then I would, again, I, the thing I'm trying to figure
[3:53:52] out here is what makes the moves that we are doing, either different or the same, that
[3:53:58] we can draw conclusions potentially around, around the effectiveness of the strategies and
[3:54:03] how, maybe, how we're deploying it, or what we're deploying, and does that tell us anything
[3:54:09] about our outcomes?
[3:54:12] I mean, I think we could all agree that across school districts in the nation, there was some incomplete learning during the COVID years, so I made that that's a statement we can all agree on.
[3:54:22] I think that's something that we had a discussion last week or the week before when we were talking about this progress monitoring report around where are the schools that we're really seeing improve and can we learn something from those particular schools or their structures that we can compare, there's things that are happening.
[3:54:36] And, you know, while this is the second year of this curriculum, there were many, many
[3:54:44] teachers that piloted in, you know, the beta year or whatever you want to call it, the
[3:54:49] pilot year.
[3:54:49] And so there weren't schools that adopted, we didn't do school, school adoption, we did
[3:54:53] like, if you want to do it, you do it.
[3:54:55] But what we noticed is that there were particular schools that completely took it up.
[3:54:59] and then those
[3:55:00] And schools where there is strong common planning time during on a sign time during their extra, during their non-teaching period, that is not their prep. Just to explain that to everyone here without making sure we all understand what that is. So where that was really clear, where the leader was very involved, where there was implementation with integrity, then we did see that those schools improved more. So that was one of the things, actually one of the ideas that we had for tonight.
[3:55:29] was to bring some of those folks here, and I failed miserably in getting them here because
[3:55:34] I don't know, I just fell off the plate. But next time I promise, we're going to bring them here
[3:55:38] to talk about their own experiences, the teachers' experiences, and the leaders' experiences,
[3:55:42] because we do think that that will flesh out some of what you're saying. But I think that's like
[3:55:46] to Moonhock's point of time, we'll tell. It's a good question, right? In 2020, the current first graders,
[3:55:52] the first graders in 2020 are now seventh graders. So like, what did they miss in 2020?
[3:55:59] in 2021, how are we trying to accelerate that learning in 2022-23?
[3:56:05] Now that we're coming back, will we see a shift because we're implementing this curriculum
[3:56:09] with fidelity and really paying attention to focal populations and to the interplay between
[3:56:14] curriculum teacher and student action?
[3:56:17] Which I think that like, to be clear, I mean, I can recall a time where we were going as a
[3:56:23] classroom and paying attention to what the students were doing with our core rubric, which was
[3:56:26] It's really important because we had finally adopted something that was universally used in our school district to examine practice.
[3:56:33] But we weren't always identifying and what's the teacher doing to make that happen.
[3:56:37] And I do think that we've shifted that.
[3:56:39] I mean, the work that Devon and the team did on coming up with this learning walk tool to say what's the end-to-play of those three things.
[3:56:45] I think we'll make a difference.
[3:56:48] So your point is that happening in other districts and do we have to look, I think we could do that.
[3:56:52] We can see if it's going to be similar.
[3:56:54] because I think, I mean, just to, you know, acknowledge, I mean, PD has been
[3:57:01] happening for ever in our district. I think the question would be the
[3:57:05] content of our PD change set over those over that time. Right, because that
[3:57:10] will help to illuminate a little bit around the strategies of it. I think there
[3:57:15] actually has been some significant changes, so I would just say, so for example
[3:57:22] last year, 25, 26, was the first year that we had done full professional development
[3:57:34] release days for middle school math teachers since I joined the district in 2019.
[3:57:39] So that hadn't happened in many years, so we had been pulling teachers centrally.
[3:57:45] We hadn't been doing curriculum aligned professional learning since I joined the district in 2019.
[3:57:51] So there actually have been significant shifts in just the content, the style, the structure,
[3:57:57] the strategy associated with just, and that's just professional learning aside from any
[3:58:02] of the other components.
[3:58:03] And a lot of that, I would say is, you know, we spoke to earlier the shifts in staffing and
[3:58:08] professional learning.
[3:58:09] So there have been, I would say, pretty big structural shifts and a reintroduction of certain
[3:58:15] professional learning strategies that had been absent for many years prior.
[3:58:19] And I'll just add one more thing, which is that we were trying to get early release to
[3:58:23] happen for the school district so that everyone was early released on Wednesday.
[3:58:27] When COVID happened, that was like the first year we got it into play, so then we didn't
[3:58:31] have the opportunity in those years to put into play the align released.
[3:58:35] That's curriculum and instruction have done with the, minimally with the elementary schools,
[3:58:40] right?
[3:58:40] So now all of the elementary schools get early align release and they get curriculum that
[3:58:45] that is done, that the coaches get trained, and the coaches do that, that those professional
[3:58:49] developments with their staff.
[3:58:51] Year one was literacy, year two was math, now we're back to literacy with an option
[3:58:56] to do math on another day of the week, and so I do think that like that was significant.
[3:59:01] I mean, I have this like memory of trying to organize across many things to have early, early
[3:59:06] release happen across the district, but then like what happens during early release was
[3:59:12] really vague until recently.
[3:59:13] So I think that that is also different.
[3:59:16] Thank you to delegates for your time here tonight.
[3:59:19] I appreciate you.
[3:59:21] And happy school year.
[3:59:24] My last question.
[3:59:27] Slide eight.
[3:59:29] These are our, we're looking at star,
[3:59:33] math, fall, star, math, winter, then spring, S back.
[3:59:38] For interim goals.
[3:59:41] I guess my question would be, if we know that, and I might be stepping in a pilot
[3:59:47] due to, because my question may be just wrong, so just correct me if I'm wrong here.
[3:59:53] Thank you.
[3:59:54] We see the increase from fall to spring final SBAC scores.
