001All right. Good evening everybody. I'll call this uh policy meeting to order. Can I have a roll call, please? Dr. Wy >> Dr. Wy >> Mr. Broofphy Miss Connor >> here. >> Miss Kratz >> here. >> Miss Nyman. >> Mr. Brad Uptoro >> here. >> Mr. Roger Up to Grove >> here. >> Dr. Weir >> here. >> Mr. Panerella >> here. >> Okay, if I could have everybody rise for a pledge of allegiance and a moment of silence. >> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. I don't believe anybody has signed up for public comment period number one. So that moves us into the policies. So policy 105.1, Dr.
002Dr. David Heiser, if you want to take over, let you drive here. >> Okay. Thank you. So, again, just to be reminded, um, committee meeting here with policy really meant to be a work session. So, it's us to be able to talk openly and freely about some of the things here. Um, we've invited a number of administrators to the the table tonight who engage in a lot of these policies on a regular basis. We have Mrs. Petri, our director of of OTL. We have Mrs. Bartman, our director of special education. And we have Dr. Horton joining us as well, our director of student services, all of whom um are involved in these policies and we'll be asking for their thoughts and opinions as we go through some of these. The goal is obviously if we
003can get to get through all these policies. If we do not get through all these policies, we will push some of those to the next meeting. And again, as the idea behind our policy re review, which this is the first year that we're we're we're really doing a a hardened review, is anything that's outside of three years, we're looking at that policy um on the surface. If there's an emergent need due to a legal change, we are immediately trying to address that with any particular policy. um and if there are any updates from PSBA that that are needed to take to be taken in that. The idea behind this is that this is probably a three-year process for us to get through all of the current policies. So by the end of the third year,
004we're right back to again looking at policies that are three years old. And that's why we decided on a three-year look back um in terms of this and trying to make sure that we're staying as current as possible with regard to policy. So, let's kick some things off. We started um and this was this was from our former uh board or excuse me, our former um committee meeting from two months ago. We carried some policies forward. So 1051 um was brought back and I believe Dr. Wear you had um asked for some cons um some addition to having board involved in this as the last stance. So I went back and really looked at this a little bit more deeply in terms of this. So there there isn't a a need for this because the
005there isn't an appeal process. This is just a review of instructional materials. All parents are granted that with regard to this policy. So there's not a consideration in policy 105.2 which we already moved on. It's up for a second read puts in that has that that stature in there. So I went back and kind of looked at this and I really would recommend there not have to be any additions to this. >> Right. And after I review that policy, I I did see that how that's in that 0.2 one. So yeah, I I I understand where you're coming from with that. So that's not a problem. >> All right. So then 1051, as you have currently in your possession and as listed, I would recommend that we move forward. Obviously, under federal law, it's also
006granted in there the rights of parents and guardians to inspect and any instructional materials. And this really just kind of lays out the process of how do parents go about doing that? >> Yep. >> Okay. All right. So 105.3 um animals in the classroom. So um we did adopt this policy back in 2015. Um there is no updates um from PSBA with regard to this. We do have a service animals in the classrooms and in the buildings that's in the 700. So that one's in there already and we're covered under that. This is an addition to that. Some school districts, some school districts don't even have this as a policy in there. Um, we there there is no regulation with regard to this. I think there was a generalized sense that we needed something at
007some point in time in the district. Maybe certain, you know, um, allowances were given for animals to come in and so forth. I think this generalizes it it enough um, in terms of that. Um, unless there's some other thoughts or questions that board members would have with with regard to it. >> Sure. The only thing that came to my mind when I was reading this policy is uh vaccinated appropriately. Um, you know, what does that actually mean? Do we are we looking for proof? Are we asking for proof before, you know, an individual brings, you know, things to like a petting zoo like a goat or what whatever the case may be. Um, and I know when we do do policy, um, we want to keep it fairly vague, you know, leave it, you know,
