00157 Mount Prospect for Thursday, August 22nd here at Fair View. Um, can I get a roll call? Vice President Choke >> here. Member Dorner >> here. >> Member Fay >> here. >> Member Qualch here. >> Member Leto here. >> Member Nelson >> here. >> President Bennett Kill >> here. >> And could we start with the pledge of allegiance? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. So, we moved on community comments. The District 57 Board of Education welcomes community participation in an effort to both listen to our stakeholders and keep the meeting moving and want to remind everyone of our public participation procedures and guidelines which is available in board policy
0022230. Individuals wishing to address the board can do so during the community comments portion of the agenda. Individuals should provide their name and limit their comments to 3 minutes. Please remember that this is not a dialogue between you and the board. The board is in listening mode during this time. Individuals wishing to contact the board of education are welcome to do so via the district 57 website under the board of education tab. Individuals should behave with respect and civility towards others and abide by board policy 8 col 30 visitors to and conduct on school property. Do we have any comments from the community? Not yet. >> It's only the first meeting. >> All right. Seeing none, let's move on to the staff and superintendent reports. So, I'm sorry. I'm actually just getting into I'm in
003the wrong meeting. So, I'm in after a really effective training. I am sorry. This is not reflective of the quality of the trainers. Um, they were amazing. I am somehow in the September meeting. So, let me get back. I don't know why. Oh, this one. Right there. We are. I'm so sorry, everybody. Okay, I'm already ready for September. Yeah. Okay. Um, so the first topic is my um initial kind of um production of my recommended goals for the board to consider for the coming school year. Um I apologize in the attachments there were some snafuss. One thing I've learned the hard way with um the company we use um to manage the superintendent evaluation is that if I draft the goals and save it, if there's any changes at the board table and how you
004want those changed, I I haven't found a way to go back in and correct it. So that was my attempt to work around saving it. Um so thanks for your patience. But hopefully in the board packet you had a chance to see um the separate documents for each aligned to each of the strategic um plan goals. So um I'd be happy to take any questions of course for any of these, but I did want to take a moment and outline my recommendations for including um performance goals around math, reading, and attendance. And so um given some of the questions that I received from the board packet, I wanted to um start here and hopefully this will give some context to um this portion of the goals. So obviously everything that we're doing in the district
005is around this mission of inspiring every student every day to reach their full potential. And hopefully it was clear to see an alignment with um what I'm proposing as goals as well as this in particular with um when it comes to student performance. So next slide. So um when we think about outcome goals for math, reading and attendance um there was a thought around how best to do that and given that we are also limited in some ways by the timing of the assessments that we give and when we receive that data back. Um there probably is some conversation that we need to have for um including these goals as it relates to my superintendent evaluation because some of these we won't get to the spring which will be after um the legal required time
006period to complete my um evaluation. I think there's an easy solve for that. I think the board could basically apply that rating to the next year's um evaluation because effectively you could receive that data in the end of the school year and then provide that for the following year. So it's not insurmountable but it's just things logistics logistics that we could talk through. Um I also wanted to explain a proposal of basically a rubric um because I think when it when we're talking about the reading growth uh for students and the math growth for students um I would propose that we want to reflect that um anything 70% or higher would be beyond what MAP defines as um a high quality outcome when it comes to students. students obtaining their growth goals. So for a
007a score of four um in reading growth would signify that 70% on average of our students are um obtaining or exceeding their growth goals on their MAP. And then obviously it goes correspondingly lower. So a three would be 60 to 69.9% of students etc. Um so if you go to the next slide, this is some context to that goal. Um the line the target line reflects the goal of 70%. Um which would be obviously what I would be shooting for. Um but this gives a little background as to where we've been historically. Now complicating things is that MAP has recently reormed um which is great that they do that from time to time. It's sometimes challenging based on when those reormings occur. In this case, they occurred right around the night that um Dr. Vandar
008and um Mr. Terski and Mr. Brier were presenting about those norms. So um I think they know when our board does our review and then they time their reorming after that. So the blue reflects the 2020 norms which is reflective of what the board has received briefings on. The green is reflective of the updated norms from MAP and you can see that a goal of 70% is ambitious in that we have not yet met that as a district on average. Um, and again, we're talking about students in second through 8th grade when we're talking about these tests. And these are tests that we give three times a year. And um, they are um, used to measure both um, proficiency as well as um, growth over time. Um, but they are adaptive tests and that they
009get continuously more challenging as students answer their questions correctly and vice versa. if they're not getting things correctly, the test will automatically adjust to provide easier questions. And the goal really is to provide um information for teachers to make decisions around how to best teach kids as well as program evaluation goals for us to see how how we're doing compared to other um students and districts that are taking these tests. And we go to the next slide, you can see um a very similar scale of proposed rubric for math. But the following slide will show that we have a little bit of a different historical context. Um you can see over the last two school years. We are pleased to show and this should be um familiar because um at our recent board meeting, Dr.