[4:00:00] How much of what evidence do we have that are inarims? And I know this is within a year, but what evidence do we have that are inarims are actually predictive of overall aspect performance relative to just fall to spring growth that we see typically in a year? It's based on the Pearson correlation studies that come out of that. So that was part of the reason why we ended up switching to an interim.
[4:00:30] from assessment measure that was predictive of the SBAC
[4:00:33] was so that we had that high level of predictability such
[4:00:36] that within the year we had a sense
[4:00:38] of where students were relative to that progress.
[4:00:45] But we now have students who've taken them both, right?
[4:00:48] So is it, are you asking about like,
[4:00:51] do we have evidence that it's predictive for our students?
[4:00:55] Does that make sense?
[4:00:56] I think that's what he was asking.
[4:00:57] Yes, we've actually done the correlation studies
[4:00:59] ourselves internally, yes.
[4:01:01] Oh, okay, I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
[4:01:02] I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
[4:01:02] Yes, yes, so we've, as a, as a first pass at the selection of it, we had, we obviously hadn't done that with our own students into correlation studies, but as we've gone along each year, one of the things that we do in practice is just to confirm that our correlations are still mapping up, now we look at it more at the more granular continuous scale level, which is at the scale score versus the more binary, proficient, not proficient because you have more predictability in that way.
[4:01:31] So, sometimes because of the ways that things map on, it's not exact like correlation when it comes to looking at the
[4:01:38] proficient versus not proficient, but on the scale score level it is highly correlated.
[4:01:43] Thank you.
[4:01:45] Well, I'm sorry, and due to the high correlation, the
[4:01:51] plan is to look at the winter star results and then make determinations at that time,
[4:01:59] whether how our students are doing and perhaps we would have to increase our instructional
[4:02:08] coaching in certain schools or for certain populations or do additional PDs in certain
[4:02:16] classrooms and for certain schools.
[4:02:19] So I think we're going to use that data to inform how we can pivot and I know this is something
[4:02:26] that the board has asked all the time of just, great, you have all this data, what are
[4:02:30] you going to do with it?
[4:02:32] And so, hopefully, when we come back at the next progress monitoring report, we'll
[4:02:37] be able to share what the data is showing us and what we have done to pivot to continue
[4:02:42] to push the instructional core.
[4:02:49] All right.
[4:02:51] So, to build on actually what President Kim was asking, you know, for goal 2.1, the
[4:02:56] The coral areas, if say, you know, we have a bounce back of four points for general population.
[4:03:04] If say, hypothetically, if that's due to, we're post-COVID, the resilience of our students
[4:03:10] as we discussed, we're still seeing it has gone down for African American students.
[4:03:15] So similarly, I'd be interested in what does that data show in other school districts?
[4:03:21] has it similarly gone down if so what might be some of those reasons so I would
[4:03:27] ask just as you look at other potential district data if you see the same
[4:03:33] thing. Yes thank you so related to that then you know there seem to be two
[4:03:40] strategies in the commissioner request for information for interim goal 2.1 it says
[4:03:45] in the sixth grade each and every initiatives being planned to mirror the
[4:03:48] successful kindergarten model for interim goal 1.1.
[4:03:52] And as I just to lose state, that seems to refer to
[4:03:57] start early literacy for AAPI where we saw 1%
[4:04:01] point increase from spring to spring.
[4:04:03] Is that correct?
[4:04:07] So in the request for information,
[4:04:10] it says that there's a plan to create in each and every
[4:04:14] initiative for sixth grade that mirrors interim goal 1.1.
[4:04:19] And I'm assuming that refers to the increase in one percentage point that we saw for
[4:04:25] in-term goal 1.1 related to AAPI earlier the literacy on the start exam, correct?
[4:04:33] Yes, it's because we're seeing that each and every by name strategy is working to support
[4:04:39] our African American students in achieving the in-year growth for literacy.
[4:04:47] And we believe that if we deploy the same strategy for our six graders, we will be able to then build that within your growth for math.
[4:05:00] So then is the strategy. So there are two strategies, then, that I'm hearing. The first is implementing
[4:05:05] a new each and every for sixth grade math. And then the other one that I think I've heard
[4:05:12] the panel talk about is more around the instructional guidance, learning walks, is across all schools.
[4:05:22] Is that correct or that's sort of the strategy?
[4:05:28] That's correct, I think.
[4:05:31] Yes, so for six graders we're talking about expanding on the each and every by name for our six grade African American students.
[4:05:40] For 2.2 we're talking about increasing professional development for our administrators and having a more refined learning walk tool.
[4:05:52] and having more learning walks, and Kevin can speak more about the learning walks.
[4:05:58] Yes, I was also going to build on that, and then I couldn't remember which slide to go back to,
[4:06:03] but additionally, I want to return to the lab schools that are receiving intensified support
[4:06:08] from TNTP. So all of those schools were strategically selected as they have high percentages of
[4:06:14] focal student populations. So those schools are receiving intensified support in strategies such
[4:06:20] as instructional leadership, support for common planning time, the design of their math lab courses,
[4:06:28] coaching for individual math teachers. So essentially, what we want to build on is how we can
[4:06:36] improve the quality of instruction and the high expectations that educators have for
[4:06:41] focal students at those lab sites in order to shift student proficiency rates. So we will not only
[4:06:48] I'm going to just be tracking student outcome growth very closely at those school sites,
[4:06:51] but our hope is truly by the nature of, you know, lab schools is to best understand
[4:06:58] like which practices are really working that we might want to codify and scale across
[4:07:02] the system.
[4:07:05] Yeah, that's really helpful.
[4:07:06] I was actually, I was wondering if the learning walks were specifically designed for, I think
[4:07:12] in the past we've been presented information where 30% of African-American population
[4:07:17] is within six schools and so forth.
[4:07:20] So I was unsure if those were across our entire portfolio or specifically geared.
[4:07:26] And what I'm hearing you say is, correct me if I'm wrong, it's across all schools.