008up up for a little bit of interpretation, but that was the only thing that I noticed, um, that would catch my eye is vaccinated appropriately. >> Mr. Sautanic, I'm going to have you weigh in a little bit on animals in the classroom, on vaccinations of animals. What would you is there any thoughts in regards to this is our current policy as it is right now? PSBA has no further guidance on this. We do have a service animal policy. Um, you know, bringing up the idea of must be appropriately vaccinated kind of leaves it open. Is there anything that we would that would concern us with that from a >> I'm not aware of any cases very bluntly on the subject. However, I do think it may be a reasonable requirement that we can enforce. >>
009Okay. So, we would have to then I I don't know if vaccinations for animals are different. I I would imagine they probably are. So, I guess we have >> they they are. >> Yeah. >> Not that I'm an expert on it, but they are different. And uh and the issue is do we want to monitor that? >> Right. Right. Is that >> that's really the issue. Uh >> so from a legal perspective again, do we want to monitor that? I guess is our question. >> That's correct to you. >> Yeah. The answer. Well, that's a that's a business determination on the issue. If you anytime you impose a requirement, you impose an additional responsibility on the part of the administration to monitor that. So, if somebody comes to you with a service uh animal, you're
010going to start reviewing inoculations. I don't know whether or not your school nurses are up to date on veterinary inoculations. Uh, and Mr. Lens is laughing. Uh, so you can't make this up, Matt. Okay. So, the issue is, uh, the issue is, do we want to enforce that as part of the requirement? Um, you could perhaps make a requirement that upon bringing a service animal for the first time that they have all appropriate lensure and inoculations because you need to register your dogs also in most counties uh and get appropriate lensure, >> right? So maybe they already have that just based on the >> the fact that they're >> a service animal. So we don't >> remember these aren't necessarily service animals. These we have a separate service animal policy. These are >> Johnny or
011Sally their hamster in um in their cage, you know, that kind of thing. and we've read a story about hamsters and you know there's interest in maybe oh we get to experience the the the viewing of a real life hamster. Um >> I'm not I'm not sure that I got to tell you uh that's an additional mandate. >> Yeah >> that uh you may not want to spend time enforcing that requirement. >> Right. Like I said, that was the only thing in in >> I bring in my pet frog. I I don't know if there's a regimen for inoculations for frogs. I really don't know that. >> I I mean, I know we don't have lenture. I know we don't have most times for many of the smaller dogs and cats and things of that
012nature, but when we start to get into bunny rabbits and um all sorts of other Yeah. types of animals because that, like I said, that was the only thing that stood out. What what is what does appropriately mean? you where where do we where do we want to draw the line where where's the line in the sand on this >> yeah I don't know that there is a line I think there's good coordination between u the the families our teachers and the administration at the buildings to which we would see this obviously for service animals that's that falls under a completely different thing this one I think we do have a pretty good communication guideline of of the hows and what's and um would procedurally be very conserv conservative of how we address this. Um,
013>> so I I I I I think the more we put in there, >> the hole becomes a little bit larger, right? >> Yeah. >> And deeper. >> Yeah. And I I I don't want to make any more work. >> Yeah. >> You know, to to add different bullet points to this. >> All right. Um >> I was just pointing it out. Yeah. >> You okay with All right. >> I'm just I'm just one thought. If it's dogs, I think it would have to have Well, it is for for Yes. >> for dog license, right? >> In Burks County, >> right? Somebody could have an unlicensed >> county, >> you know, dog. I think that would be reasonable where we would ask for those types of things. Um, when it comes to those types of
014pets, yeah, I'm thinking a little bit more in the elementary where, you know, small animals might make their way in just to, you know, for all students to be able to experience those things. Okay. Um, 108, adoption of textbooks. So, um, I'm going to turn this one over to Mrs. Petri u to talk a little bit about um it. And I believe we've we've taken a pretty good look at this. And Mrs. Priy, your determination is we are good. >> Yes, I think um we are good with this policy. Um I do have some suggestions for you to take a look at as far as um the next document, which is the AR draft of um of what are some of the things that we'd be looking at when we're looking to adopt a textbook.
