So through the ongoing work of the governing board prioritizing coaching in a way that is this model, right? So any any kind of thought that this group brings related to that would have to be non-instructional and it's going to have to make sure that aligns with SOFG. I don't know, Vanessa, if you had anything more to add to that. >> Trying to think. Just trying to think. >> Well, can I also >> like where where to take it to take if it's not here? I know we we get that a lot of times. Well, if it's not here, what committee? What this? What that? And I know in the past we've had things that said, oh, go handle that in committee. And then in the committee and and then the committee's like, well, no, you got to handle that over here in meet confer or no, that has to go.
So, I guess I I I've heard it come up and I want to try to find the solution of where to have the conversations uh that the people can review or whatever and and I think we can try to dedicate to bringing some of that information back. Um but not just saying it we don't cover it here. Does that make sense? >> Yeah. I also think the thought process behind the model we talked about with the halftime coaching halftime teacher is cuz teachers we talk amongst ourselves and you know we have members that they would like to go and visit a coach teaching a concept that they're having you know they're trying to teach a teacher to do like for example the EOD model they would love to go see a coach actually implement it in their classrooms and then maybe debrief in afternoon when that coach is no longer teaching.
So a place that teachers can go and visit to actually see the things the district is telling them what to do and a teacher who actually doing it in a classroom. So it's not this abstract idea that was developed in district office. Now they're telling teachers to go out there and do it but they're not even doing it type situation. >> I know. But what I'm saying is teachers want to go and see the coaches doing it. They want that model >> which sounds I don't it sounds instructional to me. I am not the expert in SOFG but I do think to your point both your points everybody's that you've got a list here and maybe maybe some of the experts not that not that you all are not would take a look at this and say look this feels like an instructional one that >> may not be addressed during this doesn't mean at some point you know you can talk about it but it may not be an option moving forward.
Um, and then the same for letting the group go back and say, "Okay, this one's going to need more time. We need how and then you guys let us know how much more time you need or to say, look, we can't do this because we've got contract staffing, you know, whatever. But it is something we can maybe bring back next year." So, does that sound reasonable? Let you all have the time to look at the list and then say, "Here's how much time we need to get this information." And and I hope this one on top of your regular jobs >> built some trust with that because we've done a couple of years of it where we said all right we can't get it in this session but we will get this data back to you guys or some response back to you uh by like next December because we look at workload u because we do recognize that in the past there were things that would go out and me would never hear it again.
So, I just want you to know the history is that we've been really intentional about getting things uh documented in a way we've never documented in before, getting information out to the groups ahead of time. So, we're hoping to that that's working for us all. >> Okay. So, is everybody I'm sorry, James. >> Thanks. You can cross all the others off, James. And then Dorothy, you have a question. No, you're just passing. Um uh so after that process if it comes back that some of these things are not in the realm of meet and confer cuz I kind of keyed in on what she said uh when she said that like if there if this is not the place then what is the place um can that be part of the message too saying well this is not me for meet and confer but here's your avenue to go and explore this that way that there's an opport so it's not just like well sucks to you.
We can't really talk about this. Um, at least there's an opportunity and people don't feel like they're kind of shut down. And then like what Dr. Lauren referred to, I we had a a coaches meeting yesterday and I know one of my teachers was telling me how excited he was because the cohort that he was a part of, the person that was running that cohort, um, one of part of that process was he was going to go and see this expert actually go and teach. So he was so it is it is part of that process is going through and it is something that teachers really value too. So >> not in that mind. No. >> Okay. >> So it is 2:12. We're a little bit past our uh allotted break time. So I'm giving you 15 minutes. So back at 2:27. Okay. And then we'll talk about what we talked about during the caucus as well.
a conversation that came up when uh the groups were at caucus. Now that I'm thinking about this, since it was a caucus, I'm not sure. Were we okay with cameras being on or what was discussed during caucus? >> I was going to say it was on for you guys, right? Okay. So just to I want to clarify there was a concern brought up when we were looking at uh the issues around let me jump ahead here. Whoops. This one where I asked you about these and did we feel like we had unpacked these issues enough and there were thumbs up agreement about this that we didn't need to do any further exploration. But what did happen afterwards is another option was brought forward. You all others brought other options forward. We captured all of them on the on the sheet. But there was a concern that when we agre came to consensus that we've addressed the scheduling, we've addressed the staff and we talked about the time, we talked about the coverage that that it can't be brought up again.