[4:07:31] But we also then have labs that are specifically focused on where we have focal populations.
[4:07:39] Okay.
[4:07:39] But to
[4:07:46] follow up on the lab school strategy, are there any additional financial or staffing
[4:07:54] resources that are going to be deployed at those school sites as opposed to supports
[4:08:01] coming from central office?
[4:08:09] I can talk about one piece just to name the central office component and then I will defer
[4:08:17] for the additional resources portion of the question.
[4:08:19] But one of the things that I want to just sort of zero in on in the labs structures
[4:08:25] and intensified support is part of our goal is to increase the capacity of educators
[4:08:33] at the school site.
[4:08:35] So ultimately, we know that when we can grow the quality of teaching practice and professionally
[4:08:40] develop administrators and instructional coaches and then support them to develop strong systems
[4:08:45] that not just support their professional growth, but actually support their retention at the school site so that we can build a really stable teaching staff.
[4:08:55] Over time, we hope that will lead to the growth of instructional quality.
[4:09:00] So I just want to name that like part of our goal here is not just sort of like the deployment of resources that then come and go, but actually building the systems and structures that will grow and retain staff at the school site.
[4:09:12] Vice President Healing, that is a tactical question, so I would encourage you or invite you to turn this into a more strategic question.
[4:09:20] Thank you for that opportunity, President.
[4:09:22] Don't mention it.
[4:09:25] I'll be trying to reframe that as a more strategic question.
[4:09:30] Last spring, during budgeting season, I know that there were last minute funds from the state that were allocated
[4:09:38] to the district, that we, I think as a board, we're not fully understanding how those funds,
[4:09:49] I think approximately $30 million, we're going to be deployed towards student outcomes
[4:09:55] in the district. Do the strategies that are described
[4:10:00] Here, allocate those funds or represent any kind of changes in funding allocations toward meeting goal two. Thank you for the very strategic question, vice president healing. So the funds, the additional funding that we received from the state were already purpose restricted to certain things, but the amount that
[4:10:30] that we allocated towards at services components was around $12.5 million.
[4:10:38] And part of the $12.5 million is actually in development right now,
[4:10:44] planning process right now as we think through what would the additional professional development for
[4:10:51] our educators look like?
[4:10:52] What would it look like if we were to be really strategic in allocating additional supports to
[4:10:59] to focal population students, and how would we provide the additional support to educators,
[4:11:09] to administrators, so principal supervisors.
[4:11:14] So as part of this strategy, we have not dipped into the $12.5 million, because we were
[4:11:29] hiring up for math teachers, we do have some wiggle room within that the the allocation
[4:11:39] to be able to support the lab schools.
[4:11:44] John, do you want to add anything to that?
[4:11:47] No, but I think it's a good push that if we think that a school would benefit from something
[4:11:53] extra in aligned with that, that we should do that. So, you know, there's nothing right
[4:11:59] right now that I can say but at the same time we should consider it.
[4:12:07] Thank you.
[4:12:10] Also on slide 13 there is an indication that there's been more of a focus on preparing
[4:12:22] assistant principals to support goal two on sites.
[4:12:27] Are there any middle schools that do not have assistant principals?
[4:12:32] And what is our strategy for reaching them with the same professional development and
[4:12:38] supports that schools with assistant principals are receiving?
[4:12:42] Yeah, I can take that.
[4:12:43] So last year we started the year, so we have what's called cohort meetings.
[4:12:48] The cohort meetings are where principals and assistant principals get together.
[4:12:51] And at the early education and elementary level, they come together once collectively
[4:12:57] principles, the system principles, and then once a month in what's called citywide where
[4:13:00] they come together across, and we include their instructional coaches.
[4:13:04] That was in partnership with curriculum and instruction in the last couple of years.
[4:13:07] At the middle school level, we separate principles in the system principles into two different groups
[4:13:12] because of the size of the groups and also because of the APs need to stay back when principles
[4:13:17] are off and vice versa.
[4:13:18] And every single K-8 and middle school has at least one assistant principle last year and this
[4:13:23] current year.
[4:13:25] When we started the additional support for math, given that we had goal two as the focus for middle school,
[4:13:36] Lee and CNI got together and said, all right, well, we won't do another meeting off campus.
[4:13:41] We'll do a virtual meeting, and we'll separate the group into K8s in middle school.
[4:13:45] And so we've started out the year pulling principles and assistant principles for a second time a month,
[4:13:50] but virtually by their grade ban.
[4:13:53] So K8 principles and the system principles came once
[4:13:55] and then middle school principles came another time
[4:13:57] and the virtual meetings were just terrible
[4:13:59] for so many reasons.
[4:14:01] And so after two months of trying that we were like,
[4:14:03] nope, we can't do this.
[4:14:04] This like, no, first of all, everyone's getting pulled
[4:14:06] and an emergency fire drill somewhere.
[4:14:08] And so then we put our heads together
[4:14:09] and we said, well, what can we do?
[4:14:11] And we said, well, what if we give assistant principles,
[4:14:14] this focus, and then we have assistant principles
[4:14:17] bring it back to principles?
[4:14:18] And so we tried that last year
[4:14:19] and we saw some success.
[4:14:21] We saw a deep and understanding for our system principles.
[4:14:24] We saw an increase in learning walks last year by them.
[4:14:26] We saw them engage in conversations
[4:14:28] that we hadn't seen previously across schools.
[4:14:30] And we didn't always see it translate
[4:14:32] into them having conversations
[4:14:33] that were strategic with their principle.
[4:14:35] So at the end of the year, M and I were like,
[4:14:37] all right, what do we do?
[4:14:38] And so we started building it into our one-on-ones.
[4:14:40] We'd go to the principal and be like,
[4:14:41] what'd you learn from your system principle this month?
[4:14:43] You can see how well that probably went over.
[4:14:45] That felt like it was a gotcha.
[4:14:46] So then this year, we said, let's not do that.
