001or feedback. Um, and then after we do that, we're going to begin, we've actually started some of this RFQ selection on a platform, a digital platform to build our framework within. And we've actually identified a platform that we'll start working with once approved. You guys move over. All right. So, future forward, um, once we have approval, we've built the platform with all the resources for the teacher, the Lichfield leader evaluation framework, um, then we'll start using it, um, in the winter spring of 2026, um, we'll have training for the Lichfield educator evaluator framework. Um, and also, I guess I, um, I should back up a little bit, bringing it to the board of course as well. Um, in the winter of 2025, the Lichfield classified evaluation framework will start being built. Um, and then with
002the anticipation of bringing that tool the spring of 2026, we're hoping alongside of the teacher educator framework, we'll be bringing both of those to you in the spring of 2026. Um, in the fall of 2026, we anticipate that's when we'll begin using the teacher tool as well as the classified tool. So to kind of give you a future forward look at the cascading system that we have been working on. All right. So before we um present to you the um Lichfield leader evaluation framework, we want to present to you the research that we use was used to ground um the formation of our the documents by the committee. So we really um entertained I guess engaged um our committee to really think about the purpose of evaluation um from the spectrum of accountability to measuring
003growth and development. And really what we arrived on and based on the research and based on our beliefs about Lichfield is that really a good tool has all three components. Um we need to be able to measure growth. We need to be able to get information to develop our staff. And then we also need a way to hold staff accountable to their roles and responsibilities of their respective role as a Lichfield leader or a Lichfield educator. Some other critical elements that we considered as we built the foundation is um is really when we look at giving someone feedback to develop them or help them grow or hold them accountable um really that multiple measures of assessment. So really looking just like we look at a student as a whole child, we also have need to
004look at the employee as a whole person. And so looking at student achievement growth metrics as an example, um department or operation effective met metrics, direct observation of leadership practices, stakeholder feedback, teacher, staff and family feedback, and evidence of their own growth. And keep in mind this is a Lichfield leader evaluation framework meaning this is for all Lichfield leaders both on the educational side of the house and the operations side of the house. Um in addition um standardbased model that's aligned to the vision and mission of the organization. We spent a lot of time um looking at the um professional standards for educational leaders and making sure that we had those critical attributes aligned to the instrument that we were creating and then alignment with the organizational vision mission strategic plan is essential. That's another
005foundation of research. And so just as um Mrs. Benjamin presented to you that we discovered the Lichfield learner characteristics and skills um weren't just about our students, they were really about our staff as well and really aligning that. What are we building here? What are we becoming? We're believing. We're belonging. And we're becoming that Lichfield learner. No matter if you're a student or you're a staff in our organization. So that's kind of looking at like the philosophical premise like of how you create a foundational evaluation tool for that measuring growth, that development of staff, and that accountability measure. But you also have to look at when you when you implement that evaluation tool. What are some critical attributes you need to be aware of um that it needs to be designed with district involvement or
006educa or organizational leaders which I as I presented on the slide previous um we did incorporate those stakeholders. Um be educational um to leaders to help them understand their leadership and what action to take to improve. So making sure however we designed our instrument that um when we provided that feedback that it was very specific to certain descriptors so that they can really look at what am I doing really well that can be celebrated and what are my areas that I can even get better be aligned to the extent practical for teacher and staff performance assessments cascading um just to remind um anyone that's watching in the board that cascading means that really creating that common language around our instrument that no matter what your role in the organization um that the instrument um domains
007and um indicators are are similar across our organization no matter what job that you do. And then rigorous and fair and equitable. Gather evidence or performance through multiple measures of practice. Communicate results with consistency and transparency and include training, support, and evaluation. Support builds accountability, but people need to know what they're being held accountable to. So, believe, belong, become the Lichfield learner is our Lichfield promise. And the committee and admin council identified as we started building our tool what the domains would look like and really um looked at those Lichfield learner characteristics as being the domains that we would use for any employee across our organization. So to just kind of go over some common language because common language is really important in an organization because it defines and keeps us all in line to
008know what we're looking for and what we're talking about. And so when we talk about the instrument, I just want to go over some common language with you. Um the scale is aligned to the AD's requirements of how we communicate effectiveness for our educators and leaders, which is highly effective, effective, developing, and ineffective. That's the scale. Each domain is the Lichfield leader leader Lchurchville learner characteristic or skill. So um communication, character, problem solving, content expert continuous um continuous learner. So those those Lichfield learner attributes. So those are domains and then each domain has indicators. The indicators are on the far left of the chart there. The indicators each have descriptors that fall under that indicator. And some indicators might have one descriptor while other indicators might have a few um descriptors. It just depends on
009what that indicator and what's included in that indicator and what we're measuring. There might be multiple measures under indicator or there might be several um measures under a specific indicator. So just to when we talk through the instrument in the next slide just understanding domain is a lit for learner characteristics indicator is under each domain and then descriptors are are what we define as the measurement for each indicator. So this is the outcome of the work and if you'll go ahead and click on the image for me. And so as you'll see at the top you'll see domain one is communication. And first of all let me just point out to the board. On the far left side you'll see the document tabs. Um under each tab you'll see each domain. So as you maneuver
010through the document um you can look at each domain. You can see each indicator and then the descriptors that align to those indicators. Now this is paper right? This is a paper format that we're presenting to you so you can understand um how will the the language of the instrument the instrument itself will be operationalized in a digital platform. So you can kind of imagine with me you'll go in, you'll select an employee. In this case we're talking about the Lichville leaders. So you'll select your leader. Their evaluation framework will populate. It'll come up with a domain. You'll pick the domain. Under the domains will be each indicator. You'll select the indicator. Under each indicator will be the descriptors. In those descriptors will be types of evidence that you can select. There'll be um artifacts
011that you can upload that are evidence of those um descriptors and um also give a score for each descriptor. So each descriptor will become a score for each indicator and then each indicator will be averaged for an overall score for each domain. So, I'm going to pause just for a second because that was a lot and I have been saying this language for like a year and a half. So, I'm going to pause for a minute and just see if you guys have any questions up until this point. Um, and then I'll explain more. I want to actually spend some time in content expert with you all um to just show you example. >> Miss Wallace, did you have any questions so far? >> No, I'm just reading through each tab. >> Okay. >> Love
012it. >> Mr. Mike, did you have questions so far? Yeah, just uh clarification. You're talking about the point system that would be in the electronic version and you're saying so each each um each domain is averaged out within all those descriptors that you would have and then there's like an average score put to that. >> Yes sir. And I and I will show you a little bit more in the next slides of how the final calculation will be made because there is there are some requirements um from Arizona um of how we have to break up where the scores can come from for um leader performance as well as teacher performance or teacher evaluation not performance evaluation. >> Right. Thank you. >> You're welcome, >> Mr. Owens. >> Yeah, no questions. I like the um