010Bondar highlighted the u wonderful growth performance for students in math. And interestingly when MAP did the reorming it slightly had the opposite effect that in the 2025 norms it actually dropped um what what MAP would consider to be the percentage of students meeting or exceeding. But it's also interesting to know that in the prior two school years we were significantly below. So we I believe 70% is um reasonable um for another reason is that we will be piloting math this year. So that is I think a relevant context for the um consideration of using math outcomes um to evaluate on my superintendent evaluation. So, it's worth a discussion, but this is a little bit of uh context uh for the board to consider. And then we can go back to any of these, but I'll
011just finish up by giving some context on student attendance. Um we've talked a lot about chronic absenteeism and being an important indicator and tied to a lot of outcomes when it comes to student experiences and success. Um, chronic absenteeism is defined as students missing 10% of the days that they are enrolled. And typically or the past school year, you can see that our chronic absenteeism was 11.3. Um, the year prior we had an average of 15.5. Um, the year prior to that 10.2%. And then of course those anomaly years of the 2020 and 2021 school year those were really during the pandemic. So um those are uncharacteristically low in that they were when students were either on quarantine in home or we were doing hybrids. So it's difficult to use those data to actually compare
012apples to apples. but it's relevant to know and compare what our attendance averages were prior to that phenomenon. So, um we do believe that we're on track to um reach the goal of under 10% chronically absent. We would love to get that even lower than that. But it's a challenge and it's one of those areas that um there's certainly more we can keep doing and refining on our end, but at the end of the day, it's not something that we ultimately control, especially when it comes to our younger students um who often get to school um in the cars or buses driven by adults. And so there's definitely influence we can have over these outcomes and I think they're important um to be included in my superintendent goals. Um but I just want to give
013a little context to those areas. And I would present um and ask the board to consider approving the similar rubric when it comes to a continuum of defining success that a four would be reflective of under 10% chronically chronically absent for students. a three would be 10 to 12.9% and etc. Um I think there's no perfect way that those cut scores were developed and I'm certainly open to feedback. Um being that this is the first year that we're really looking at including these. I wanted to start somewhere and um we can always refine these as they go. chronic absenteeism, similar to math and reading, though we wouldn't have that endofear data until after, you know, this year's evaluation would be complete. So any scores would be lagging and then used for next year's evaluation. Um,
014so I'm happy to go into any of the other um, goal areas that were presented in the packet, but hopefully this additional context and information clarifies any confusion around what was um, included in the packet. I'd be happy to answer. Anybody want to start? Kim, >> I appreciate you sort of giving that context. I know I was one of the ones who expressed some confusion about the the charts and sort of what are we doing with these. Um so would it be possible to go back to I guess any of them? Um so the sort of proposal around this is we have a baseline for a lot of this information right now. Right. You said for instance that last year's absentee rate was 10.3. So >> something like that, right? Okay. 11.3. Um >> so
015we're already in that third band at present. And in terms of evaluating a goal, depending on what the outcome was, we would either say like, okay, we've moved to this other band, this four band, so that's good, or we've stayed the same, which is not bad. Um, I guess I'm I'm just confused about sort of how the rating system, if if I am understanding it as a rating system, would work in practice because we would have to sort of start from somewhere >> and then move one way or the other. And I think the movement and measuring the movement would really be the basis for how we would evaluate success or lack thereof as opposed to having what seems to me to be like ratings, right? Like we're Okay, so you scored a four in
016this context because you moved up to this other >> band. Um, am I like fundamentally misunderstanding? >> No, I I I think you're correct in the way I'm understanding. I mean, it and I'm certainly open to feedback if there's a different thought about how this could best um be used. I think I was trying to present a scenario where you know it wasn't sort of just good or bad and and understanding these things on continuums and understanding that um it's important for us to measure the progress um and hopefully the sustaining success and areas that we are able to sustain success but also understanding that even for MAP I mean that those are a moment in time indicator and we want to also recognize is that those are tests that are given and they're important
017and we take them seriously and we put a lot of weight into them. However, they are point in time, one data point and that if we'll make conclusions around the effectiveness of, you know, uh the quality of a program, there's a caution to doing so too simplistically. And so in a in a continuum rating or rubric, we're sort of acknowledging that yes, three would be um you could still have improvement from last year's 11.3 and still that could signify, you know, a solid performance in that area. Solid being reflective of how it compares to the state average. solid, you know, being reflective of um what um activities and efforts are being made to try to improve experiences for kids. So, as to the actual numbers that align with those or even about this continuum in
018general, I'm open to the feedback of what makes sense to the board as a useful metric. But I think it was just a goal of trying to start the conversation of you know these this would hopefully frame how the board would say >> if when it comes to my evaluation how you're evaluating the effect of the work in of leadership to address some of these target areas >> and I do appreciate that. I appreciate bringing some objective measurements into some of these questions that I think >> can tend to be a little bit subjective like yeah it feels like we've done better >> right I would much rather see some solid measurements that show that we've done better >> that being said I feel very uncomfortable for your sake with the idea of tying your
019evaluation to a particular measurement a particular sort of mark of improvement because like you said, especially with the chronic absenteeism issue, 98% of that is outside of the control of you, your administration, the staff. >> I mean, I obviously don't do this work every day, but but for just the messaging and the encouragement that we've done year over year over year, I really don't know how much more we could be doing to bring those numbers down. Um, and so to say, you know, I'm going to hang my hat on moving us somewhere when I have so little input >> in actually tangibly making an impact in that area, >> I I wouldn't want to put that on you personally, professionally, >> and the same to the degree like you said with the the MAB tests,
020right? It >> if you get a cohort of kids that's that all have tummy aches, right? That's going to impact their score and then that's going to impact you. And >> there's just so so many outside factors. And that's not to say, you know, you and the staff and the teachers aren't responsible ultimately >> for the outcomes. Um I I'm just really hesitant about kind of putting too fine of a point on it. >> That brings up a good point that I probably failed to also contextualize. I think to that end um these goals would be tied to goal 1D but in the area of strategic plan goal one I present goal 1A being reviewing and updating the K8 math curricula. Goal 1B increasing opportunities to enhance student agency and engagement. Goals 1 C preparing
021for full day kindergarten implementation in the fall for the fall of 2027. And then 1D is the are these student performance goals. So in this scenario where we really had a unfortunate spring data point for all three of these categories, >> there would be a scenario under which maybe twos let's say were achieved. I certainly don't want that and no efforts will be aligned to that outcome. But if that happens, um I feel confident that um the remaining goals for goals for under strategic goal one are much more um within our control and sphere of influence that could could hopefully pre present the board with a more comprehensive um amount of data to ultimately evaluate my effectiveness aligned to strategic goal one. Mhm. >> And I sure >> I personally am comfortable with that risk
022because I think um I trust that the intent of this is to establish high expectations and to align um quality for the outcomes I'm responsible for. And I I don't I don't disagree that that makes sense, but I also appreciate the sentiments around being able to have some asurances that, you know, we're not tying too much of that rating to things outside of my direct control. >> So, >> okay, fair enough, >> Chris. >> Well, thank you, Dr. Gore. I agree with Kim. It's awesome seeing these uh metrics based goals here. I think this is awesome. Um, so I have several thoughts on this. Um, I respectfully would disagree a little bit with Kim on this. I think one of the things we need to be comfortable with and and we need to make sure
023you're comfortable with is that you should have goals that are put out there that you're not 100% sure you're going to achieve. That's a good thing, right? and and yeah, there may be things out of your control that cause us not to meet all them. I think the the antidote to that, which I I guess I I didn't see, this is where maybe I'm a little wary of what's proposed here, is that what I would have expected to see is that each of these metrics, the assumption is we're going to go do some things to improve each of these, right? But I don't really see that spelled out here. So, we want to improve our math scores overall. Great. What What are the activities that we're going to do that we expect to make that
024happen? Right? There should be a very clear cause and effect relationship there. And to Kim's point, to me, that's kind of the the way that you blunt that. Well, gez, I did all these things that I said I was going to do and yeah, the numbers still didn't work out. because in the end that metric is it's a hypothesis. You're hypothesizing if I do A B C D I'm going to get E. Sometimes that works out and sometimes it doesn't. But as a board we would say, hey, Dr. Gore did all these things that we thought would lead to that improvement and it didn't happen. >> So yeah, it's I mean the outcome was the outcome. So I mean we probably wouldn't rate you a four for that, but we're also not going to say
025well you completely failed, right? So to me that's how we avoid that >> concern. >> Um so I guess >> can I respond to that one just so or do you feel like there's more? So I that's fair. I think in feedback in previous performance um or in superintendents the feedback has been there's been too much detail in the activities. The activities are going to happen. That's that's all day every day. you know, the the workaround and I think that can be included in the in the quarterly updates to the board. Um, and I think even um goal one through C are maybe more activity based in sort of what we're orienting our time and resources and energies around and priorities. Um, they're certainly not the only thing we are working on. I tried to
026be more selective in this year's goals to be a bit more curated to to speak about only kind of the top three in each goal area. Goal one happens to have four, but I believe the other have three. I try to be more selective to only elevate the most critical under the strategic plan. Um, but I think a there's a lot of activities happening under my work and leadership and cabinet's work and our our school's work that aren't even reflected in these goals. >> Two, I think the the activities that's the easiest thing for me to report on. And I think unless the board doesn't feel comfortable with approving these without that attached, I would just respond to say those activities are very easily um addressed in the first quarterly update and then subsequent updates.