[4:14:48] So when we built out our scope and sequence for professional learning this year for administrators
[4:14:54] in conjunction with RPA and CNI, what we said is how do we do something with principles and with the
[4:15:05] All the K-8s have coaches, one is still on the process of being hired, but at the middle school level about half of them have coaches. And so we wanted to be strategic about doing what we're doing with elementary school and applying it to the middle school level, even though the role of the coach of the middle school level is slightly different. So we learned from last year, and we've had our first partnership with curriculum this last month, September.
[4:15:29] for both principles and assistant principles
[4:15:32] around learning walks specifically
[4:15:33] and like how to get started
[4:15:35] and to make sure we remove the barriers.
[4:15:37] Lauren, we hope you did that.
[4:15:38] And this coming month we'll do a calibration
[4:15:40] of like how do we know what we're seeing as high quality
[4:15:42] and we'll do it in both places,
[4:15:44] principle and assistant principle.
[4:15:47] Thank you.
[4:15:48] I really appreciated the linked spreadsheet
[4:15:53] in the responses regarding the uptake of algebra
[4:15:56] across different middle schools and K-8s
[4:15:59] And was wondering what our strategy is to make algebra available at the two schools that that spreadsheet indicates have no eighth graders taking algebra and whether that is an availability resource issue of our provision or whether there are strategies to improve readiness of students to access the curriculum as well.
[4:16:23] I was waiting for that question.
[4:16:25] I'm also going to say that if you can just try to turn that into a more strategic question,
[4:16:30] that would be helpful.
[4:16:31] That's my question.
[4:16:32] What are strategies to make sure all of our students, including two entire middle schools,
[4:16:37] are able to access that?
[4:16:38] I don't think by putting the word strategy in the question, it turns it into necessarily
[4:16:43] a strategic question.
[4:16:44] Just saying.
[4:16:49] Is there, can you,
[4:16:54] may I maybe be able to help here?
[4:16:57] I'd love for you to models to issue a question ask these.
[4:17:00] I think your question is aimed at an accessibility question and how it improves your three outcomes.
[4:17:11] I think it's about barriers.
[4:17:13] That's what I'm hearing.
[4:17:14] That is also what I'm hearing.
[4:17:17] Maybe one question would be what are the barriers that we know exist among our eighth grade students
[4:17:22] currently at our schools, that we may want to consider as we think about improving our
[4:17:29] eighth grade math outcomes.
[4:17:32] And I am asking that on a slight specific level for equity purposes.
[4:17:38] All right, I'm going to pick up the question because we know which two schools it is and
[4:17:42] there are two different reasons that those two schools.
[4:17:44] So I think we have one K-A and one middle school that didn't have any uptakers for algebra.
[4:17:51] as you know, the algebra was offered across all school sites and where anyone wanted to take
[4:17:55] algebra they were encouraged and supported to do so. In fact, two schools, three schools added
[4:18:02] a zero period this year. Might I add, almost seamlessly, like it was kind of impressive, I want to
[4:18:08] like pick, I want to like lift up those administrators that did gargantuan work to make teachers or sharing
[4:18:14] classrooms, kids who take the bus get it. I mean, it really was a lot of work on the part of the
[4:18:18] of principals and the unions that participated
[4:18:21] with those principals and the assistant principals,
[4:18:23] so anyway, that's not what you asked me,
[4:18:24] but I'm just gonna give a plug for them.
[4:18:26] At the two schools where we saw that students
[4:18:29] didn't enroll in algebra,
[4:18:30] there was at the K-8 level,
[4:18:32] there were kind of like three ways that K-8s picked this up.
[4:18:35] One was, we're just gonna enroll everyone in algebra
[4:18:38] because we don't know what else to do
[4:18:40] because our school site is so tiny
[4:18:42] that if we don't give everyone this elective,
[4:18:45] then we can't make our schedule work.
[4:18:46] So in some cases, regardless of how many students were automatically enrolled, every single
[4:18:52] student got their math eight and then they got the algebra and then where they opted out,
[4:18:56] they tried to figure out what to do and there were some creative ways of doing that.
[4:19:00] In other schools, they opted in only the kids who opted in and then they really tried to work out
[4:19:05] their schedule and there were some funky electives happening and then at the third school, they offered
[4:19:10] the opportunity but no one was actually eligible at that particular school and so no one picked it
[4:19:15] And so for the first year, what they said is let's do some math labs.
[4:19:18] And similarly, at the middle school where this happened, there was no automatic enrollment at that particular site.
[4:19:24] And they're using their algebra FTE for sixth and seventh grade math labs to increase one eligibility for automatic enrollment.
[4:19:31] But also excitement around algebra.
[4:19:33] So I do think that there will be some shifts in both of those places for next year.
[4:19:37] And there was some questions that we had around like, where do we allow?
[4:19:40] or where do we support leaders to make decisions that are really good for their community,
[4:19:45] but also where do we push the conversations so that if it's challenging because of a structural
[4:19:50] issue, we can interrupt that structural issue to make sure that access is happening,
[4:19:53] especially for our early-street students.
[4:19:55] So thanks for that question, because it's one we have to.
[4:20:00] I wanted to pick up and follow up on Vice President Eulings. It's actually was her earlier question. I think it relates to this one, too. So we have this 12, the 12 million, 12.5 million that was put in the budget as a commitment, which I actually think were required to spend because otherwise we're not honoring the state reserve cap requirement. So that's a different topic. So my question is, given that,
[4:20:30] And given the fact that we have to spend it, what do we know about interventions that
[4:20:35] do work for based on targeted increased investments at schools?
[4:20:40] Like, where has that been happening and what have we learned from it?
[4:20:43] I guess I was thinking about this, your question too, about like, oh, if a school hasn't been
[4:20:48] able to implement this, what are examples of targeted investments we've already done that
[4:20:51] we have data showing we think they work that might inform our thinking about investments
[4:20:58] moving forward?