015So, I didn't have any concerns or suggestions for 108, but I do have some things for you to review for a the AR, which is >> the AR0. >> Yep. >> Okay. >> Let me just ask a process question. Do does the board approve the ARs or this is just provided as an information basis. >> It's provided as an information, but they get captured in the approval process for us as well. Um, we have been bringing all the ARs through first and second reads. >> Okay. I'm just saying some districts relegate ARS to the administration to approve. >> Yeah. And I guess my answer is we have not. We have brought this forward with the board in this process this year. All the ARs have gone through a board approval with the policies that they're
016attached with. >> Okay. Do you want to you have that document you wanted to share out? So If you take a look at this document, it's broken into three separate sections. The first section is um and you notice it's all in draft form is um questions the teachers would be answering when they are reviewing materials. So they're taking a look at it from the instructional lens. Is it aligned to our standards? Is it um is it user friendly from the teacher perspective? Um, so they would be going through this document to make sure that the resources have um the things that we're looking for. They would be answering yes, no, or unknown. So that may trigger some additional questions to a a company if that is um something that we're going through. So the other
017piece that we added to this is also that the the um resource is and texts are aligned to our vision of a portrait of a graduate as well as our instructional model. So those are things that are outlined on our district website. But we want to make sure that any uh resource that we are adopting is aligned to what we want our students to look like when they graduate from Bash. So we added those components toward the the end of the teacher piece of the document. The next section um would be questions that the offices of teaching and learning would um be addressing and looking at the content authority and looking a little bit deeper into the resources provided and the references provided from the publisher. um also gathering feedback from other schools that are
018using that textbook or resource um regarding you know their success with that implementation. And the last piece is really aligned to the federal accessibility guidelines. These questions are questions that would be given to the vendor to answer um to make sure that any digital materials that they're providing for us, whether it's for our teachers or whether for our students, that it is meeting the federal mandates for accessibility. Um so we are sharing that with our vendors that we've been speaking with regarded um regarding our ELA resource um reviews and looking at different vendors um because we want to make sure we're not purchasing something that's aligned to that um the accessibility regulations that uh actually have just been moved one year. We have one more year to work on that. Um but just making sure
019that they're providing that information for us. I would like to use this in draft form with our teams. On Friday, uh it's kind of a a practice round for us. On Friday, our teachers in our ELA curriculum review teams will be looking at our resources that we've been vetting for the first time and um they'll have an opportunity to engage with this document a little bit to make sure that it's providing us with really solid information on whether it's a resource that we want to adopt. Any questions? it. So again, this is the first time I'm seeing this and I'm just trying to relate this to AR the the 108 AR 1 and two. Is it are they aligned? Is that how I'm seeing that? I'm sorry. The checklist, the evaluation form. >> Yes, this
020is the textbook evaluate. Yes, using the evaluation form. The recommendation would be after that evaluation would take place. >> Okay. So, yeah. So, I'm I'm seeing the AR the 108 AR1 textbook evaluation form uh which is again the reading level, the format and illustrations, the checks and yeses and nos. So, that aligns with this. Okay, perfect. >> Yep. >> Yeah. And the uh the recommendation form then would be after all of that is done, what's the textbook that is going to best meet our needs or resource? >> Sure. >> So, go ahead. question you say um as far as the fiveyear old um the copyright date I mean we have what one year left on that before we is that five not more than five years old and how far are we into that now
021already >> so in our curriculum review process we have a six-year curriculum review so in that adoption that year year three of that process is when a new resource would be adopted so that would fall in line with the the years within our curriculum review cycle. Um, and and that year five doesn't mean that it we're going to be purchasing a new resource. It means that we're evaluating it to make sure it is still relevant and and appropriate for the instruction. We just want to make sure that we do stay current and that we are reviewing the resources that we're using where students to make sure that they have um the best best pieces of information in their hands. >> Yep. But it falls nicely in our cycle of of review. Mrs. Petri, are you