013how you explained the purpose. I really like the usage of accountability throughout. Um I was going to say this at the end, but I mean I know board member Moran reviewed this and I kind of wish board member Climber, you know, previous got to see this because this is something that they've been work wanting for a long time. So um yeah, knowing how much work you've put into it over the last few years, um I think we're all excited to have this. But yeah, no questions. So, if you'll go ahead and click on the tab on the far left under content expert. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Melissa. >> I'm good. Thank you. >> Okay. Sorry. I'm just excited to show you content expert. All right. So, if you'll click on the content expert and if
014you will select the one that says principal. So, it should be domain 6E if that helps you. And then it should say principal right after. Perfect. So, this is an example I just want to walk you through. So I'll let the board members get to their copy. So you're going to go to domain 6E and then PR. It should say principal there. Okay. So as you'll see um you have your scale at the top. Highly effective, effective, developing and ineffective. And then you'll have your um domain which in this case is content expert. A definition of what content expert means. It has the mapping for those um educational standards that we already talked about. that was a foundation that we used to build this tool. Um, and then if you keep scrolling down, you'll see
015the first indicator which is I think if my eyesight is being kind to me, it's resource expert job and resource expert. And um, that is the indicator. Under that indicator, if you keep scrolling down for me, please, you'll see there's one, two, three, and it keeps going. There's about nine or 10, depending if it's principal or educational director. Well, no, there's five under this one. I'm sorry. Five under job and resource expert. So each of those descriptors will have um their own evidence that's attached to them either in that portal that I talked about that digital platform will populate different types of evidence for educational leaders or operational leaders and the evaluator will be able to click on that evidence and also upload evidence for that descriptor and then give that descriptor an overall score
016and then that out of four and then that overall score will be averaged together to give an overall score for the indicator. Um, if you keep scrolling down, let's go all the way to the bottom because this is really what I wanted to highlight is the blue font. And the reason why I wanted to highlight this is um, part of Arizona's requirements is a certain percentage or of educational leader, principal or teacher evaluation is 33 to 50% of their evaluation has to come from student outcomes or student growth. And so this particular indicator is worth 33% of that final score. So when board member Mike's asked about the averaging and and I'll talk about it when we get back to the slideshow. This part is weighted differently than the rest of the instrument. It counts
017as 33% of the of the evaluation. And so I'll give you example. The first one which I think should be um growth on benchmark. I'm going off my memory. growth on the benchmark using our growth coefficient formula. If a principal's data comes back to be within that threshold, then they would be highly effective, effective um developing or ineffective based on those results. So this whole section why I wanted to point this out is strictly based on that quantitative evidence um of student success at Lichfield for their particular school. If you're an educational leader, it's based on the district as a whole. All right. Will you go back to the slideshow for me? So, this this slide speaks to what I've already already kind of previewed for you is that under each descriptor there'll be types
018of evidence. We are still building this out but in the digital platform that artifacts of evidence just I gave you a little sampling in that link and we won't click on it right now but board members you have that access to that and the community does too if they want to check it out. Um but it just gives you so far what we generated as far as what different types of evidence would be for that descriptor to support that ineffective developing effective or or highly effective. Another thing that you'll find in the instrument is we took some time to describe define what strong evidence means, what evidence means, um what some evidence mean and what limited evidence means. So if you have a descriptor that maybe only has one measure, then how is it strong
019evidence is based on its consistency and so on. So you'll see there that we've spent some time as a guide for the evaluator to say, okay, if I'm looking at am I going to call that strong evidence or evidence or some evidence, then it gives them a guide of what attributes to look for. So I'm going to pause there before I go into my what's next slide and see if you guys have questions. >> Miss Wallace, any more questions for now? >> No, no questions. Looks great. Mr. Mike's >> U just a cl I'm trying to imagine the when you're using this. So the under the success 33% piece there's a whole bunch of rubric language just under success in general. So are they is that going to be teased out to where each one
020of those are individual? They'd be looking at that going the first one is the the coefficient is used and so there's that one and that would be based on those numbers and the second one. Yes. So and that those would been then be used for the averaging of >> Yes sir. So in 6E you might have one descriptor that's highly effective and you could have one descriptor that is developing. >> Okay. >> Right. Depending on the quantitative measure that you successfully accomplished that school year. >> Right. Okay. Great. Thanks >> Mr. Owens. >> I don't have any more questions right now either. So >> no. Okay. So what's next? Right. All right. So, obviously having you guys review the tool. I know that you guys have we've we've provided to you the last few weeks
021to hopefully look at and study it and um see if that you are ready to approve it tonight. Um complete the artifacts of evidence by descriptor. That's still work that we're going to do. Um because we need to get more operational leaders around the table to really drill down also um you know just looking at it multiple perspectives just making sure that we try to build the digital platform as comprehensive as possible. So it doesn't change the actual descriptors or indicators, but it's just those artifacts and that drop down we're going to build in the portal so that it's easy to check off like we can or or or generate ideas of hey what is evidence so that I can get better in this area. Um and then using the RFQ process um identify that
022digital platform and build that framework in the platform once we have the digital once if we have the framework drafted. Um we've actually spent some time already doing this. I probably should have updated this from before, but we did review the growth coefficient evidence um in the t content expert domain. So, what you see tonight is our recommendation for how we um set that um set that highly effective, effective, developing, ineffective when you see um the growth coefficient for the benchmark. Um those are our solid recommendations for what they should be. Um additional training for evaluators to build that interator reliability. Um, we're going to use the digital platform reporting features to monitor evaluation process and scoring. So each principal will well right now we're working on the the Lichfield leader framework. So each evaluator
023of the leaders will be able to access that data as an admin cabinet will be able to access that data to look for trends to look for opportunities to help people grow for accountability all that. So, it's going to be really comprehensive reporting features that we can really use to make decisions and then additional training as part of our admin council with our leaders, continue that work around the teacher um the Lichfield educator evaluation framework um and then start building the Lichfield classified evaluation framework and then we are going to recall that committee back in the summer and maybe even invite new folks as well for some new eyes um to review the Lichfield leader evaluation. framework after this first year and make any changes that we feel and then of course bring it back
024to the board and let you know what we're what we're recommending those changes to be. So this is a these are tables that kind of they they shows you how the weights will be as I explained. Um Arizona requires that a total weight of 33 33 to 50% has to be from that student success indicator. So 33% will be from that blue fonted area and I made sure I made it blue to make it a little clearer. Um and 67% will come from all those other indicators and domains. Operational leaders are different because they don't have that same law requirement. So 100% it would be just an average of all the indicators together, but they still would be no matter if you're an educational leader, operational leader, you're still getting the feedback on each descriptor.