[4:20:59] I
[4:21:03] can see, I can see John being frustrated, you know, I think again because this is going
[4:21:13] to be the first that we just completed one full year of the math curriculum, I think
[4:21:22] there's still a lot of learnings that has to happen.
[4:21:25] and we still need to evaluate the data
[4:21:28] and see how we are doing in implementing the curriculum.
[4:21:35] I will say, from just, again, talking to the team,
[4:21:40] that we do need to provide additional supports
[4:21:45] from for our focal students and something
[4:21:49] that John and the team and I have had lots of conversations
[4:21:53] about, and supports could look
[4:21:55] anywhere from additional instructional coaches for educators to additional
[4:22:02] family supports for students and for families to differential supporting
[4:22:10] differential instruction inside the classroom. And I think this is all going to
[4:22:16] require a lot of planning from the team for the team and something that we are
[4:22:24] actively engaging in right now so we don't have an answer for you but I will say
[4:22:30] that we are actively thinking through that. And again to be clear I wasn't asking
[4:22:35] for the plan I was asking what we know about what we're already doing which I
[4:22:40] assume we have knowledge of so I but I I understand if we don't want to answer
[4:22:44] that question right now but I guess the question really was about what are we
[4:22:46] already doing in terms of targeted investments because we are I know we're doing
[4:22:51] some I mean it's not that we're not doing anything so I guess my question was
[4:22:54] more about what are we learning from what was happening,
[4:22:56] that's what's already been happening in the past,
[4:22:59] not so much a push to already have the plan.
[4:23:01] So I apologize if that wasn't clear.
[4:23:03] Well, I think one of the things that the team has just,
[4:23:06] I'm sorry, just in my eyes.
[4:23:07] One of the things that the team has just shared
[4:23:09] is just that in learning that just pulling our APs out
[4:23:14] for additional professional learning opportunities
[4:23:18] was not enough and that we're now going to do
[4:23:20] professional opportunities for the APs
[4:23:23] as well as the site leader. So that's an additional thing that we've learned and now we're pivoting
[4:23:28] to do more and expand. We're also realizing that we need to do more professional development
[4:23:36] opportunities across grade cohorts and grade bands to support our educators.
[4:23:43] And I know that there's a focus on expanding on our each and every student by name,
[4:23:51] where we're learning how we do that for our African-American students and now we want
[4:23:58] to replicate it for our six graders and doing more intentional English learner-focused
[4:24:08] trainings.
[4:24:10] So there are things that we've learned this past year and we're going to try a couple
[4:24:16] of those things moving forward and then in terms of tapping into the 12.5 we're going
[4:24:24] to continue to figure out how to use that.
[4:24:28] My next question is a follow-up question to Cousin Alexander's question, which is Interim
[4:24:35] Goul 2.1 looks at 6th grade African-American students and the first evaluation for that
[4:24:41] that is in the fall, which is pretty soon after they've finished their elementary school
[4:24:45] education. Given our ability to track or students went to elementary school and our middle
[4:24:52] school theater patterns, do we know of any strategies that we're employing in elementary
[4:24:58] entry schools.
[4:25:00] Such as lesson study or anything else, that are predictive of higher sixth grade performance for our
[4:25:07] focal students coming in at the beginning of middle school to help with that readiness for
[4:25:11] eighth grade achievement.
[4:25:18] Third time this term.
[4:25:24] There's actually a question that I've been very curious and interested in. I just haven't had a time to dig in.
[4:25:31] Not just lesson study, but just based on where students come from, which schools,
[4:25:35] and going back to many of your questions about identifying bright spots about things that were done well.
[4:25:42] I was actually just browsing some of the historical data.
[4:25:47] Many focus students achievement issues go way back, right?
[4:25:53] So I've always held the line that trying to support students in middle school is a little bit too late.
[4:26:01] So, yeah, in order to kind of dig into that, we'd be very interested in going farther back in time to see where the optimal point of intervention might be.
[4:26:18] Unfortunately, we don't have that information at our fingertips right now, but definitely something that we should look into.
[4:26:25] I
[4:26:29] mean, what I heard was what elementary schools are doing well, or maybe not, that are contributing to that sixth grade dip.
[4:26:37] And I just don't think we've sussed out that feeder pattern and where kids go to be able to answer that really well.
[4:26:44] But again, figuring that out might lead to some type of like something that's happening in the third, fourth, fifth grade at particular schools that would help us in the future.
[4:26:55] Yeah, I think my question is more, are there, when we see data, we see it's district wide, but
[4:27:02] when we break it down to like elementary school level perhaps, are there elementary schools
[4:27:08] where focal students are outperforming and to what strategies do we attribute that?
[4:27:14] And can we expand on that?
[4:27:22] I am hesitating because mine is an inference-based extrapolation and not one that I can say with
[4:27:30] deep research base, maybe I'll give that anyways.
[4:27:37] So I think there are some consistent and
[4:27:41] predictable patterns when we look at schools across middle school and elementary school
[4:27:48] that we see. And so you know we have some high growth schools particularly for focal populations
[4:27:55] of students, particularly for black students at the middle school level, and there's one specific
[4:28:00] specific school I'm thinking where their math growth actually outpaced their ELA growth,
[4:28:05] which is unusual, and what I would say, and there are some similar elementary schools
[4:28:14] in that pattern.
[4:28:16] I think what I would say predictably, and again, this is not a research based, but from my
[4:28:21] own, like, inferences being in those classrooms, you are looking at classrooms where that
[4:28:29] that trifecta of high quality curriculum and instruction, high quality teacher practice
[4:28:34] and strong student ownership are occurring every single day.
[4:28:41] And I just would say I think we dramatically often underplay what is required in terms
[4:28:46] of like the consistency and the precision of instruction to move outcomes.