022suggesting that AR01 and two as currently listed be replaced by this AR? Is that what you're suggesting? And I Yes. Well, AR1 would Yes. You know what? And I This is an addendum. I think I messed up my numbers here. So, AR1 is really aligned to this. The AR0 is the process that we would follow to reach to this point. So I apologize I have the wrong >> does that make so AR 108 AR0 follows the process and then the checklist is 108 AR1 which Dr. Weir pointed out. Yep. So I apologize I have those numbered incorrectly. >> Okay. All right. The evaluation form >> that is what I just handed you is the evaluation form. >> Right. But you're talking about the numbers confused with what you just said. >> So this 108 AR0
023is the process we would follow to get to AR1. >> Okay. >> And these are the >> so >> correct. So AR0 we're suggesting AR0 as as listed here in the packet is is accurate is correct. That's correct. And we are recommending AR one and two would be replaced by the document to which you gave us >> AR one would be replaced with the document that I gave you. >> Okay. >> AR2 I would recommend stays the same as is recommended by PSBA. >> Okay. >> That makes sense. Okay. >> Yes. I apologize. I jumped ahead. Yeah. Yep. >> Okay. So, I just encourage I know this is a document you just received. Take some time with this. We'll bring these policies the the 108 and all the ARs with it back to committee of
024the whole so we can discuss these a little bit as a larger group if there's any concerns about any of these. Um, but I know we're we're now in the throws of this six-year cycle and review cycle. ELA. Um, next you're going to see math come through. So, these are very important to the process that we're going to have and engaging not only our publishers, but all the teachers involved in the curricular review cycle as well. So, we want to make sure that these are accurate, but we're we're moving these along at the at the right speed. Okay. So, those were policies that we had asked to bring back from um the former committee uh meeting themselves. So, we'll get those corrected and bring those back uh to committee meeting um for everyone. So, our
025newest policies starting with 111 for uh review. Um this is policy 111. Um we do not currently have this policy. This is um policy 111 lesson plans. Um and we are encouraging that there there be a um policy for this particular um piece and um consider it for adoption. We Mrs. Petri step them step the board through what pieces that um you're recommending. >> Yeah. So I I'm going I have another draft to share with you. So, um, you know, looking at the recommendation, um, from from PSBA, um, there were some areas that, um, I want to make sure that we're considering as we're looking at lesson planning. Lesson planning is a critical part of our instruction and we we do require teachers to do lesson planning. Um, but I think it's we don't have
026a policy about it. Um, so I think it's important that we, you know, outline that. um some of the areas in the policy that I um have a draft for you to take a look at. I I did not put a a timeline on when lesson plans would need to be turned in. Um and the reason for that is that um I think it's really critical that we encourage our teachers to constantly constantly be monitoring and adjusting their instruction. So if we are asking that's outlined in this draft um to provide lesson plans and a and a significantly amount of time in advance of instruction that takes away the flexibility of planning and monitoring adjusting. So we are really talking a lot about formative assessment which means checking for understanding and then monitoring and making
027changes to maybe the instructional plan the following day. So, if I'm submitting lessons a week in advance, my plans might not follow that based on what my students are able to do. So, I'm going to u walk this draft around for you to take a look at. My recommendation is that we would use the language in the draft that I'm I'm going to share with you. I think the other piece that's important for a board with it comes to lesson planning is that you know as stated by PSBA I think the reality becomes okay so when a uh school building of 200 teachers and 200 lesson plans are turned into administration you know what's what's the reality of what's to be done with regard to those things this really comes into play and we have
028great trust in in the the teachers this comes into play when we have underperforming folks that we we need some some backup as to what it is you're expected to be doing and calling on some of those things at some of those particular times for us to be able to understand where folks are. But for us to to ask somebody to turn in a a packet of lesson plans when our goal is continued adjustment along the way, we don't really have any accuracy and we're performing a, you know, we're really performing an exercise that's taking away from the purpose of how good teaching is encouraged. Um, I think the folks that we have and what we're we're we're seeing from our from our teachers is expected. They do lesson plan. They do create unit plans.