025So you really know where am I highly effective in that indicator where where you know where maybe I need to work in that particular indicator by descriptor. And then this is the overall scale. So after that's all averaged together, no matter if you're an educational leader or an operational leader, this is where the scores will fall to give you that final score of highly effective, effective, developing, or ineffective. >> You're good. You were excited. >> I was supposed to let Mrs. Benjamin speak. I'm sorry. She's funny. >> Clearly, she's very passionate about this. So, >> President Zida, may I interject? First of all, I just want to say thank you to Dr. Dooy and Miss Benjamin and the the various team members that have participated in this process. It it is very exciting, but it's
026it's been one where we've sought a lot of feedback to try to get it right. Um certainly the electronic tool as we further the process, depending upon the board's vote tonight, um will just even make it more um operationalized. And I think um I'm excited to see the feedback that we capture from the evaluation process over time. Um Dr. Ducey, would you mind real quick going to the portion uh of the data that also has the superintendent piece for me? You know, the slide that shows um the the point that I'd asked Dr. Dooy just to share with you all this and we put it >> back in the slideshow. Sorry. Go back. We put it uh so that the board could see as we move into my goals in the next particular conversation. But
027the idea was when you talk about cascading that if we're going to ask um whether it's a site administrator or a district administrator or myself um to be held accountable to a certain data set that we wanted it to look similar. And so, um, the team and I worked hard to showcase those, um, items connected to student success that were part of my goal number one. And so, I just wanted Dr. Dooy to share that, um, so you can see how that also applies um, to my future work depending upon the board's vote as well. So, um, it's in here. So, I didn't want to leave it uh, uh, to chance. I wanted to make certain the governing board saw that and how it reflects uh similar to uh the item that you'll see next
028in the agenda. So, Dr. Dy >> Benjamin, >> so we looked at Dr. Davidson's goals and we also looked at the um leader evaluation framework and we tried to build it out so that it would be consistent with a cascading evaluation framework. We want that really to start with the leader. So, we wanted Dr. Davidson's if possible to look as close to the leaders, the teachers, and the classified staff as possible. Um, building this in, we can of course make things look a little bit different if we need to for the governing board, but we're also hopeful that you could use that same tool that we're going to be using for the online piece um and gathering artifacts and evidence that way for you as well. And then the other thing that I will note
029is during our study session um you guys had mentioned some different data points that you thought were important for to track from the superintendent role um in the goals and so you will find that we built the foundation of student success based on that feedback. So eighth grade minimally proficient decreasing highly proficient going up third grade minimally proficient going down. So examples like that, attendance. Um, so we try to incorporate those multiple measures to reflect what you all also requested to see. >> To add to that, Dr. Dooy, I believe if if you spent some time governing board to look at this or if you'd like our um technology person to help us, there's 10 different indicators um that would be assigned to goal one for student success. So there's a a variety of data
030pieces as Dr. as he shared, but uh there are 10 different pieces that um in this case I would be scored on. But if you were to look at the administrator or the leader tool, same thing holds for them. >> Did you have any questions, Miss Wallace? >> I did not. I have read all of the tabs fully and I love them. I think it's fantastic and I can't wait to see the tool in action with the new technology piece that is to come. I think it will be very helpful and informative and thank you for all your hard work. It is awesome. >> Thank you. It was definitely collaborative. So many people were helpful in this process. >> Mr. for mics. >> I don't have any questions about about it. I mean, I I
031really do think it's incredible the aligned language, the the process that was gone through to make sure it aligned to all the standards that were necessary and how to make it a useful piece. Uh, a chance to have those check-ins. It looks like that's built in to be able to for everybody to know where they are at certain moments and uh that collaboration and the alignment for the mission vision of the of the district. I mean, it really it it really is incredible. I mean, I'm excited for your excitement with it um and and what it's actually uh produced for this point. And it it's a great start for all the other stuff to cascade off of it. And I'm excited to see what it looks like through the usability piece with that electronic component
032because I know that's going to be a massive piece as far as how well this is able to be used and putting that artifact stuff in. So I know that's another big thing that you have to go through and then additionally, you know, kind of getting through all the the hurdles of using it for the first time as well. But that's an exciting piece to really kind of see and get that feedback and moving forward. So um lots of praise for it. So thank you very much. Mr. Owens. So I know personally when you know my performance is being reviewed and I think everybody can agree that you know you want it to be objective and I hope that this removes that subjectivity out of the performance reviews because the last thing we ever want
033is somebody saying oh I got a bad performance review but my numbers or this person shouldn't have got you know not that we need to compare ourselves but at the end of the day you know performance matters and we want to make sure that that subjectivity is removed from the equation and I think that this accomplishes that goal. Um, like board member Mike just mentioned, I like the alignment. I like the cascading, right? Everybody's held to the same kind of standards and so that way that's not fair that they're not based judged based on this and student test scores are are big our big performance um indicator. So um yeah, I can tell by your how excited you are both of you that um you know to have finally have this completed. Obviously, when we
034roll it out, there's going to be some hiccups, but I'm sure we can overcome those and we'll get some good feedback so that way, you know, if there's any changes need to be made for the next school year, we'll ready we'd be ready to do it. But yeah, thank you so much. >> First, I want to say thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Owens already mentioned it, but Miss Climber, Miss Moran, myself have been wanting this for as long as I've been on the board. So, I am super thankful for all the work. We know that this was a huge undertaking. So, first of all, thank you for all of that work and that it's going to continue to right cuz we're still we're going to learn and grow from this year and implementing
035it and then all of the work we have to do to also have it continue to roll down to all the rest of our staff. Um, that being said, we are going to talk about the superintendent's goals next, but we do have a thing in here for superintendent uh evaluation and they're kind of connected. So, I guess my question would be this tool that we're approving or this we're going to be approving this and it lays out all the framework beautifully for everybody, but Dr. Davidson has some additional goals that aren't so laid out easily in there. Um, should we be not approving his portion of this right now until we have that all broken out? >> Yeah. >> So that it can all be one cohesive piece. President Z and certainly that could be