[4:28:51] And I will also say I think we dramatically underplay the deep belief that adults have
[4:28:56] have to have in the brilliance of students in order to not over scaffold in order to
[4:29:02] not under-anticipate their perseverance in order to not believe that they might need something
[4:29:10] different that maybe isn't quite grade level, right?
[4:29:12] So I think what in these schools that both are demonstrating high growth for focal students
[4:29:18] that I have been in those classrooms, I think there is somewhat a beauty and a magic
[4:29:24] in that simplicity in terms of the quality and the consistency of the instructional practice
[4:29:28] and the school systems that support it, whether it be teacher collaboration or coaching
[4:29:33] are very strong instructional leaders.
[4:29:38] Thank you.
[4:29:39] One quick final question.
[4:29:42] What evidence do we have in our data, if any, that our math ed tech strategies are causing
[4:29:54] any growth in our eighth grade or other math outcomes.
[4:30:00] I think we've asked, for example, around, like, Amira, whether Amira implementation is causing, is helping, is causing student outcomes to improve. And the answer they've gotten in the past were around, kind of the theoretical application of Amira that were
[4:30:27] not tied to actual outcomes in our student data. And I'm wondering if we have any evidence in our student data about the impact
[4:30:34] happy that those tools are having or not?
[4:30:36] When you say, are you talking about technology tools
[4:30:41] that are providing tutoring services in math to students?
[4:30:44] Yes.
[4:30:45] OK, because we're not currently using one in math,
[4:30:49] the like we are in MIRRA.
[4:30:51] So we have Desmos, which is a magic math.
[4:30:54] It's part of the curriculum.
[4:30:56] It is a computer tool.
[4:30:59] I thought we'd previously discussed
[4:31:01] just Amira is using a math tutor and that it was deployed across her.
[4:31:07] No, so one point of clarification, Amira is specifically literacy-based.
[4:31:14] There is a tool at the high school level, EDIA, that is an AI-based math tutor that we
[4:31:19] did pilot last year and do some study around, but it is not at the middle school level.
[4:31:30] Okay, so I am going to move us to, oh, okay, yes, Commissioner Fisher.
[4:31:36] Sorry, I have one follow-up question and I promise it's strategic and I hope it's quick.
[4:31:41] I just have to get back to it and find it now because I have too many spreadsheets open
[4:31:46] to actually, okay, mine is about strategic resource allocation.
[4:31:53] I do have converted me to the, I shouldn't say converted, but you've convinced me, like
[4:31:59] the hearing how important learning walks based on what you've shared today.
[4:32:03] And I love the strategy of, and focusing on the student ownership.
[4:32:09] But I'm wondering, we're already hearing from school site leaders just how much work it
[4:32:13] is to run a school, right?
[4:32:14] So do we have the appropriate level of resources in place to make sure that we can implement
[4:32:20] these strategies with fidelity and collect the amount of data we need to make the decisions
[4:32:24] we want to make. Especially like we heard complaints, you know, when we cut APs at many schools,
[4:32:31] so I'm just I'm like wondering, do are the resources sufficient to meet the strategy?
[4:32:39] It's great commission official that we're ending on this particular question because this is
[4:32:44] what John Davis started this whole conversation with, which is the amazing Dr. Harrell who's
[4:32:51] sitting back there because we are engaging with a few of our principals right now to really
[4:33:00] do a mapping of all of their roles and responsibilities in school sites.
[4:33:06] So we're talking to principals in different cohorts, so elementary, middle and high school,
[4:33:11] I think we're doing a K-8 one to just really understand all the load that is on their
[4:33:17] place, everything that's on their place, and then really work with them to figure
[4:33:21] out what we can do to take what are some of the things that we can take off their
[4:33:25] place and move over to Central Office leads. So we're in that process now and I will be more than
[4:33:34] happy to bring back to the board what we've learned from those conversations and what
[4:33:42] types of resourcing we would need to take additional things off principals plays and
[4:33:48] then continue to support principals to be in the classrooms to, of course, complete
[4:33:54] that instructional core trifecta that we talked about.
[4:33:59] I would very curious about the resourcing piece, so I look forward to hearing more about
[4:34:03] that.
[4:34:03] Thank you.
[4:34:06] Commissioner Rae, is this the true to your question?
[4:34:09] Yes, I've given the last one before, so I can do it quickly or relatively quickly.
[4:34:14] Commissioner Fisher's question reminded me of a question that I had had, and last year
[4:34:20] there was a lot of discussion about implementing things with fidelity and comparisons to a pipeline
[4:34:24] and so forth.
[4:34:26] This year I've heard more about implementing things with integrity, and there's a comment
[4:34:31] One of the staff answers that an emphasis on fidelity can become overly compliance oriented, et cetera, et cetera.
[4:34:38] So I'm actually, I'm wondering, what is the difference if any between implementing something with fidelity and
[4:34:47] implementing it with integrity, why does that matter?
[4:34:50] Are we actually shifting, is that a strategy in a way, are we shifting strategies in some fashion?
[4:34:56] Commissioner Fisher, is there a way that you can switch that to align it to a goals
[4:35:11] Is there a way you can modify that question to align more? I'm trying to understand if we are actually, if there is a difference between these two things, if we are shifting, if someone wants to help me with this, there will be.
[4:35:29] welcome to do it. If they are, if we are shifting, is there a strategic
[4:35:35] focus shift? Is it a strategic move to go from implementing with fidelity to
[4:35:41] implementing with integrity? Is that intended to help us improve our student outcome goals?
[4:35:46] Because I'm not really understanding fully the way in which this language is being used.
[4:35:55] I don't believe that there's a shift.
[4:36:02] I think we always want to implement our curriculum with fidelity and integrity, because
[4:36:11] we do want our educators, our teachers, to fully embrace the curriculum because we
[4:36:21] as a board adopted the curriculum.
[4:36:23] and so, one, they need to be able to implement the curriculum to fidelity, but they can't implement the curriculum for students to really own the curriculum and own the learning if they don't implement it with integrity.