029we do have those those processes in place. This is really to cement it in language in the event that we need to go down some pathways that would require some plans to be turned into us because we're having some underperformance that that has transpired. So you want to share your your new draft? >> Yep. So um if you take a look at the new draft um you know we are highlighting that you know that to have effective instruction obviously the lesson plans must be pre be prepared prior to implementation and I think the key pieces are that plans are to be revised as needed based on responsiveness to students and I really think that's the critical language um that we are really trying to embed within all of our our instruction at this time. Um
030and also like Dr. David Heiser noted that we would be clear that um in if there was a situation that they should be available to be inspected by uh any department um leader, building principal, superintendent, assistant, superintendent. So they should be at the ready if that was requested when um you know someone would would pop in to see a classroom. Um also just making sure that um there is adequate plans for substitutes. So that's another important piece. So making sure that that planning process for if a teacher will be out that um they will be able to plan for someone to take over their classroom and continue that meaningful learning um related to that subject area. Um and then uh you know just really making sure that uh the teachers are adhering to our our
031our our protocols, thinking about the daily lessons planning and making sure that's included in that long-term unit planning as well. Any questions as a a quick overview of that plan? Dr. Wear, do you have a question? >> No, I'm I'm trying to um just look at the language of this versus the the language of the the current 111. Um I'm not seeing too much uh too much change, but again, I'm just trying to compare and contrast with just getting this now. Um so so we're eliminating um in the old 111 from what I'm seeing uh >> currently we do not have a a policy on this. This is PSBA's re um policy recommendation they have. We do not have a >> we do not have a 111 policy for border town right now. So having
032looked at this particular policy, >> I think some of the the biggest changes if you look at the language um so to facilitate more effective instruction, lesson plans must be prepared at least there's a blank there in advance and they shall be inspected and must conform to guidelines by people listed below, you know. So I think like that language we shifted a little bit so to allow for monitoring and adjusting instruction. Um the other piece that was something that um we had looked at is that lesson plans shall be completed and submitted in a designated online platform for review. We don't have an online platform for reviewing um teachers lesson plans. So there's not a that location is not something that we would be able to to meet. >> So those were the biggest shifts
033really was that timeline on the the um submission and timeline and submission of lesson plans. Does the district have a set um list of requirements that a a good lesson plan should have? Right. Stating the objective and the the who, the what, the how, the how, those kind of things. >> We do. So, um we don't have a like a set template that we ask teachers to use. Those are expectations that those things are included. Um especially this year with our our focus on teacher clarity and you know looking at learning intentions. um that is an expectation that students or the teachers are providing that information to students but they have the autonomy of developing how that the development of their lesson plan but those are pieces that are included aligned to their standards. >>
034Okay. Um >> but to answer that we don't have like a written protocol I guess to >> Yeah. And that's what I was looking for was it template that there >> we don't have we don't have a a template that teachers have to follow. >> Okay. Is there I mean this seems pretty simple but is there anything like with the teachers union since this sounds like a requirement that they could say we don't need to do this or anything like that? >> I I you know lesson planning is part of the job itself. So there's there's an expectation with regard to that inside the CBA. Um there's no restrictiveness with regard to that. And again, taking out, you know, as as Miss Petri said, some of the timelines with regard to it, um, is something
035like I I, you know, the our ability to go ask a teacher, please provide me, you know, by the end of the day some of your lesson plans for next week if we're finding that we, you know, need to move on under performance and things of that nature. That that that is something that we have the ability to do. We don't have a policy right now that says anything about doing some of those types of things. And this is just good practice of of good inherent teaching that we want to make sure that we're we're doing. And and again, um you know, we have a lot of of great teachers doing good things of of their planning that we see and we're seeing good results for that. And and just to add to that that
036there as part of the teachers evaluation every year there's a whole section on planning and preparation which encompasses those ideas. So that is part of the conversation you know during a a teacher's evaluation that they've they've get a rating on that planning and preparation. So if it was noted that they weren't doing those things this policy would allow us to have a little bit deeper conversation about that. Okay. If we're okay with that, we'll have Mrs. Petri will we'll form that into um a better looking established policy and bring that back to committee of the whole as well. Uh policy 112 and 113. These are two policies that are out of date. They haven't been um reviewed since 2015. Um, however, there's no new um no new information, no new updates from PSBA regarding those.