027So >> So you actually led me to my next comment which and I appreciate what you just said. >> My comment was you have way too many goals. Way too many. I would strip this down to five. Honestly, I'd maybe do one for each strategic plan area, maybe two for one of them, but there's there's fewer than last year, but there's still way too many. And I think the the concern and and I've seen this happen in my professional life is that people are concerned that if I don't have everything I'm going to do listed in my goals that the perception is we're not doing anything, right? And of course, we all know that's not true. We know that you and your staff are doing all kinds of things to run the business and keep
028things going and keep what's going well going well and fully expect you're going to keep doing that. In my just my opinion is I think the goal should be reflective of what are the areas we really need to work on improving. Where are the things that are not working the way we want right now and let's make improving those areas the goals and then that's it. And then those are your goals. It's not all you're going to do, of course, because we can't let the things that are going well, you know, stop going well. >> But to me, in in in how we evaluate you, in my opinion, that's really the mark of a successful year is we've identified the gaps and we work to close them and here's the result. Right? So, I you
029know, I think there's a lot of great stuff in here, but I don't think I mean, and again, I'm sure you're going to go do everything in here, but I don't know that everything you've listed is something that we absolutely need to focus on this above all else. So, I guess that would just be my general feedback. Uh, and then I guess one last comment on and I probably should have said this second, not third, but the I mean I I with the rubrics, I mean we are clearly not in the same place in math as we are in reading, right? I mean I think the results you just showed bore that out. I remember them from last month. I I'm not I personally don't think it makes sense to evaluate you the same way
030for both of those because in one area we're doing pretty well and to me that's more of a maintenance thing. I wouldn't even make that a goal and in reading I think what we should be focused on is let's we know we need to improve there. Let's make a goal around that and then let's clearly spell out what we're going to do to get there. So again, just my opinion. I'm one of seven, but I would focus the goal here that way. And the absenteeism, frankly, unless there are some if unless you and your team think that this is something we need to focus on above all else, I personally don't. I I wouldn't even include it. So anyway, my two cents, but thank you for doing this. I you put a ton of work
031into this. I appreciate it. It's awesome. I just think there's way too much here. [Music] >> Pam, >> I agree with Chris on the amount of goals and I agree with Kim with holding um you accountable for for some of the things that you don't have control over. And my question is, does does this hinge on it seems to me it's sounding like the the um the changes in uh abilities in math and reading are are focused on how well someone does on a test. Well, what about the kids who don't do well on tests? Why are the colleges getting rid of things like ACT and SAT? You you know, I'm not an educator. I'm a librarian. But if but if um higher learning is recognizing that tests are not the only indication of ability
032then then holding you to guarantee that a ch all children will do better on tests is not recognizing that not everybody does well on tests. And the other thing that I that I wanted to say about the goals is I'd like to see something where the board recognizes that the things that are not in your goals may interfere as as Chris says, you know, we could have another pandemic. I mean, given what's happening in the federal government right now where we're kind of um you know, dissing uh vaccines and scientific uh recognition. Um that could happen. But my um my concern is there has to be something where we recognize how you surmount surmount un unknown crazy things. We're building a new facility. Something could happen where you have to drop everything and focus on
033on something that we're not even aware of right now. That's not even on our radar. And and that's something when I've in in every institution and I've worked at many many public libraries and private libraries and academic libraries. All of the evaluations that I have either written or that I have taken the the paperwork for and performed, all of them have the ability to reflect unforeseen incidences in how well the um the uh person being evaluated handled them and that's not been present in your evaluations. So, so I would like to see and I I know I've brought it up before. I would like to see um board recognition or something that is stated in in the goals themselves that recognizes that um you know unforeseen like like common everyday things that may not be
034so common. um you know h how give credit for for accomplishing everything else and still coming out with a a good um ending for something that's unexpected. So that's what I wanted to say. Okay. Um, so I tend to agree with Chris that I appreciate having actual outcomebased goals here. Um, I think that's what we're here for, right? Is for kids to continue to do better. Um, I do, you know, I I understand the testing piece of this. These tests are different than the ACT and SAT. I don't know if you want to talk about that piece at all, but um, you know, these are over time they are growth. They show growth, not necessarily proficiency. Um, and that's what you're basing these goals on are growth goals, not proficiency goals. Um, and so that
035I I do appreciate. I do think for me, and I this is I think to Chris's point, but a little less of that is like what is the progress monitoring in between those that maybe we can look at that aren't the beginning, middle, and end of year. Um, are there pieces we can look at and say like we're on track towards this goal? we are, you know, something so that it isn't just to that point in time. Um, I think are important pieces to to think about. Um, and I I don't know. I you know, Chris, I hear you on the the math piece. Um, but looking at where the new cut scores are, we're pretty close now to that 70. Um, it's not as high as it was. I don't know if you can
036go back to that one. Right. right? We're just at 71.6 now. Um, and so I worry, especially given what Mary, you were just talking about with like new math goal or curriculum and all of that, I think for me that math one is important. And on chronic absenteeism, like kids need to be in school. Um, I know it's not something that we can always control, but we did have before the pandemic, we were at 6.5 and 7.2. um you know we are pretty high now in that 11. Um so I actually appreciated these three areas. I think they are important. Um I think for me the part that was missing is just like are there other progress monitoring pieces that we can be looking at? Uh especially at like board meetings throughout the year and
037really being able to think about like what is that next thing, right? like is it grades at overtime? Is it um are there progress monitoring like checks happening in classes? Are there I don't I don't know what they are. Um but I don't know. I feel pretty strongly that we do have some sort of outcomes based because I don't know right now. I mean I think and part of it isn't just so that we can like it isn't a gotcha, right? It is a like are there resources that we need to put towards other things that we're not right now? Like that's the check-in. That's the piece where I'm like, well, if our reading scores or we are looking at something progress monitoring and we know that we're not maybe not going to hit it