[4:36:37] It goes back to the instructional core that we are striving to create, where we have strong curriculum, and then we have teachers who are able to implement that curriculum so that our students are able to own that instruction.
[4:36:53] to really work through the instructional learning challenge.
[4:37:00] And you can only do that if our teachers are able to really embrace the curriculum.
[4:37:08] So I don't believe that there is a difference or a shift in how we want our educators
[4:37:21] to own and embrace the curriculum, or deliver the curriculum.
[4:37:25] We always want our educators to deliver the curriculum with highest integrity.
[4:37:32] So I don't believe that that is the case.
[4:37:36] I don't know, team, if you want to add to that, or John?
[4:37:42] Yeah, I mean, I think this gives a good opportunity to kind of talk this out and
[4:37:45] get this out in the air as much as humanly possible.
[4:37:48] I mean, when you're starting with the curriculum and it's brand new,
[4:37:52] You're going to be you want some fidelity right because you don't like it's new. You got to follow it
[4:37:58] You got to get into it right but over time once you understand the moves once you understand different aspects of it
[4:38:06] You can go more towards integrity and if a if a teacher makes a move that's different
[4:38:12] But it's still very rigorous and let's say the final question that's asked
[4:38:18] Then you're doing that with integrity, right?
[4:38:21] So if you still have high standards, but you're changing something in the lesson as it's given,
[4:38:25] then that's with integrity and that's fine.
[4:38:28] But again, when you first get a curriculum, you kind of got to do it, right?
[4:38:33] And so you got to have fidelity to it.
[4:38:35] And so you'll hear that every now and then, but it's really with integrity.
[4:38:39] And again, you don't want teachers making so many moves that it lowers the standard
[4:38:45] it and makes it too easy because sometimes that happens, right?
[4:38:49] You still want to make sure as you're reading the lesson, as you're reviewing the lesson,
[4:38:53] as you're going through whatever the students are going to have to read, you're asking
[4:38:58] the most rigorous questions, you're giving them time to grapple with the problem, whatever
[4:39:03] it may be.
[4:39:04] So we end up leaning more towards integrity over time, even if we start with a little bit
[4:39:10] of fidelity so that teachers kind of get it.
[4:39:15] Anybody want to add anything to that?
[4:39:16] Yeah.
[4:39:18] So these terms are relatively new to me as well, but the way that I think about
[4:39:22] them is the letter of something, as opposed to the spirit of something. You do something
[4:39:28] because it's exactly specified by the letter of something, but implementing the integrity
[4:39:35] is honoring the spirit of the curriculum and making whatever appropriate modifications
[4:39:44] that honor that, right?
[4:39:46] So it gives, it's exactly the way that John just described
[4:39:49] about some over time changes that happen,
[4:39:51] about how changes happen in general, right?
[4:39:54] About implementing a large scale curriculum change
[4:39:58] like this takes time.
[4:39:59] and
[4:40:00] We take phases of trying to move folks along the spectrum.
[4:40:10] Okay. Thank you, commissioners, staff, superintendents. So this predictive conversation, now we will vote on whether or not to accept the monitoring reports to clarify we are voting to accept the report as a formal acknowledgement that we have had a satisfactory conversation with the superintendent and her team. And that now we would deeper understanding of how the reality of our students lines up with our vision
[4:40:34] for them to do this. We will go through a series of questions and vote to accept the
[4:40:38] report if the reality matches the vision of the goal, if there is sufficient growth towards
[4:40:44] the goal, or if there is a strategy or plan in place to cause that sufficient growth towards
[4:40:49] the vision. If we're not able to answer yes to any of these questions, the board will consider
[4:40:55] voting to not accept the report. Before we do this, I do want to acknowledge that we have
[4:41:02] ask the superintendent to provide a one-year goal for us within able to your goal of our goals.
[4:41:11] And to a certain extent, we are not able to answer some of these questions without that
[4:41:16] one-year target in mind, as we've acknowledged previously in another board meeting that
[4:41:23] we already know that we are not able to reach the goals that we have in place practically.
[4:41:29] And so first, this message is staff by no means is an indication of our belief or confidence
[4:41:37] and at least the work that we are seeing at all.
[4:41:39] This is a question of whether or not we are actually seeing the progress that we want
[4:41:43] to see or not or plans that do that.
[4:41:46] And for the board, I would say that this is an opportunity for us to continue to hold high
[4:41:51] expectations for ourselves and for the superintendent.
[4:41:54] And I think this is a great reminder for us that this entire meeting, as a progress
[4:42:02] managering meeting, has meant to help us build culture around student outcomes in this
[4:42:07] district and to allow us to consider the ways in which our resources more closely align
[4:42:14] with our goals.
[4:42:16] That said, I'm going to first ask the question, and at least for this meeting, I'm going
[4:42:22] I'm going to provide some clarification about that question before then I ask the question to our commissioners, so that's kind of the cadence that we'll go.
[4:42:30] We won't do this every single time, but for the sake of just kind of building our muscle for this.
[4:42:34] So the first question is does, yes.
[4:42:37] Just to clarify.
[4:42:38] So your position is that until we get a new number, a new sub-goal, would you call it?
[4:42:50] Just a one-year target?
[4:42:52] A one-year target.
[4:42:53] From Superintendent Sue, it is impossible to vote yes.
[4:42:57] Correct.
[4:42:58] Yeah.
[4:42:59] Because we already know and we've acknowledged in a previous
[4:43:01] meeting that we do not intend to reach the goal that
[4:43:04] is currently in place.
[4:43:05] And we knew that and we made a decision to extend our runway by
[4:43:10] a year knowing that we would need to revisit our VVGGs and
[4:43:13] reestablish new goals.
[4:43:15] Part of the superintendent's metrics, which she will come
[4:43:17] back in present on, asks her to name a one-year target, and that is what we would do our
[4:43:23] reports on to be able to articulate whether or not we feel, for example, is there sufficient
[4:43:29] is there a strategy in plan to cause that sufficient growth towards that one-year target?