037However, Dr. Horton um who oversees counseling did take a look at the school counseling and I think has a little bit of wording that that she's recommending that we we do place in there. Just a recommend >> just a recommendation in the authority section um where you note that the board direct student shall be provided a program of guidance and counseling. Um probably around 2009 um the professional organizations really moved away from the term guidance counselor and shifted to school counseling. So in this instance, it would be appropriate to change program of guidance to a comprehensive school counseling program which involves the coordinated efforts of all staff members. So I would just suggest changing to be current with the terminology that the our professional organizations are using and that the state is using when talking
038about school counseling versus guidance counseling. guidance implies, you know, providing um guidance um and some direction is where a comprehensive school counseling program is really looking at providing varying levels of support and um looking at a well-rounded picture of students and how we can provide school counseling and taking leadership within programs within the building to support student success. Okay with that making that addition. Okay. Or replacement I should say. Okay. Uh 113. Um dealing again uh last reviewed in 2015. There are no new updates to the policy as it currently exists. Um I did ask uh Mrs. Bartman, our director of special education to take a look at uh this and a number of others that we're reviewing this evening. Mrs. Bartman, anything to add? No, there are no changes with policy 113. >> You
039can see highlighted in there and bolded in there a couple of words and um titles that were given outside of that um pretty standard just replacement on it. Okay. >> All right. takes us to 113.1 again discipline of students with disabilities and um this is included there is some changes to and some updates to this that correct? >> That is correct. If you look on the page three of five, there were some wording changes that came about underneath referral to law enforcement. Instead of it just saying tobacco products, it didn't. It just said tobacco before instead of tobacco products. So the word products was added directly underneath there. It also says in the school safety and security provisions of the school code that used to say under the safe schools act. So again, minor verbiage
040changes that were needed. the paragraph directly underneath there where it's highlighted law enforcement agency, it used to say local police department. So again, we're just looking at a few wording changes. And then also the word law is in bold and that used to say local law enforcement. And then at the very bottom of page three, it now says PA Department of Education and that used to be Office of Safe Schools. And those were the changes that were outlined in that policy. Okay. Sticking with Mrs. Bartman, uh, behavior support 113.2 again. Um, last reviewed 2021. And again, the date, my apologies, date's not listed on there, but the last review of that was 2021. So again, it's outside of our three-year look back. And um again, a few little updates to this as well, right? >>
041Yes, that is correct. If you look on page four of this policy, again, same thing, law enforcement agency where it used to say local police, directly underneath there, the word law is in bold. It used to be local law enforcement. So again, these very, very minor changes. And then at the in that same referral to law enforcement all the way the last paragraph in that section there are some changes just based upon the legal requirements. So it used to be 1 and 18 1 and 17 and now it's 1 and 18. The next paragraph underneath there relations with law enforcement. Same thing law enforcement agency has been changed. It used to say local police department. And the same thing at the top of page five. It used to say local police department. Now it says
042law enforcement agency. Those were the only changes to this policy. >> The only thing that I saw when I was reviewing this um was the insecusion. Um I did do a little bit of research on other school districts and the statement that's here um the you know the confinement of a student in a room. We're talking about CPI type of um seclusion, right, for a calm down period. Is that correct? >> Correct. For deescalation. We don't use CPI here in the district. Um we use safety care. >> Okay. Okay. Um and this would be an involuntary um confinement. Correct. Is that >> that that we're we're that the district is asking the student, you know, for that calm down period. Correct. >> Depends on the situation. >> Okay. Okay. >> To be honest, you know,