036a motion just that we were to approve the evaluation um tool the leadership tool as presented minus the portion in regards to my goals because we'll be talking about that next. So that that would be fine. >> Okay. Just and I'm not saying that we aren't going to go with this but just to make sure that the whole board can be part of that discussion and and I think that what's in there is great and I like the you know cohesiveness through everybody the alignment. I think that's wonderful. But just so we can make sure that we do that through all of the goals and we have a complete tool for us as a board to use and to make sure that we are working on that cuz this is that's one of our main
037jobs, right, is to evaluate the superintendent. So I want to make sure that we are all kind of a voice in what that looks like at the end while maintaining this wanting to have this cascading evaluation tool and hopefully we can use the same and that makes it easier. I would love for us to have a tool that we can use on the computer and not be some table in a word document. So, um, so yes, that was my only question, but I think this is fantastic work. I I know that it was a huge undertaking. So, thank you for myself, for all these board members sitting up here, for all the board members that came before that are not here, and for Miss Moran, who would definitely be saying that, and it's sad she
038can't say that tonight, I'm sure. Um, with that, does anybody else have any other questions? or if not I can make a motion so that I say the part I want. Um I would motion to approve the sorry the wrong >> sorry hold on I was looking at the wrong thing. I motion to approve the new Lichfield leader evaluation framework minus the superintendent section as presented. >> Second. >> Having a motion for myself and a second for Mr. Owens. Call for the vote. Miss Wallace, >> yay. >> Mr. Mike, >> yay. >> Mr. Owens, >> yay. >> I'm also a yay. Motion passes. Thank you guys again so much. And now we're going to move on to superintendent goals for the 2526 school year, which we all kind of got to work on at our
039uh retreat, not retreat that we had recently. So, uh yeah, extended meeting. Extended meeting. So this will be Dr. Davidson will lead us in this discussion. >> Thank you President Zo and members of the board and those here with us and those out watching tonight. Um I don't have a big giant presentation. I certainly provided the documents for the board's review. Um in similar fashion, goal one remains student success, increasing student achievement. I did provide the 10 different indicators there that we just discussed. Um and certainly those are indicators that were discussed um in our um particular work session. Um but also those are pieces of evidence that are important to us as a district. Many of those items are reflected in our school and our district label. So that's why I wanted to ensure
040that we had those 10 items to review in regards to goal one. Um the other goals are are things that we have discussed around our um work within our special education department within our work in our communications department and communication uh external communication as well as goal four and five regarding the evaluation tool and process and certainly financial responsibility and stewardship. um the way I had it written um because uh there is still a very unique piece to my role as superintendent goals and completion of goals and action steps do connect to performance pay a little bit differently than um our other educators. So, I provided that information to the board as well to demonstrate that um no matter what evaluation tool we use, we still need to have the opportunity for the board to
041weigh in on my success or lack thereof in regards to these goals. Um so, wanted to make certain you had a little bit of a piece on how we would be potentially working through that with weights assigned to um the the goals themselves. So I will stand for any questions conversation and um I know in the work session as well we did talk about potentially modifying the evaluation tool and with the board's most recent vote um that's something we can look at doing if the board so wishes um actually designing my tool to look similar to the tool that we just presented on behalf of the Lichfield learner characteristics. So um I'll stand for questions or conversation. Thank you. Miss Wallace, I'm actually going to start with you to see if you had any questions
042because you were not when we were doing the goals, but now you've had a chance to look at them. So, if there's anything that you specifically wanted to talk about in the goals, now was a great time to do that. Uh, no, I have read over them all and they all, like last year, seem like a heavy load, but if that's what we're taking on, then here we go. Well, I'm excited for all the things we're going to work towards. >> Mr. Mike's, did you have any questions right now? >> Yeah, I mean, I had some I had some questions with um with mainly kind of the the first part, the student success piece with the with the rubric and everything. And I I see I see the alignment with the of course with the
043framework that we're we're building out and and I like the idea of us maybe looking at tackling um that for this year to align a superintendent's evaluation to that. Um there was a couple couple things that I was just trying to make sure I had clarity as far as the what's being measured for the student success pieces and because and I was just trying to go back and compare what we're measuring the year prior and so if I look you know for instance the first one for reading that's that's all inclusive grades 2 through 8th this time or is it is it broke down to I mean and that's a question I kind of have throughout most of them we had teased out in the other ones where it was just an eighth grade score,
044just a third grade score for state assessment data and then um also benchmark data was was broken out and it seems like we're kind of packaging these all that together. Now, am I reading that correctly? >> Now, the way I would understand it, Mr. Mike, is that if there is not a specific grade level there, the score that I would present would be based on the grade levels that part took in that assessment. >> Okay. All right. Okay. Okay. So, and just and that was just a clarification for a ship from what we have which >> which I'm good with. Um the this this might be a silly question but I'm going to ask it anyways is the cadence do we is that K is that K5 we use the data and okay and that's
045what we were trying to I was trying to clarify that piece because I know we just focused for instance last year just on the K2 piece but once again it's all K5 and Mr. Mike if you're okay I'd like Miss Benjamin or Dr. introduce you just to speak to how we use the Acadians data because it is a very select piece of data um with some of our lower grade level. So >> so we use Aadian data um by law for AD. It is required for move on when reading for kindergarten through third grade students. We also use it for fourth and fifth. It does help to provide some diagnostic information very quickly three times a year for our teachers and staff. And then we're able to provide um intervention for those students whether that
046is in the classroom tier two or pull out tier three with a reading specialist. >> Right. Thank you. Um the uh for the for the fourth piece I was as that's for the state math eighth grade is what it what it seems like and I was just reading through that second part for effective and and it uses the and or um piece with it and I I don't know if we need to change the language of that but if it's and then technically that becomes highly effective uh then it would read that way highly effective is red for um for four because we're shooting for a decrease in minimally proficient and a um increase of highly proficient. So to hit both of those and then the effective piece reads um andor. So I'm just wondering