[4:43:36] So, again, can I just, just to clarify, it sounds like there's a, it's like confusion.
[4:43:40] So, there is a timing issue here that I will not be able to, so I won't be sharing
[4:43:49] my the response to the short-term metrics that the board has given me until October.
[4:43:56] However, we wanted to start progress monitoring recommendations now.
[4:44:03] So that's why there's this mismatch in timing.
[4:44:07] But I certainly hope that once I share the new targets, we'll be able to move towards that.
[4:44:18] Just for clarification, and maybe this is something that are answered by the progress monitoring committee.
[4:44:24] But based on our training, I'm not sure that it has to be as prescriptive as basing the response
[4:44:33] to the questions on the short-term metrics. Like I'm reading the manual now.
[4:44:39] And there's nothing that specifically ties our yes or no to that short-term metric that I can see.
[4:44:46] am I am I misunderstanding? No, so again perhaps my introduction of short
[4:44:54] geometrics is conflating here. In the short
[4:44:57] orthometrics we have asked the superintendent to identify
[4:45:00] Okay, one year target so that we can reasonably hold her accountable to the progress towards that target. Because we know that the ultimate goal for goal one, two, and three will not be met. Right? So we're not replacing the goals. We're saying, hey, tell us a reasonable target that you believe is something that can be accomplished within a year. So we know what to hold you accountable to. Can I say that? Holding the superintendent accountable is not the same as necessarily voting yes on this progress monitor.
[4:45:33] So the question number one is does the reality match division obviously know because we're not, I mean, the target, the vision is 65% let's be clear, this is goal two, so the vision is 65% proficient on the SBAC in math, 8th grade math, so there's the reality match division now because we're at 45% right?
[4:45:55] Right? Is there sufficient growth toward division?
[4:45:58] Yeah, yeah, so he's going to ask you, but I'm saying, like, when you get to question
[4:46:00] three, I guess my point is like it's going to, we, if you think we can get 20 points in
[4:46:06] a year based on this strategy, you could vote yes, but I think what President Kim is
[4:46:10] saying is like, that's sort of absurd, and I don't think anyone's going to argue
[4:46:13] that. So, so if we don't have another metric, like we were kind of saying, once we have
[4:46:17] the intro metric, then we could judge with that, but in the absence of any other metric,
[4:46:22] It's sort of absurd to say correct and the clarifications that I'm going to give for each of these questions will articulate that pretty clearly.
[4:46:29] Okay, thank you.
[4:46:31] I think that was a point not that correct.
[4:46:33] Yeah, and I think the purpose is that we don't want to set up a situation where there is great staff work and there is great progress being made and we're just voting no no no because we're not going to get 20 points in a year.
[4:46:47] Correct. Okay. So, it's 9.53 and I want to end before 10. So, first, does the reality
[4:46:54] of the support meet the vision of the goal to clarify this is an objective question
[4:46:59] the reality can match the vision if the results are on track to where they should be in this
[4:47:05] case, 65 percent. Right? So, for example, if a five-year proficiency goal is 70 percent but
[4:47:11] the three-year goal is 62 percent and the current proficiency rate is 62 percent, then yes,
[4:47:15] the reality matches the vision, okay? So does the reality of the support meet the vision
[4:47:23] of the goal? And we're not going to formally go around but just generally I think the
[4:47:28] answer is no. Second, is there sufficient growth towards the vision? So this is both a
[4:47:35] subjective and objective question. Essentially this question is asking if we are off track,
[4:47:40] Is there enough growth to get back on track towards what this would be of 65% which we
[4:47:46] know the answer is no?
[4:47:48] The third question is, is there a strategy in plan to cause sufficient growth towards
[4:47:53] that vision?
[4:47:55] This is subjective.
[4:47:56] Commissioners need to decide if the strategy in plan in place will cause enough growth
[4:48:00] to get back on track towards the 65% again, we know the answer here will be no, right?
[4:48:06] So, in this instance, we would do a roll call vote and we would vote no.
[4:48:12] Does that make sense?
[4:48:16] That makes perfect sense.
[4:48:18] And I think a corollary question that we can ask after the fact is whether or not the
[4:48:22] goal is still an appropriate representation of the community's vision for what students
[4:48:26] should know and be able to do.
[4:48:27] So, even though it's no, it's still very, very important.
[4:48:31] That's why we're asking for an interim target, which is that set.
[4:48:35] Exactly.
[4:48:36] Right?
[4:48:36] Okay.
[4:48:36] Okay.
[4:48:36] What I just said were 65%, we would just replace with whatever percentage the superintendent provides.
[4:48:42] Thank you, and that's why we're also beginning our PVG listening session.
[4:48:47] Let's come up to set our new page.
[4:48:49] Okay, so that said, because we answered no for the first question, this roll call vote will be just for the third.
[4:48:56] Well, just we're going to do a roll call vote for or not, right?
[4:48:59] So if we can do a roll call vote please, that would be great.
[4:49:02] Commissioner Ray?
[4:49:05] No.
[4:49:06] Commissioner Alexander?
[4:49:07] Commander?
[4:49:07] No.
[4:49:08] Commissioner Weissner and Ward?
[4:49:11] No.
[4:49:12] Commissioner Gupta?
[4:49:13] No.
[4:49:14] Commissioner Fisher?
[4:49:16] No, but thank you to staff for the Herkulean efforts.
[4:49:19] Vice President Hewley?
[4:49:21] No.
[4:49:23] President Kim?
[4:49:24] No.
[4:49:25] Thank you.
[4:49:26] Thank you to staff and thank you Dr. Sioux
[4:49:29] for this presentation we look forward to many more.
[4:49:33] And with that,
[4:49:34] I do not believe we have any other items and I will adjourn at 9.55 p.m.