043no, that's fine. We're not necessarily taking a student to a certain area. It may be within the classroom that that student needs to deescalate. >> Okay. So, because that brings me to this question um with or without staff supervision in the same room at all times. So we we want to make sure that we are monitoring that student that there is somebody with him or her >> correct at all times. >> Correct. There would be someone monitoring the situation at all times. >> Very good. Okay. 113.3 screening and evaluations for students with disabilities. again last review 201 uh 15, right? And um again uh no new updates to this but again based on the date um this needs to be uh reviewed and looked at. >> Correct. There are no changes to this policy. Um,
044again, as we are, it's a general screening process and as of course we are working through the MTSS process, there may become a time we need to change some verbiage in here, but we are at the beginning of that process at this time. >> Okay. >> All right. 113.4 still up the bat here, Mrs. Bartman. >> That is correct. Confidential of special education student information. Again, last revised in 2021, so outside our three-year look back and really no changes to this as well. That is correct. No other legal requirements have changed in that time. Okay. >> All right. 114 gifted education. Uh again last reviewed in 2015 and um obviously based on the date out of our look back time period um but no new updates with regard to this. Is that correct? >> That
045is correct. The only updates are the ARs that were attached from PSBA. >> Okay. All right. So let's look at those ARS. Um, and am I correct in saying we do not have an active 114 AR0? >> That is correct. We don't have >> Okay. >> any of the ARs for policy 114. >> So, this is up for adoption. Do you want to do you want to talk to that specifically? The AR0. >> Um, sure. The AR0 is really just outlining the gifted regulations and what we need to do for gifted support services. Um, so that is pretty much what that document is. And then as you go through all of the other ARs under this are all of the documents that we utilize for gifted services. So there's the notice of parental rights for
046gifted students, the permission to evaluate forms. These are just the blank forms that we utilize for our students. the gifted written report which is the evaluation report, the invitation to the team meeting, a blank GIE, gifted individualized education plan, the blank notice of recommended educational assignment or the NORA, and then the notice of intent to re-evaluate. And the final form that is located there is the ODR um office of dispute resolution uh due process complaint that can be filed if needed. So those are all examples of the documents that we utilize. >> Right? Any questions from the board? Again, what we've not done is we we've always had a gifted um policy there. What we've not um placed in in our policies are all the ARs that are associated to that. Is that correct? >>
047That is correct. >> Okay. So, this would be something a little bit new for us to be able to display the the the regs and the multitude of forms and structures that go with the gifted education program. The AR1 is that going out every year? Um, or is this just as the initial screening comes out to that student parent? >> The notice of parental rights for gifted students that goes out with every GIE okay meeting. >> Any questions from the board? All right, Mrs. Bartman. Thank you. Okay, it takes us to a or excuse me, policy 115. You went through all the ARS all the way through 0 through eight of 114. Uh, this is dealing with career and technical education. We currently don't have a policy with regard to CTC. Um and um PSBA
048does have a recommended policy um to which we can utilize and script. Um again, some of this is based on whether or not you operate. We don't currently operate our own CTC. We obviously send students to our county um CTC's. So um you know much of this policy does not necessarily apply the italicized areas don't really apply to us when it comes to that but it does just give some guidelines and delegation of responsibility um certifications that are used at the CTC just gives meat to and really I think elevates um we're one of the we we are the outside of reading we are the largest provider to our CTTC's in terms of participation. I think this all having a policy really elevates the program itself and significantly um places it on um everyone's radar
049um with regard to the types of things um we expect to see out of a CTC and the responsibilities that are associated with it. So, what we can do is we will um eliminate much of the language in here um that's not associated since we don't operate. We'll only uh put in the necessary information and we'll we'll we'll trim that down and bring it to the full committee. >> Right. I was just going to ask if we could do that for >> trim out all the other unnecessary >> next three months, you know, before next school year. >> Yep. Absolutely. Okay. um 626 and 6261 um federal fiscal compliance again as we go through audits um and we um are are being looked at with uh federal audits and so forth. U policies need to