047and that's just words smithing stuff that I just want to make kind of clarity for it. >> It's it could be either is why Dr. Davidson I think that's what he's asking. That's okay. So, you're talking about eighth grade math class. >> Yeah, sure. The fourth the fourth eighth grade math. >> Students against that one. Eighth grade math. >> Yes. So, >> yeah. Sorry, Dr. Davidson. I should probably be a little bit more helpful of where I'm talking. Okay. >> So, I guess maybe the word smithing should be or. >> Yeah, that's just that's just what I'm thinking. I mean, and just and I know this is potentially where we're voting for it or not, but I just wanted to make sure that's clear. >> Then it would just move over to highly effective if
048it was and >> I believe with the board's permission certainly that can just simply be or because it is the the alternative one or the other. um some of the uh some of the other kind of questions and maybe this is just alignment for information we have because I'm I always look at where the growth is on highly effective or effective and you know we have a 1% growth or a 2% growth um listed or whatever the coefficient and and sometimes I want to of course make sure that they're realistic goals that we have but sometimes I'm like okay well what were we were that what did we have that last you know that last year so I guess what I'm asking asking is when we are, you know, officially looking at this, we see
049the data comparison where, you know, what it what we had as opposed to where we're going. For instance, 2% if we have a, you know, or a 3% growth for ELA for proficiency. Um, is that a, you know, is that a reach for the stars type of thing? Is that, you know, is that something within our within our grasp? Those are those questions that kind of pop in my my mind when we're looking at this stuff. >> And certainly, Mr. mics and governing board members we can have further detailed conversation if we wish um uh from a year-to-year perspective we are definitely looking at the data as it comes back and building goals based on um those particular individual grade levels or school as a combination um for this evaluation process um we certainly looked
050at how we did but when you haven't seen the full data set some has been shared And it happens every year. You know, some grades are higher than others, some drop, some high. And so we try to find a balance. Also using the data, not just from Mr. Owen, but from my last evaluation where if you remember, we had certain percentages that were seen as growth or or maybe remain the same or went backwards. We tried to use that as kind of a scale. And and I guess my additional and is if we were to grow whether it's 2% or 3% or meet certain um benchmarks such as that growth if if we were to do that across the board and that happened A++ district, right? So we kind of set that bar far out
051there knowing that if I were to be highly effective in every single category, we'd be in a that'd be the the greatest place possible. And some of that's my clarification with it because I see 3% and I don't know >> I mean I know you guys I know it's just not a random number you would pick out of from there but just kind of make you know understanding that piece and it kind of goes along >> I'm sorry goes goes along with the the last kind of question I have with number nine when we talk about the uh the average daily attendance rate one of the goal that you have um when I see a breakdown of 95% to 90% to 85% % um when we looked up I see we were at 94.64% is
052what we had last you know last year and so I just I guess I sit back and highly effective on the grand scheme of things I mean once again is that 95 I mean is I mean 94.64% seems like it's outstanding. I'm not saying that we ever want to sit back and just be fine with it, but of course I want to make sure going, "Oh, is highly effective, you know, is it 93% and higher?" I mean, and that's that's one of the other questions I had as far as, you know, getting that per, you know, that percentage of 95 or versus 90%. So, just the clarification on that piece. Yeah, I I guess I would we utilize and I say we because certainly this is a conversation with some of the team members here,
053but utilize 95% as kind of that gold standard that if we can get above that and because essentially that means it could vary, but the intent would be that every single one of our schools was increasing their attendance to bring us up as a whole over 95%. But I that one certainly can be discussed and and talked about. Um, okay. >> I I part of this is just me making sure, you know, I look at it and I say, "Oh, 95% sounds good >> to me, but you know, is >> um is, you know, in comparison for a highly effective district for or evaluation is it should be diff, you know, different, but it's kind of the it's a touchandgo piece of going, oh, do we lower that, you know, percentage goal?" I'm not trying
054to say, you know, try to say that completely, but just making sure, you know, the attainability piece of it. So, >> Dr. Dy, you want to add to that at all? >> Yes. So, our schools that are achieving that 95% or higher are also our schools that are having the highest impact on student growth and achievement. So when we look at that 95% across, then if we can get all our schools and as a district to average out to be above 95%, then it's our belief that we're leading to better student success results. And then you were asking about the 3% and I think Dr. Davidson elaborated on this, but I we worked with Mr. Owen to look at trends for many many years of our state achievement data and we looked at precoid rates
055and we really said if we want to get some of those rates back again because we have declined since then um in the next four years we would like to see a 12% difference in our overall student achievement. So it's practical to achieve a 3% growth as a highly effective leader um to get to that 12% as a district in the next four years. So that's some of the foundational discussion of how we came up with the 3% in addition to looking at what has been the trend across the district of growth um and what's practical because there is a difference just because you don't have the 3% growth doesn't mean you're not effective but if we truly are going to call a leader highly effective then we need to have growth that's beyond what
056is normal growth. >> Okay. All right. Great. Thank you. I appreciate Yeah. those main those are the main questions I had for that for that piece. Um you know everything else with the goals I mean they're big things to tackle and lots lots of variables in there and I I do notice that some of them are there might be some action pieces uh that we'll be able to move forward with on some of those goals throughout the year and then there's some stuff where we're creating a plan that's going to be implemented the next year. I know with with wording and everything like that. So, um, yeah, I think those look like really big big goals to hit and it's going to be exciting to see where we go with that. But I appreciate the
057clarity with with all that other stuff. It's helpful, uh, helpful for me when I look at that rubric >> for sure. Madam President, real quick, >> um, Mr. Mike, you spoke to, you know, attainability. Um and and I would always love to say that without a doubt we will attain the highest level of of proficiency in in this evaluation or in this goal in particular student success piece that without a doubt we are highly effective. Um but certainly there's a lot of variables in this and we recognize that whether it's just the student performance themselves our our connectingness to our community and how you know our families are working alongside us. um the hard work of our our teachers and our principles and um so as as we talk as an admin cabinet and certainly
058with our team this really these are really district goals you know that that yes again mine tied to performance pay a little bit differently than others but um this is a we are all in this together scenario so I I just want to highlight that and our and our team recognizes that as well. >> Yeah. Yeah. Great. >> Can I ask a follow-up question before we have Mr. Owens um about Mr. Owen being part of this discussion for those 3% those things. He says this is attainable. And the reason I asked that just to let you know why I'm asking is because we've been told so many times like that having 3% growth is like crazy un unrealistic can't happen kind of thing. So I love that we're going to shoot for the stars here.