And so I did clarify that the way I've run IBN is that that is true. So, for example, you can't and this happens. I've seen it happen. I've seen it sabotage a process. I can also see it interrupt a process and you don't ever get to the end and you can't bring anything forward because you're still talking about it. Um, when when I was asking you about this, what I was saying was we're finished talking about this issue. We're not going to bring any options forward down the road to address this. >> Well, then those options come up like as we were doing >> consensus quick. >> The issue around it is is you might leave this room today and you might have a think tank moment like I do in the shower sometimes where something comes into my head and I think it's the greatest idea.
But when does it stop? We have three days left. We haven't even started talking about compensation. I mean, we have some information, but we haven't talked about options or anything about what we're going to do. So, the reason I say that we we've finished talking about this is that we are finished talking about it and we're not going to come back and bring more options, which could bring additional work for somebody to explore. Um, it it just carries the process out much longer. You're you might have people sitting here watching us right now saying, "Well, why didn't you talk about this option?" Well, what are you going to do when the next person says it? And then the next person brings you their option and another person brings you and now we've just added a couple hundred more options. So, I want to make sure because there was a feeling that maybe others didn't understand when I said, "Are we finished with this issue?" That they understood that.
So I want to make sure that that we do. So first Daniel had his hand up. Roxan, if you don't think he >> Yeah, I feel like we brought this up like those option additional options up as we were doing consensus for these. So like the excellencia thing was brought up as we're doing consensus for the scheduling and then we did the caucus as we were doing consensus for the staffing. Right. So >> I also think that we did that we did that initial activity where we wrote things on the note cards and we prioritized. I feel like we should have just used these instead of coming up with new ones. Well, they here's what happened is if you look at your survey, you all identified workload as the priority area. But when I started thinking about well what is workload and what you saw is in some cases it was time in some it was coverage and it was different things to different people.
So the idea and I will be better moving forward to make sure that I'm more specific in unpacking what does that mean because I can look at scheduling and I know what I'm thinking about scheduling but I don't know what neighbors thinking about. He's thinking a whole different thing probably. So it's fine in the context of what we did today. But what I'm saying is my take on this is uh regarding the issue of workload that we have tackled this particular issue of workload in the subcategories time coverage scheduling staffing and that's what I heard from you all. So is everybody does everybody understand that and understand that at the next meeting you can't say hey I came up with another idea for time or another idea for coverage because you see where I'm going it it may never end. So is everybody clear about that?
Okay. Everybody in agreement that once we say we're finished discussing the issue, we're finished discussing the issue because we could be here. I'm happy to come back as long as Joel wants to keep paying me. As long as you guys want to keep having >> Okay. So, what you're saying is if we don't put it on the chart paper, >> can you use a microphone? Thank you. Sorry. >> That if we don't um >> are you saying that if we don't write it on the chart paper then that's it? What she say once we come to consensus? >> Oh, come to consensus that we're done with the like the thumbs up and thumbs down. We did >> we have come to consensus on this and this and we're saying we're not doing a deeper dive into these two things because everybody understood that those things were captured in this.
>> Okay. So, that part where you asked us to put a thumbs up or thumbs down if you felt that we had did a deep dive into scheduling, that part's not going to happen anymore. If it didn't get put on the chart paper, then that's it. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. And I just remind you about norms, about non-verbal body language, too, that we need to be making sure we're not saying things with our eyes or other things that we wouldn't say out loud. Um, so if we're clear on that, I'm going to move forward. the issue that we need to to talk about and um is where do we go next? Because if I'm looking at your survey, the biggest thing and you all saw this on your survey, compensation was overwhelmingly the biggest thing everybody wanted you to tackle. Second to that was working conditions and we prioritized that.