038because we're at the midyear and we're like, that's not what we would want to see right now. Like, is there something that we as a board need to resource allocate to say like, all right, we need to be able to say there needs to be more reading tutors or there needs to be more something that we need to reallocate resources for, not for you to say I failed at this, right? like that's not what this is about. It's that we're all here to make things better for kids. Um at least that's why I sit at this board table and I know the rest of you do too. >> Hey, um I kind of agree with all of you on a bunch of this stuff. Um it, you know, if you feel comfortable with that portion
039of the evaluation, I'm all for it. Um because like you guys say the um absenteeism it I mean that's kind of hard to but you know if you have more before school activities you where kids are like I want to go because I got this activity to go to before school starts and then they're going to stay. Um those are some things that can help with that. Um, and then also goal-wise, you have narrowed down your goals, but I don't know that you should really narrow it down more because we sometimes have looked like, well, well, she also did this and she also did this. So to incorporate it is I think is a good idea to incorporate more and it's like what then would she pick? Would that be enough for the year for
040each one to have just one goal each? So if you are comfortable like with this also I think it's fine to have this broader um evaluation having these these more things to look at which like you said that makes this not as huge a piece when you're looking at the evaluation when you have one ABCD. So um so I'm I'm I'm for it. I'm going to let you talk. >> I appreciate everyone's feedback. Um I in hearing the comments um I think everyone comes with a lot of thought and consideration. Um and I know we we haven't heard from everybody. Um so if you want to just maybe Okay. Okay. Um, I appreciate the recognition of the complexity of the job in that you in your role as the board, which is a significant responsibility
041and um essential to the outcomes in this district that you ultimately have to decide, you know, is the person in my seat effective at their job? And I trust that in the analysis that you have to do in making that decision that there will be um hopefully an acknowledgement that what is proposed in the August you know goals that I bring to you will also be in recognition that the nature of the job doesn't always mean that we know what my leadership will be charged against you know this year and what what's unexpected and certainly That was best reflective, I think, in our strategic plan, not even acknowledging the fact that a referendum would successfully have passed, a new building would be designed, and full day kindergarten is happening. And um I think as long
042as there's that um alignment between the board and administration around those realities, I trust in good faith that you my job is to give you everything I need to give you for you to make an informed decision about deciding on my effectiveness. And I trust that um if I'm doing my job and providing for you those honest and regular updates and good faith and clear, you know, any data that would need to be used in order to make that decision, which is a significant one, I trust and hope that there will also be a ability and um for you as those evaluators to take into context anything that's not included in here. So if I did all of these perfectly, but I, you know, made a terrible judgment that resulted in, you know, something horrible
043happening for the district, I would expect that that would also be terms that you'd have to take into consideration in deciding my effectiveness and if I'm the right fit for the district. And likewise, if I don't make these marks, but that there are things that happen in the meantime that reflect um leadership that would be expected in spite of whatever is being presented that you would also acknowledge that when you look at the total picture of the person, the position, and the work that you'd have enough to be able to justify a decision. Um that's really how we approach our evaluation. We have terms, we have limits, we have guardrails, we are fair. Um, things can't be used unfairly and we have to look at the big picture of how a person does their work
044and are they the right fit for the position. So, I think in summary, my my thought is that um I'm striving to keep refining each year based on sort of the the feedback of what's been limiting. And I hope that in the same vein there's a I appreciate the comments around um the total package that has to be considered when it comes to making a decision of effectiveness. Um and my attempt at this is to give you more refinement and quality and how you have those data points. In terms of the benchmarking, it's a total fair observation. But speaking frankly, it would be not impossible but maybe not so perfectly aligned to the ask that we would be presenting sort of the every 6 to 8 weeks of student data at the board table. Um
045those types of um monitoring are happening in our schools because they are essential in the way that we align resource allocation, interventions, progress monitoring particularly for kids who are not showing that they are making the pace. But we also don't have such perfect um and consistent um data points for kids that are demonstrating progress and beyond. Their teachers are doing that. that's done through the work of, you know, classroom performance tests, um, certainly grade point average for older kids, um, and all sorts of other data points, but we don't have such a systematic and fair maybe way of consistently telling that story at an interval of, you know, beyond the quarterly. I think the quarterly does align pretty well with our um, fall data days, our winter data days, and our spring data days. And
046you know there's that hopefully could be sort of the in-betweens. Um but I just want to be upfront that it's just as it currently stands we don't have a great or perfect way of doing that in maybe the way that it was envisioned. Can I just I just wonder then like to that point and I I hear that and I know that um I do wonder if there's a way just to contextualize those scores in a different way potentially and I don't know exactly what that looks like because I don't know the systems but I think that's another >> just what is it that you could bring around the kids that may be struggling to meet >> you know their growth growth goals like is there something else that could be shared to kind of
047give that contextual piece especially if we're starting to get more of this data. >> So, just something to >> think about. I you know, and I know like I like and I know that's something we're working on, right? Like assessments and grading is not necessarily in here, which is fine to Chris's earlier point, but like I know that's something that's continuing to happen and I think that's >> um just part of that that goal. >> I was just going to chime in something similar. I think when it comes to having that sort of progress type information, I don't feel particularly strongly about seeing any actual data the same like we did last month in terms of like a big comprehensive presentation. I would be happy with something like a narrative where you know maybe you
048or Kristen is just like yeah we're doing great and or here are some of the challenges just to kind of have those touch points of being informed. I don't know if Jen that's necessarily the level of detail you were thinking of, but I think for my purposes, right, like we don't need anything really, you know, super thorough or detailed if all we're trying to do is see are we on track. At the same time, I feel like if we were in a place of, you know, 6 n months into a goal and it's really not looking great for that last quarter, I I we have the relationship that you would bring that to us and I think we would all trust you to say, "Hey, this isn't working out and we need to shift gears."