059That's great. I want to know are we setting realistic goals? Again, they can be like our stretch goals. That's good for me. But I just want to make sure there's something that we can achieve and we're not setting anyone up for failure. >> Kylie, >> go ahead. It's not >> setting realistic goals again. >> Okay, she's turning it back to me. So, um, to that point, um, President Zid, I guess what I would share is as we look at my evaluation and our abilities to, um, have our students achieve or, you know, whether attendance or what have you, you could probably say the highly effective piece in all seriousness was in some cases were stretch. Like just using the the conversation we've had with Mr. Owen before. Um, when you look at the one right
060beside it, if you were to give me points on being effective, those scores also will demonstrate that we're doing good work and our kids are doing great things. Uh, and as we talked with the leader evaluation, this is very similar in that we would I would have scores across each indicator. So, it's possible that I got a three as an example in one of those. Maybe we had some fours and and potentially a two or somewhere in there, but it'll all come together at the end to give us a score that balances and and and puts me in a particular category there. But um I guess I I I still believe we can obtain it. Uh but to Dr. Doo's point, the the highly effective portion year over year, we might have to come back
061and talk about that as as we, you know, see how our our kids do and how our schools do. But um I think the conversation at the end of the day will be around the overall performance that you rate me. This this is one indicator that's pretty clear um from a a category perspective. The other is give a little bit of balance. But I think that's what we'll determine is is you know being an effective leader is that good is that good enough or is the demand to be highly effective across the board and if so do we keep those stretch goals or do we modify those over time? Okay. Thank you, Mr. Owens. >> Um, yeah. So, I think the last time we went over your performance goals, um, I kind of basically asked
062you a simple question of will these goals that you've created hold you accountable for your performance? Because while you know we had input from the teachers and administrators and stuff for their performance goals at the end of the day you get to write your own goals. So if you're highly effective and it's this district reflects that then will you be rewarded and at the same time if this district somehow you know shows in effectiveness will that also be demonstrated in your performance? I mean, because we're going to know it, but if you're one or the other and this doesn't reflect that, then it's not accurate, right? So, do you feel like this is accurate and it'll hold you accountable? >> I would say yes, sir, across the board. And I think also when you look
063at the way we connected, performance pay, um this goal one being at 30% um that that's a significant significant. So, yes, sir. If if we're rocking and rolling and I'm getting highly effective marks across those 10 indicators, that'll be indicative of the the work that our every single employee in our district is doing. >> Thank you. >> Okay. My only other question, and this is really to my fellow board members, is they broke down the different percentages based on the goals um of what the performance pay will go to. And so, is everybody comfortable with that breakdown that they did? because we didn't talk about that. So on there's the breakdown of what the percentage for the performance pay goes to for each of the five goals that there are. And so it's like the
06430% for goal one, 20% for goal two, and goal three, and then 15 for goal four and goal five. Are we feeling that's the best way to do that? because we didn't talk about that at this um >> meeting. Yes, go ahead. >> If I can add please just to the conversation on that the the rationale for the weights. Um certainly student achievement, student success being the biggest that's one that is most important to me. Um the other two, goal two and three are newer goals. Um and re and have some action steps. So they're really we're just starting. So I gave those uh a little bit more weight versus goal four and five which are are important goals but are are kind of um continuation goals from last year. So that that was my
065rationale for presenting it that way but again I'll certainly uh stand for conversation and change things as needed. Michelle, did you have >> No, I was going to say I feel like the weight is correct based on the work in each goal and the amount of evidence that will need to be looked at for each goal. I feel like the weight is is accurate. >> Okay, Mr. Mike. >> Yeah. Um, and after the clarification, I mean, the weight, you know, once again, I always sit back and go, okay, where do we come up with these percentages and numbers that that makes sense uh to me as far as what's being tackled um with it. So, that answers my questions I have, >> Mr. Owens. >> Yeah, I agree. The quantifiable student success data should be
066the most weighted and then yeah, have no issues with any of the other ones. >> Okay. I don't either. I just wanted to make sure that we talked about that. Um, so what we need to do is well, what's on here is that we could possibly approve the goals, but it's got the breakdown in here, and I don't know if we're doing that since we are going to put the specific breakdown stuff on hold. Well, we're going to discuss it at another meeting. So in approving like what's on the agenda is to approve the goals and the performance pay breakdown, but the goals have the ver like the breakdown that goes from their evaluation tool that we just looked at prior. And since we did not do this section of it for the goal one,
067um are we wanting to approve that in it anyways or want to approve the goals minus the breakdown? Well, I mean, when I'm looking initially when I ca came in here as far as the breakdown of everything, I wasn't I mean, I I got some I getting some clarity is was nice for some of that information. I mean, I look at the subheading, you know, I was like, "Oh, what is it? Is it, you know, math, you know, where's the subheading for each one?" But that's that's just putting it putting in those pieces. I mean, um, and if we fix that one and or piece, I I I feel pretty I feel pretty good about, um, this this this one. I I think moving forward I think I think and like I said before and
068as mentioned I think if we sit down as a board this year and look at a way to tackle this and work on our version to align to the district's piece to where we're measuring the highly effective effective piece along with you know obviously goals three through five are measured on a different a different piece but if we can have this all-inclusive evaluation thing if the board uh would would be able to tackle that that be great. But then, you know, for this for this piece here, this this um this looks good to me. >> Okay. >> Does anybody else have any comments about that? Okay. Then if somebody wants to make a motion or unless Dr. Davidson, did you have anything else you wanted to add? >> The the only thing I'd add, Madam
069President and Mr. mics would be um the answer is yes even though it wasn't a question the answer is yes to us working together to align our tool for me um to be more closely to the leadership tool we just adopted um one of the characteristics for our Lville learner is content expert and I would ask that the board you know as we look at this these these five goals are kind of my demonstration of of being the content expert so um it's this is for all practical purposes the scorecard for that I would use and and certainly communicate as we talked about throughout the year on these goals and action steps. Um so just know we're already kind of leaning towards us going through that process um with the board's blessing over time. >>