I do not know or see that there are any more issues around working conditions, but that doesn't mean that there isn't. Um, so we're going to need to take some time maybe to talk about I can talk to Kelly and Joel and we can do a deeper dive into the survey and we may bring that back to the whole group to do a deeper dive next time. We're not going to do that today because we're getting close to our end time. So depending on how things go compensation wise, I don't know. We may start tackling that at our next meeting and coming up with options based on information you heard today. And then depending on how much Joel and Vanessa, whatever they can bring back about these those issues that we the working condition stuff, we may address that either at that next meeting or the following one.
Everybody good with that? >> Yes. So my I guess my clarification is um looking at the list from Vanessa and me coming back in March on March 5th if we're unable to complete or get the information that should be our report out. So I'm going to give you an example because it's right there at the top. uh evaluating job description for task alignment to SOFG. We have 80 job descriptions um and it's not going to happen, right? So there's we're not going to be able to evaluate job descriptions before March 5th, probably not even before the end of the year. And it's also a task that's being done in departments to look at um alignment to current work and that's already an ongoing that's a process that's already started. That's good. So, um, would we then come back and say, "Here's an update on where we are with that process," or do we in this group say, "Let's not worry about job descriptions at this time, knowing that there's work being done." >> I appreciate the question.
I think what you all as as much as you can is you look at the list of options and you say we can get the information for what it would take to move somebody to an 11 or 12-month AP contract if that's feasible. To your point about job descriptions, thank you. To your point about job descriptions, we I think everybody can understand that that obviously is a big take. It doesn't mean that we remove the option, but it may be something that we say, look, we've got to create a task force or we got to hire outside company that, you know what I mean? Whatever that may be. Um, so it's just information I think. So I what I think is would be helpful to this group is here are the things we were able to cost out. If we need other folks in the room to explain a particular option and help people understand what it is or isn't, uh, we could do that.
But I if you can communicate either with me ahead of time or even with the group or have some of the information in there, then I think that's okay. I think what this group needs to understand is just like you all, everybody's got their day-to-day job, right? We just talked about workload and now you've added some additional things. And so we need to give the time and space to get that information so that we can make the best informed decision. And if your information, I'm just looking at the two of you because you're here is that look, we can't get this information until the April meeting or we can get this information by this meeting, but we're going to need to revisit this particular thing at a later date. I think just say that and I think this group needs to be and has been if I'm understand what happened previously is open to this idea.
I don't know who went first Roxson >> Jo uh Kelly then Dorothy >> and then Brian Brian >> uh I was just going to say Whoa. >> Sorry weird noise. I was just gonna say maybe we can utilize the chat so that Vanessa if you can't get to all of it today or have an answer to us today. >> What's making this >> feedback? >> No, I think this guy's like broken um that you can just let us know via chat like where you're at or this one's too much or exactly what um Alexis was just saying. >> Is everybody okay with that? There's just like a update that says look we're working on this. We think we'll have it ready by March or April or not until next year >> 2029 when Joel retires. Is that what it is? >> Okay. Does that >> Sorry, I messed it up.
>> That's okay. I was just saying like just an update if you guys are okay with anformational update about the request and that how much time it may need. >> And then everyone just don't touch the top part cuz that one's definitely broken. So you don't yank the top. Just pull this part closer to your mouth. >> Got it. >> Thanks. >> All right, Kelly, then Dorothy, then Brian. >> One of the things that I thought about is that we also should try and remember that we're not the only body that works on some of the financial things. >> So like the executive team at the district also does some >> meet some challenges on their own, right? So like they fixed some things in um like for example some schedules last year or this year whenever they did it that you know could have been done here but wasn't done here.
So the same thing could happen this year too. Like there might be things we can't get to but that doesn't mean it just stops. They could continue to work on it. Correct. >> And you know so or I mean there there's a reason they're in the room, right? They're hearing what we're wrestling with what we're working on. So, >> or or they may be working on things, but you aren't aware >> aware that they're working on >> and so maybe that communication. Right. >> Yeah. >> Good point. >> Okay. >> Right. Yeah. >> Brian, >> uh just I just wanted to clarify to Joel because that that came from our group, I believe. And James, tell me if I'm wrong. We we weren't expecting a that fully done. We we just we just wanted the option of of that happening. So, it sounds like So, we weren't wanting all that by the next meeting or anything like that.