049Um, so like that piece I think isn't as needful for me. >> Just one one thing on that and I I think to me again and this is why I think it's important to understand for each of these goals that we're trying to make improvement in because we they shouldn't be goals if we're not trying to improve something, right? There's going to be a list of things that you and your team are going to do. You're not just going to say, "Gosh, I hope our MAP scores go up next year and cross your fingers and hope it happens." Right? There there's going to be a whole slew of things you're going to do. That to me, that's what I would want to see. That that's the um what's the word I'm looking for? But the
050the the piece between where we are today and when we get the spring map scores. That's what I would want to see is, you know, we we believe if we do XYZ, we're going to see this improvement. Well, how are we doing on XYZ? Right? To me, that's the update I would want to see. And if we don't think those things are going to happen, then it's a pretty good chance that if we said we do these things, we're going to see improvement. You know, this by the same token, if we don't do those things, we shouldn't expect to see improvement. So, if those things that we believe are going to lead to improvement and they're not happening, that's where to Jen's point, what do we as a board need to do to help you
051with that? Do we need to allocate more resources to something? Do we need to say, "Hey, this goal that we thought was important, well, this is really more important, so let's shift gears a little bit." Right? So, those are kind of the leading indicators that I I think will help tell if we're on the right track or not. doesn't have to be data necessarily in that case. So anyway, >> any other comments? Go ahead. I think to me to my for me to understand it's like objectives. Chris is talking about objectives and other industries might call them pathways. the the the steps that you take to get somewhere. >> Okay. Mary, do you feel like you have a clear direction from us? >> You just heard seven different answers. >> I heard we're slashing these
052goals. No, I know. I'm going to come back with three next month. No, I'm teasing. Um, so in summary, but but correct if this is an inaccurate summary. We're going to keep the Is it I I want to clarify. Are we going to keep the proposed math, reading, and attendance goals? But is the is the board comfortable in that in if we are is the board comfortable with the first quarterly update providing more articulation of the pathways and the changes of our behaviors and our actions aligned with those goals and updates around them and and whenever possible data that's objective not just sort of reports of meeting dates and stuff but really saying these are the targets of the work and then keeping our analysis and reporting tighter around that. Um, I guess I heard
053some thoughts around the number of goals, but it wasn't it didn't seem to be overwhelming or at least the majority of the board that spoke that wanted a change in the overall number. Is that a fair >> I think I was the only one who said >> Yeah. I just want to make sure if that's not accurate, I I will adjust accordingly. But >> no, I think that as most of us were >> comfortable with the number of goals that you had. And then to um member Nelson and member Faze comments, does the board feel that when it comes to the the decision time where you have to kind of provide a summitive rating for me, do you feel like in what I've proposed, there's space for you to be able to weigh in, you
054know, categories of work that apply under those four strategic plan goals? To me, those headings kind of align with the categories of outstanding student experiences, staff growth and support, you know, family and community partnerships, and uh facility and financial stewardship. So, as long as those would be the buckets, I think hopefully there would be an acknowledgement that anything that's not directly aligned in these goals could be reflected, good or bad, in those categories. >> 1 million%. >> Okay. >> Agreed. Mhm. >> Unless it's bad and then you toe, >> which is why which by the way is why I don't think they need to be in your >> Yeah. But >> fair. Okay. >> Kim, >> just real quick, I was going to say I I do agree to some extent with Chris's point about
055the number of goals. Um, I certainly understand wanting to be accountable for all the work that's happening, but I I feel like I'm more aligned to the idea of, you know, if we have areas that we know need to be improved, I would much rather see 75% of the effort go towards those than anything else. Um, and then I was just going to add, I really appreciate the work that you're doing to kind of clarify the process and and communicate more clearly >> what it is that we can expect from the work that you're doing. >> I was just going to suggest that I think it might be helpful if we as a board were doing some kind of correlary work to that and coming together, the seven of us, to come to a consensus
056about how are we going to understand then that input, >> right? Um I think we've been through the evaluation process a number of times. Some of us it will be their first time. >> Um so it would be helpful I think to kind of get some >> uh familiarity with that process and maybe set some expectations for ourselves as a board about how we interpret the information that you're giving. And this has been helpful reflection because I think that because the superintendent goals have historically and continue to align so exactly with the strategic plan. I think there's been a merge in the function of it as really a reporting out on the progress of the strategic plan. And for good or bad, I think in some ways maybe it's been an over um a a
057not it's too general of a presentation, but I think it's a it's a it functions as a progress monitoring of the board for the overall work of all the work of the strategic plan, which is a lot of work. And maybe those goals should be cut a little bit. But as I'm looking at my amazing administrative colleagues, I think we've taken our charge to say we are going to achieve that work and all its thoroughess and complexity and we're going to use this superintendent, you know, goals and monitoring as your ability to to effectively monitor that these outcomes are delivered. as we've gone through it, it's been that back and forth of saying, let's keep refining the function of the superintendent update, but also keep a place for monitoring the work of the district, which
058is more than just what's here. So, I think that's another just thing to throw into the mix of, you know, though maybe it didn't so tightly align as it comes to a performance tool, hopefully it allowed for an analysis and um accountability track to make sure we're hitting these strategic goal outcomes when it comes to a five-year goal. So, [Music] >> I'm sorry. I have something to say, but I'm not sure here. Go ahead, Cam. >> I just I just think Mary, your comment gets to Chris's point about, you know, we want to be focused on the work that you're doing. And I to me at least I think that responsibility is knowing where the pain points are and addressing those as as opposed to feeling compelled to have one or two items for every
059branch of the strategic plan which we know is a longer term, you know, end goal than just the one-year contract year that we're looking at. >> Um, so I'm sorry I've monopolized quite a bit of that. >> No, that's actually this has all been very clarifying for me as well. So I appreciate everybody's comments. Um, yeah, there seems to be a uh not a disconnect, but that might be useful to disconnect those two things. The superintendent of because our our role as your employer is to see what goals you are being you are meeting and what you're doing to go towards those. As a district, you are responsible for for the strategic plan and how the district is moving towards the strategic plan that is somewhat different than your particular superintendent goals, >> but I
060would argue it's got to be the same. So either our strategic plan is too complicated and there's too much because to the point we're just it's too much for us to sustain. And I do think there's been recognition of that. I mean, we are pausing some of the work from the initial strategic plan to enter in now the full day kindergarten. Um but it might be something that we'll have to keep thinking about and living within as we prepare for the next strategic plan because I think the next strategic plan or even if there is a change or an adjustment for maybe next year's you know version maybe it does need to become more narrow and really tighten around the pain points and say these are just the improvement areas. We're not going to take
061about anything that is sustaining or anything. But that's hard. That's just hard in that is not hard. It is not always well done in the work of like public bodies because we have the work we do and the traditions and the and the complexity of continuing to maintain outcomes as it relates to curriculum and you know those are those are cornerstones of successful districts. um our our we don't exist with a bottom line of a a profit. We don't exist of a bottom line, you know. So, we want to establish these quality deliverables, but also we have to prioritize what we're going to say is the most important work of the next two years. So, it's I think this has been helpful for me to reflect and to understand and kind of analyze how we've