070Okay. If someone would like to make a motion. >> I move to approve the supernate goals and performance pay model for the 2526 school year as presented. >> I second. Having a motion for Mr. Owens and a second for Miss Wallace. I'll call for the vote. Miss Wallace. >> Yay. >> Mr. Mike, >> yay. >> Mr. Owens, >> yay. >> I'm also a yay. Motion passes. >> Thank you. Okay, we're going to move on to discussion item 10.1, mandatory reporting and other law changes for the 2526 school year. This is going to be by Dr. Ducey and Moss. Okay. [Music] >> All right. Good. Good evening, President Zida, governing board, cabinet, and community members. Um, tonight, Moss and I are going to, Director Moss and I are going to present the law and changes policy
071updates. The clicker working now? Um the the law and policy updates that we're providing is aligned to our um strategic plan in the keystone of readiness to ensure that we have our day-to-day operations um for our protocols and procedures as well as any unexpected events. So, the purpose of the presentation is twofold, and we're preparing you to complete a first read of the trust policy updates for some specific law changes. Um, President Hobbs signed some specific laws that affect districts. Not president, Governor Hobbs, sorry. Um, the concerning student use of wireless communication devices during the school day, mandatory reporting requirements, handling directory information regarding students. Um this legislation will take place in 90 days after legislation session ends which is approximately in October. Um the Arizona school risk um retention trust which are are now
072our policies um have issued the following seeing um the policy review that we're going to provide to you this evening. So the first one I'll start with is House Bill 2484. I'll just highlight four main key elements of this law that's going to impact us as a district. Um, first of all, it requires school districts to restrict student access to wireless communication devices, including social media platforms during the school day. This includes lunches and transitions. The district must follow the expectations that the kiddos still have um access to um communication for emergency use, medical needs, or educational purposes. Um, this is typically defined in a student's IEP or 504 plan that they need access to this technology. Um, district procedures must also allow the student to have parent guardian communication. And what this means is
073not it is access to a telephone or with permission um to be able to communicate with their parent. Um, to address these requirements, the trust is proposing the first read um that you do have in your packet tonight. policy 3-43 um as well as policy 5-305 that and also the procedures that go with both of those. Um I will comment that this won't be a big change um for Lichfield as we have already adhered to students having their cell phones off or in their backpacks and we do not have them use their cell phones during school hours. Um the one thing is that educational purpose. So, just making sure that if um a teacher has identified an educational purpose for the use of a cell phone that that is defined in a student's IEP or
074504 plan. So, I'll pause just for a minute um and take any questions on the wireless communication changes. >> Did you have any questions, Miss Wallace? >> No. No questions. >> Mr. Mike, >> I have no questions. >> Mr. Owens, I have no questions either. >> All right. Um the next um area is mandatory reporting changes which is Senate Bill 1437. And I am going to let um Director Moss um present this information to you. >> Good evening. So in this mandatory reporting changes uh that brought were brought about by Senate Bill 1437, it really is just adding clarification and also expanding in one area. So the clarification in short is just saying that um we're no longer uh reporting uh these offenses, child offenses to your SRO or SSO, your school resource officer or
075S school safety officer is no longer meeting the requirement of the ARS 133620. The mandatory reporting it requires us to specifically report it to law enforcement directly. So even though your school resource officer might be law enforcement and for that and your SSO might be for that agency that covers your jurisdiction, it does not meet the requirement. It has to go specifically to that precinct which the school resides in. So saying uh we're doing a mandatory reporting for Western sky that has to go to Goodyear PD. Even though your SRO or SSO might be Goodyear PD, it has to go to the precinct and then that precinct may uh assign it to that officer on that campus. Uh the next uh clarification um give me a second. The other clarification was that uh if the
076mandatory reporting invol uh does not involve uh parents or guardian that also goes directly to law enforcement where the option was DCS or law enforcement. But if the abuse does not involve the parent or guardian, that goes directly to law enforcement. And then the one expansion to this uh mandatory reporting is that now schoolboard uh members are included as the educational professionals required for mandatory reporting. So if we have a parent for an example parent comes up or a student comes up at the end of a meeting or during a meeting and shares some information that uh proves suspicion of neglect you are required to do the mandatory reporting which we'd help you through. But yeah, >> just a quick question. The is this um there's no change in behavior for the reporting process. So
077we have I mean we didn't just heavily rely on giving SRO information and then just leaving it as is anyway. I mean this is try to take that out and making sure we're going direct to the precincts. I mean there's no behavior change that we have of how we've been operating normally. >> We have not been using our SSOs as a mandated reporting. Yes. because typically um it's not well there are times they are from the same jurisdiction as the school's location. So there there would have perhaps been a time that maybe the SRO that we had because they did currently work in that jurisdiction that the school may have felt that reporting it to the SRO and getting an incident report would have fulfilled our mandated reporting obligation. But now we have to call
078the non-emergency number, report it, and they may very well assign it to that SRO or that SSO if they are in that jurisdiction, but it has to go through the non-emergency dispatch first. Now, so it really offers that clarity to make sure that it's clearly documented in the same way every single time. And then also part of this new um law is one other caveat is also um you're also as board members mandatory report reporters for unprofessional conduct um to AD. So just know that that's also something that's part of that report. And then you'll find the first read of these policies in your packet. And so where you'll find where the trust has made these revisions is 4-204 as well as 45-41. Dr. Ducey, may I add, please? Um, governing board members, what uh
079our intent will be next would be to work alongside Director Moss and Dr. to create uh just some uh protocols of sorts so so that you have the information of what to do, what steps to take as a mandatory reporter as it relates to either personnel matters or um child welfare concerns. So, we'll make certain we build that out and and provide you just a template so you're never put in a tough situation. >> All right. And I'll pause before we go on to the next. >> Miss Wallace, did you have any questions? No questions. Thank you, >> Mr. Mike. >> None for me, >> Mr. Owens. >> I don't have any questions. Thank you. >> There's an additional House bill called 2514 which changes the way that we disclose director information and annual notification.