050be updated. They need need to be maintained. So we last resi revised um 626 and 621 and I believe it was 2020. Um, so obviously, um, we're we're pulling this a little bit out of order, but as we go through, we want to make sure these are lock step with what, um, is required under federal law. So, uh, Mr. Lance, you want to just walk us through both of these policies a little bit? >> Yep. So, these policies align us to the current federal, uh, requirements. In particular, single audit is a portion of our audit related to grants. That threshold is now a million dollars rather than $750,000. That also ties to our audit requirements as well as we're required with accepting federal grants to comply with federal uh reporting for violations as well as
051um whistleblowing protections which are added into the document in bold for uh policy 626. The next one which is 6261 dovetales on the federal requirements um in particular. Um we have to rep have to comply for um federal awards specifically with federal requirements with regarding professional development and associated guidelines for documentation to ensure uh compliance for the requirements associated with um those federal fund grants. All right, any questions for Mr. lens in terms of those two particular and the last one again just relevant due to title one this goes in alignment with auditing purposes and so forth so this is again a little bit out of chronological order but uh policy 918 Dr. Gordon in charge of our title programs and our federal grants. Um if you wouldn't mind just taking us through and and
052what this policy >> sure entails. >> Um there are no current updates for this policy. Um the policy itself as is is written um hasn't changed. But what has happened is there are now two attachments to 918. um looking at the district level parent and family engagement policy as well as a school level family and parent engagement policy. So I would recommend that we take the time um to look at the two attachments and um update those so that we're ensuring that our building level and district level um engagement policies are aligned to to 918. This allows us to drill down a little bit and specifically indicate the ways that we're going to engage with our parents as we look at this policy in the form of parent surveys um parent engagement um nights that
053we run and title one meetings that we run in the building. So, we are doing um the things that are highlighted in this policy, but looking at the attachments just allows us to pull out some of the specific information in a more usable format than having to someone go through the entire policy and read the fine print. So, it will just provide us an opportunity to work with our um title one buildings to really show what we're doing and put it in a way that is um more accessible to to people. >> You the board currently doesn't have those two attachments. They need to be created. They need to be created by um and uh Dr. Horton and team at the buildings that are titled buildings. Um our hope would be to bring those back
054to you at the next committee of the whole meeting with the rest of these policies and then we can look at that um to see whether or not you agree with those in format. They're really the functionality of activating that particular policy itself. I say really it's um showing how we're going to implement the policy within the buildings and across the district with the different engagement opportunities that we provide. Okay. So, just going back through real quick, what we will do is we'll bring all these sounds like all of the carried over um from our two months ago meeting of uh of policy committee meetings. We'll bring those forward at the Cal meeting just to answer any questions the board may have along with all the identified 100s that we talked about this evening including
055626 um uh this evening you're going to see both 626 and 621 6261 on for um your consideration of since there's really no changes we need to make sure that we're updating that as quickly as possible. 918 we'll have those um I guess additions we yeah we we uh four attachments that we'll include in that and bring those to a committee meeting with hope that we can then start to move those along into the first and second reads. So we are moving through a lot of these policies at at at quite a rate just to get up to date. Um, moving forward, is it possible to get a redlinined copy um and and mark it up with um highlighted of what we're adding like how we added the word um uh law somewhere and then
056you know other other little nuances just because as I read through these um it it just might be easier for me to not have to scrutinize it too much to ask you know the questions of what we're adding, what we're subtracting, those kind of things. I I don't know if that's a possibility. >> Yeah, we can work on getting you that. >> Okay. >> Yeah. So, you're looking at one document that you're saying has the >> correct >> the items added or deleted. >> Correct. Yep. >> Okay. >> Um, good. Uh, public comment. Any anything else for the good of the order? >> Uh, public comment number two. I don't think anybody signed up for that. Um, if you love policy as much as I do, uh, our next policy meeting is June 23rd, um,
057which is at 6 pm. Uh, do I have a motion to adjurnn? >> Motions. >> Second. >> Okay. Meeting ajourn. Thank you.