062gotten this way. And some of it I think is correctable and others of it I think is a structural thing that might need to to follow in the in the work of the strategic plan cuz if we untether those too much my concern would be is it important if we're not even measuring the outcomes of a strategic plan that was developed through stakeholders and process and a lot of input and then are we reducing sort of it to what I believe is are the pain points that are much more disconnected maybe from the work of the community that developed that strategic plan and those expectations and you don't want to like untether those so much that we come off a track. >> I don't know. >> Oh, sorry, Jack. >> Yeah. >> Um I think
063two things Well, yeah, two things to that. I just wonder also about Well, one, I think we need to go back and look at the strategic plan and maybe do a deeper dive into it to see like where have we met it? like where are we still like are these things still things that need to be done right right like I think there is a larger conversation probably at this table just about you know where are where are those points >> um and then two I think you know there is a conversation to be had about like education in the of the community and of us but just like of what what does that look like right what does it look like to focus on pain points what does it look like to keep things
064going where are the things that we absolutely want to see continue and know that those things will continue and we're going to really focus on these areas, right? I think there's a little bit of both of that. Um, and I do wonder just about, you know, maybe there is some sort of like presentation in the coming months of like this is where we are with the strategic plan. Like are we >> like how tied is it? Is there something else we need to do differently? Do we need to think about it? Because we're in what, year, >> three, >> so we're a little over halfway through. Um, you know, and I think there is a time where in a 5-year plan, you do need to take a second and, you know, make sure that it
065is still on. >> I would wonder if a 5year strategic plan is even reasonable. I wonder, that is something I wonder like I think in the next round maybe we don't go that far out just as a lesson learned. Not that there isn't value in having aspirations, but the the context and the variables and the world changes a lot and you want to sort of maybe have tighter times in which you're convening and resetting a a strategy. But >> yeah, I I don't agree with that. Okay. >> Because I do I think if you don't go far enough out, you won't reach >> far enough, right? >> Yeah. >> Um I completely agree with you. Your goals have to be connected to the strategic plan. They must be. >> If they're not, then we're not
066doing our job here. >> Um I think the strategic plan has too many things in it. >> Mhm. >> Um and one it's great. By the way, we we didn't have one before. We have one now. It's fantastic. It's infinitely times better than the strategic plan we used to have, which was nothing. So, I think it has so many things in it. And and one of the things that I think is causing some of the confusion now is what it doesn't have is a clear indication of where are we now and where do we want to be for each goal, right? It wasn't really written that way. >> So we look at it now and we say, well gosh, is this still important? Well, I don't know. Where are we on this thing relative to
067where we were two years ago? And I don't think we know, right? because a lot of it wasn't outcome based, right? It was kind of aspirational. These are good things to do. Um, and so it's a little hard to evaluate, you know, what's really working well and what isn't. But I think just in you writing these goals, you've kind of identified what in the strategic plan is is maybe great things to do, but maybe not what we need to focus on right now. Right? Right? I mean, one of the best lines about strategy I've ever read is that strategy is just as much about what you're not going to do as what you are. And we can't do everything, right? As as talented as you are, Dr. Vanderhar, Dr. Kay's, we just can't do everything.
068So, I I think it would be a good idea to look at it now that we have passed a referendum, which is awesome. Uh, and maybe look at things that we should just strip out for the next, you know, and say we're going to get these things done in the next two years. These other things we're we're not. I I think that's okay. >> And I would say not just strip out, but acknowledge the additional work. Right? We're talking about full day kindergarten curriculum. We didn't even have full day kindergarten on the strategic plan until year five. >> We aspired at the end of that five years to to have a plan. >> Exactly. So I mean it it almost needs to be completely revamped and h have an understanding written into it of there's
069a different type of work that has to be done now because we've advanced so far on what we thought was going to take five years to do. So I'm I'm in agreement with all of that >> and and and or informally not even just informally formally we have done that internally you know we have done that um because obviously we're not sitting around saying it's not on the strategic plan we're not going to do these things we're doing that um and and really we want to be held accountable and we want to be evaluated by that work. So, I think there's some of this is not so problematic and that it certainly hasn't been restrictive in the way that we're doing what has to get done cuz that's driven by meeting the now. Um, and
070the way that obviously we need to now update our paperwork and our presentations and our reporting around that is probably where we need to keep refining it and keep the articulation to the community and the board and making sure that everyone's on the same page as to what the work is, the why, and the what, you know, so that there's no unaligned expectations around what is the priority of the district. So yeah, I think some um I'm going to use the word industries, but what I really mean are other educational organizations that are not necessarily school districts um have strategic plans that are three years >> and then each year they evaluate how the world has changed and what do they need to do and in reporting um in their their monthly reports um are
071included what goals they met like like what we do here, what you do here. Um and each person in that organization um their monthly report indicates what strate what which strategic goal they've met or what they've worked toward with their objectives. And you can have um on your monthly report as as a librarian or as you know as a as a as a staff member somewhere, you can have what you met as a strategic objective, but you can also have other things that came up that were unexpected. And so if my correct me with the with my understanding that if um looking at the five goals, if you were to keep the five goals and something were to come up under under um the the goal that dealt with financial obligations or or um things
072and we discovered that um federal grant money fell off, no federal grant money or that tariffs were raised. to 75%. And you were able to surmount that even though it's not in your goal and it's not in your objective that that we could still and would still rate you on your ability to do that, >> your success in doing that. Am I understanding correctly, Board? >> That goes without saying >> to me. >> Okay. I I I I just want to be real clear so that when we do the evaluation that that that that that's you know that we all understand that. So >> yeah, and I think that's more of our role as the board in our evaluating rather than in uh Mary um necessarily changing her goals or putting it in her goals.
073>> Exactly. And that's my point that that's our role and if it's and and if it's recognized and if we hear about it in a meeting as opposed to it being under you know meeting strategic goal that we still recognize and honor the work done. Yeah. So okay Mary >> so you guys >> I like to solve the puzzle. Let me see if I can sum up or see where we are at. You guys can let me know if I'm completely off base or not. So, one of the things that I'm hearing is that there are in fact too many goals that we would um uh encourage. >> I don't think there was consensus on that. >> Well, that's why I'm that's why I'm asking. I certainly agree, but I don't think >> but I
074don't think that from from my perspective, I don't think you need to go down to three goals or five goals, but tightening up the ones that you have um I think would be uh would be helpful. Would you agree with that? I mean, I know Chris, >> would I personally or >> No, the board in general would You're >> looking at me. Sorry. Sorry. >> What do you mean by tightening up? I mean, um, >> making the goals themselves a little bit more not universal, but have it be a, okay, we have a reading goal, we have a math goal, we have a um, under each under each one of those uh, those categories that they're I don't even know that it's not quite as detailed as it as it is. Well, >> thank you.