080And so the four basic changes in this law is it used to be um the directory information was released unless the parents let us know that they weren't it wasn't to be released. So it was an opt out um and now um we have to get permission to disclose. So an example of direct information would be like sharing student information with PTO's or PTSAs or things like that. That's now we have to get parent permission to do that. So, um it still doesn't change our legal obligations to provide directory information like student addresses, names, phone numbers, um for situations that are required under state or federal law, which you know are things like DCS or police um investigations, those type of things. We're still required by law to provide certain information in certain situations. Um
081our student information department is working on these protocols. It won't go into effect um like I said until October, but we will provide an update in the Friday update exactly the protocols that we're going to use. Um but we are bringing the first read of this policy you to you tonight, which is policy 1-41, policy 5-303, and then also the accompanying procedure to 5-303. Um and I think that that covers it. So I'll open up to any questions. >> Miss Wallace, did you have any questions? So for this one, if are we going to be sending something to parents to allow them to opt into this or will it just be an automatic like opt out like for the PTO type email? >> We have to get permission to release in the information. So you
082will know um so we'll come up with a method for parents to give us approval. It's similar to how we ask parents to give what I'm imagining student information will come up with a plan. Um and I know that um Mrs. Benjamin's also been working so with um student information as well in this. So you can definitely chime in if you have more details than I do, but um it's similar to the photo like getting parents to say it's okay to you know photograph your child and put on website or whatever. Very similar to that. Now we're required to ensure that we have documentation um of all parents giving us permission versus we have permission unless you tell us we don't. >> Understood. No other questions, >> Mr. Mike? None for me, >> Mr. Owens.
083So, this will be in effect for us because we're going to I mean, we're going to do first read tonight and then we're going to do a second read at our next meeting. So, this will basically be in effect for us from the beginning of school. Um, even if the law doesn't take effect until October, what does that I I want you to kind of clarify what that what some of that information might be cuz I'm thinking from a parent leader perspective or just even a volunteer coming in on picture day and getting a whole list of all the students in a classroom. Is that breaking some rule or is that what kind of training are we going to give our schools because the PTAs and PTO's will get student information for fundraisers and all
084various kinds of things, right? So it's seeming like a really big headache. >> Yes. So under current laws under honor bullet 2, it kind of clarifies what the difference is. Districts may disclose directory information if the district has designate items as directory information. So right now um what directory is like this students names, what clubs are in kind of like yearbook information. So that's the type of information now that's considered directory. So, we'll just need to make sure that we have permission from the parents that we can release that information. So, you're right, it is a it is a pretty big change, but we do have some time um to get in line with the law, like I said, because it doesn't go in effect till October, but you're right, you're going to be doing
085the second read for the policy. Um, but we will have time to get our ducks in a row and make sure everyone's trained properly with the proper procedure. >> Okay. So then my next question is, do we want to not be so quick to approve our second read on this one? So you have time because my concern is that if this is our policy, we should be following it. And even if so, if we're not ready yet and we have some time, maybe we need to flush that up. So maybe what we could do if it's agreeable to the board is um we won't bring this particular policy back for your second read approval until we are able to articulate our exact plan and our exact all that everything is set up. >> I don't
086have a problem with that. That's not a bad idea. >> Mr. Owens, everybody. Okay, we're good with that. Okay, we're good with that. This is just an overview of each of the changes. It's just a different way to look at the information. Um, this is also in your packet. So, that just shows you the policy procedures and forms. Remember, we moved from ASBA to trust. So, now our policy has always been policy, but our proceed our regulations are now procedures and our exhibits are now forms. So, um, I just put this in your packet just so that you're aware of what's changing and kind of the order and then a brief summary at the bottom. Just makes it a little simpler to look at. And this is right from the trust. So, I'm not word
087sniffing it at all. And I think we we already went through all the questions. So, okay. >> Thank you for this information. Now we're going to move on to our first reads of all these policies. Uh for 10.2 this will be Dr. Ducey. All right. So um as we already went through the presentation because those were some pretty significant changes. We won't always present our first read and second reads in that way, but because those particular policies are changing some significant practices for Lichfield, we did choose to present it in that way to the board tonight. Um, but 10.2 is our first read of trust policy chapter 1, sections 1-41, parent legal guardian rights and education. So, you have that in your packet. Now that you've processed it a little more, any questions? >> Any
088questions, Miss Wallace? >> Mr. Mike, >> Mr. Owens, >> no questions. >> 10.3 is trust policy chapter 3, section 3-43, the technology, which is the cell phone, social media. Um, any questions now that you've processed the presentation? >> Miss Wallace, >> no questions. >> Mr. Mike, >> none. >> Mr. Owens, >> no questions. >> 10.4. Four, first read, trust policy, chapter 4, section 4-204, mandatory reporting. Any questions, >> Miss Wallace? >> No questions. >> Mr. Mike, >> none. >> Mr. Owens, >> no questions. >> 10.5 First read, Trust Policy Chapter 5, Section 5-303, Student Records. Any questions? >> Miss Wallace? >> No questions. Mr. Mike, >> none. >> Mr. Owens, >> no ma'am. >> Nope. No questions. >> 10.6. First read, trust policy, chapter 5, section 5-305, student code code of conduct, which aligns to
089the technology law changes. Any questions? Miss Wallace? >> No questions. >> Mr. Ms. >> None. >> Mr. Owens. >> No, ma'am. >> I have no questions. Thank you for all of the information. Okay, somebody want or that that's it guys. We we we finished our business. >> I move to adjourn the meeting. >> I suck if having a motion for Mr. Owens and a second for Miss Wallace. I'll call for the vote. Miss Wallace. >> Yay. >> Mr. Mike's. Yay. >> Mr. Owens. Yay. >> I'm also a yay. Motion passes. Thank you for joining us. This meeting is a journ.