075Thank you. >> I mean, each of the four goal headings are aligned with the strategic plan headings. Um, I I just want to make sure I'm, you know, because I know there was some comments around saying they do, you know, member Qualek's comments around saying I I want to make sure that there's a breath of work that's being considered in addition to those really objective things. So, I just I I'm open to the feedback, so I'm not challenging it. I just want to make sure I'm hearing what what is the what is the direct work I need to engage in leading this meeting and changing like what changes do you want to see what goals do you want to see cut specifically [Music] um I don't know from my perspective that I have a specific
076goal to be cut um I think I've tried to bring forward more um more broad broader strokes in the way that I've tried to highlight essential work under each of the goal areas. Um, certainly there's still a lot here and maybe it's not as razor sharp in the way that it's just hitting on the pain points in that in that analysis, but I would say it's giving you kind of top two or three under each of these goal areas that allow at least allows me and my team to be able to bring forth targeted data around the progress we're making. So, but [Music] here's what I wonder, Mary, is like I wonder for this year if you we do it this way, right? Like these are the goals that you you've you've set and you
077can look through them and see if there are things that like you think could be combined or tightened or whatever like that before next month when we see them again. Um, and we keep a really good look at it this year. Like this is something we're really looking at for for next year, right? Like are there places where we're like, okay, maybe we didn't have to put in there, I'm just looking at it right now, like implement parent square pay to support convenience for families. Maybe that didn't need to be a specific action step or goal or whatever within here, but like I'm just that was the one that I read. Don't take that as a a criticism, but like maybe there's a little bit of like thinking about that, >> but I think that's
078in response to the directive to say, "Show me the action plans to get there." And that's one of the action plans. So, I think in that way that was sort of an attempt to say to illustrate the whats. >> But I'm just wondering like if there are things in here when you start to go through and when we start to get report like I think that we continue to evaluate. Sure. on our to Kim's point earlier like that we are really thinking about what is it that we want to see and hear and understand and like is some of it just because we've always heard it or are there things that like we don't necessarily need to hear each time and that that's not really helping us to evaluate in the end like I just
079I wonder if there's like a a bit of self-reflection on our end that we need to do >> because we're used to seeing all of this, right? And does that mean eventually we get to like three, five, seven goals by the end of this, right, that there's less so that you aren't reporting on everything? But right now, as we're transitioning that piece, like do we want to to like evaluate as we go? I don't That's my first thought. >> I I think the fundamental misunderstanding I think we're all having here is we cannot conflate goals with activities, right? There's a lot of stuff you're going to do. very important stuff. If it's not part of your goals, it does not mean it's not important. It does not mean it's not going to be done. And
080I think we all of us need to just get used to that idea that that's okay. Here's one. I mean, I don't not suggesting we sit here and go over every goal and say, should we cut this or not? But goal one a are you going to do this whether it's in your goals or not? I think the answer is absolutely yes. >> I think it goes with all of them. It's a run the No, it's not all of them. There are some goals that we need to improve. We need to do certain things to make the situation better. Goal 1A is a run the business goal. We're going to do it. We need to do it. It's not because we're looking to specifically improve a given metric. It's something we're just going to do
081and and we know she's going to do it. To me, that doesn't belong in a performance goal. And and there's several others like that, right? where they're they're good things to do. They're important to run the business of the school district, but it's not like we are looking at closing a critical gap somewhere, right? And that's where the three to five goals I keep talking about comes from. It doesn't mean those are all you do. It just means those are the critical things you do. A and to one point with the goals I was looking at 3C the invest in community partnerships the things that are aligned in there can almost go into four you know kind of mesh that in that part of just four because it seems cuz that community it's working with
082the with um other resources within the village I think that was re reiterated I think it was in four um and then the researching for grants which would be fiscally. So I mean I guess that way of tightening up and that getting it's just the minutia there kind of >> just nice >> and no and there's and that's an example of like there's overlap our partnerships are sometimes with the interest in resource you know allocation other times it's through enriching experience with kids and families you know and it has nothing to do with securing financial resources so I I can I can appreciate how there. This isn't these are all interconnected, you know, things and a lot of them interact with each other. You know, even in in goal areas one and two, the quality
083experiences of kids are directly tied to the staff support and success. And so there there's always that interplay between them. So you can't really have one without the other. Um, some things I would push back and say we wouldn't we wouldn't want to take those out in terms of the way that you're evaluating the effectiveness because it's core work that done well should should be um something that you're evaluating if it's done well. Otherwise, with teachers, we'd say I'm evaluating you just on, you know, the kids that have to close a gap and and only them. And I would argue that the quality of the organization, you're missing the opportunity to evaluate the effectiveness of a person if you're only looking at their ability to oversee change, you know, or obviously that's the work. It's
084all connected, but it's like you want to have, I would hope, an ability to be able to evaluate the quality of the work at hand, which isn't just change. Sometimes it's sustainment. So, but right open to >> um so, uh I appreciate everybody's it's been really instructive for me to just listen to a lot of different perspectives and feedback. I guess the thing that I've sort of arrived at is and I don't have a necessarily a specific number of goals in mind, but I guess when I'm looking at them, I'm I'm contemplating the amount of time, effort is not consistent across all the goals. Like some of these goals are like are going to be take a tremendous amount of time, effort, and like bandwidth. And so I I guess that's leads me to this
085like I'm worried that it's a lot because I my perspective is like some of these goals are really big goals and are and you know not just lofty goals in terms of the what you're trying to accomplish but like the time effort that is going to have to be put in by staff to accomplish the goal. I I'm just worried about sort of a bandwidth is I guess kind of where I'm landed with it that you know when I start to think about things of like the construction of the new Lincoln Middle School implementing full kid kindergarten I mean those are like really big like lofty goals that are not in I guess from my perspective don't seem I are going to take a lot of time effort and resources so that's all >> we
086agree Just I guess just one more comment. It seems like you really want to have these goals. So >> Well, no. I mean, >> but no, you you you are kind of fighting for them. You want to show that you can do all this. I I think it was >> I don't want I don't want to cling to them, you know, with like white knuckles saying these are our goals. >> Um I I am open. Maybe it hasn't been reflective. I'm open. I just need clarity from the seven, you know, and I think I'm feeling >> I'm feeling the positions. I I think what's hard now is the consensus of kind of specific things maybe. So So So I am actually very open to changes. I can actually reinterpret based on the feedback tonight and
087bring forward another kind of draft that might be closer to the vision or maybe even further. Maybe it'll make this one look better. I don't know. Um, you know, I'm totally open and I'm I am in totally on board with um adapting to this feedback. I I really am not I think as I think about the allocation of like bandwidth and team and our work as a cabinet and the work of our schools I'm trying to really reflect what are the essential things that we're working on and these are the essential things that are our focus our focus really is on full day kindergarten being ready for Lincoln improving our staff um experiences and outcomes making sure that we are bringing the best people and then we're supporting the amazing people. We have student work.
088I mean that probably is the easiest for us. Not in the easy to achieve but maybe easiest to be able to show outcomes with. A lot of the others are a little more challenging in the way to really show those objective things because it has to do with no we can do it through climate surveys. We we're trying to get better in the way we're really giving objective data. Um so so I I apologize if it if it at all has suggested my unwillingness like I I really am open and and hope that this you know it's just iterative um because I think over time some of it is sort of traditional work that we've done and trying to change over time because I was reflecting even on what for years before has always been
089what I'd seen boards in this district do in the evaluation of the previous superintendent. So I think that sort of informed um an understanding of what was the norm and I think we've changed a lot over that and so hopefully each year is >> reflecting that. But >> yeah, I'm I really just need clarity of the consensus of the group. Maybe not 70 but four three. Do four of you agree on it? I I was just going to say in the absence of any real consensus or like concrete feedback, I would be fine just kind of taking Jen's tone and saying, "Look, you you've done it this way. This is an improvement from what we've seen before. Certainly, you're welcome to sort of take what you've been able to distill of the seven different comments
090and and implement that in some, you know, subsequent draft." But and not to step on toes, but I'm not hearing anything that I feel like you could take away and say, "Okay, I've implemented." Right? I think a lot of what we shared is maybe what we would want to see for >> next time, >> right? But because this is already sort of a step beyond what we've seen in past years, >> I I would be okay, you know, we'll keep an eye on this and see where we get with it. >> Will we have agreement on that? >> Yes. Yes. I I do wonder in the future would it be valuable for Dr. Gore to send these goals and then us to meet as a board and then >> so we don't have >> well
091>> I actually would like to be part of those because I think as >> I don't know if this is helpful >> as much as it might be painful to those in attendance it's actually very um helpful to me to hear >> you know what are the what are the goals and interests and feedback I I appreciate it and I think the more um I'm able to hear those discussions and iterations I think it helps me, it informs my team and me about what are the priorities, what are the asks is we will our next step will be really kind of convening and looking at this and trying to um bring forward and I I very clearly am hearing that a way that even if things stay the same, the updates and the way that
092things are focused in in those quarterly updates can also make um changes reflective of the ask. So, I think we can actually get closer to that improvement with within those. >> As long as this hasn't been painful for you. >> No. No. >> Okay. >> I'm sure everyone else in the room might disagree, but I actually think it's very helpful to hear what my seven bosses want from me. So, >> that's got to be fun. >> Let's keep going. I want to know. No, >> maybe for Robera for doing the notes. It might be hard. At least you're not going to one office after another office after another. >> Yeah, >> we're all doing it, >> right? It's actually here helpful to be in the room. So, >> so Mary, yeah. Now, do you feel
093like you have direction from the board? >> I do, but I definitely want to know if anyone feels that they don't feel comfortable with this. I know I've heard some people say they are, but does everyone Okay. >> Okay. So then next month I will bring I think well then the next you'd be hearing then if this is okay would be um I don't think if we I guess we take action next month right to approve the goals. Is that it? And then the first update would be in October. >> Yes. >> If we're following with that format. Does that seem fair? Okay. Okay. So, we'll treat that as a first read. >> Okay. Thank you for all of the commentary. Um, can we move on to the uh summer enrichment summary report? >> Yes.
094Um, before we go on, I do just want to mention something so wonderful. Um just this week, actually yesterday, um Chicago magazine came out and one of the district 57 schools made the top 50 uh elementary schools in um Cook County and that is Lions Park Elementary School. So, um we are just so excited about that and obviously we love all of our schools and are proud of the work they're doing. um this particular magazine's um metric for making these determinations have to do with um I scores not just for growth but for attainment um chronic absenteeism and some other factors. So as we have um that resource available I will we will include that in um my superintendent update for the whole community tomorrow. But I wanted the board to know that great news
095and we're just so thrilled and we can't wait to continue pursuing those types of um indicators and we're really proud to see one of our schools on that list cuz we are among really um wellresourced peers on that list and I know how hard we have to fight to be on the list with some schools you know who happen to be much um more resourced not at all to but how how fortunate we are in this community and how supported we are. But it's a it's a it's a list of strong competitors that now we have their number and we're coming for them. So won't be the last time we're on that list. Um and we're going to have more and more. But that was something so cool. And with that and really in celebration
096of that, I want to then transition to Dr. Vanderhar who provided a great memo um and summary of from our um enrichment uh summer school experience >> and I will just do a a quick overview of this and I'd be happy to answer any questions but in December of 24 I came to you and shared um my memo with uh that I wrote alongside Miss Tyerski about our summer programming. So, like we typically do, we have uh summer programming for our multilingual students as well as students who qualify for special education services. We also have a summer bridge program which we have implemented since since co uh that was through federal funding with our ESSER grant that has since gone away. Um, and so I shared some changes that we wanted to make to our
097summerbridge program, which included revising our reading curriculum, communicating with families earlier so that we would hopefully boost our attendance numbers, as well as really targeting the group that we wanted to focus on for summerbridge. And something that I shared in December was that we also wanted to pilot an enrichment program. And one of the reasons for that is to offset some of the costs of Summerbridge because we no longer have that ESRE or federal grant money. And then the other part of that is really thinking of our strategic plan and providing our students with outstanding student experiences. So this memo um gives a brief overview of our enrichment programming. After our fall benchmarking, I will come back to you with another memo that really dives deeper into the financial aspect, attendance, as well as our
098student data with Summerbridge and make recommendations regarding future programming for Summerbridge. But I just wanted to highlight a few things with enrichment. Um, this is a, like I said, a pilot. We had 103 students who attended the program and we really targeted the enrichment classes based on needs that came up from the district and this is through our our different committees. So our district equity leadership team, our student data, um you can see on the the second page the different enrichment classes that we offered. So, just to highlight a few of these, um, we had a reading class uh that was really targeted to boys and that was because we have typically our our scores for reading are higher for girls. Um, all of these classes were open to all students. Um, we also had
099more of a coding class that was geared more towards um some girl interest with with that creativity. Uh we also had a middle school jump start um class for students who were entering sixth grade. And you can see from all of the feedback from students, staff, and families. It was very wellreceived. Um families, students, and staff had very positive things to share about it. So this is something that I would like to continue and expand upon. Um so I'm excited about that. you can read a little bit more, but if you have any questions, I'd be happy to answer it. And again, there will be an updated or a new memo um following our fall data review so I can share my recommendations for summerbridge programming. [Music] >> Does anybody have any questions? Have one.
100>> Well, thank you for this, Christian. It was um exciting to see all the new offerings and all the things that uh you you know were put into place this summer. So, thank you to all the staff that did that. I was just curious like when you think about how many kids could have been in these classes like what was the cap for the different classes and did any of them meet that cap? >> So we had between 11 and 18 students and some of them were at the top end especially we had one class um for incoming first and second graders and that was really the only class geared towards that age level. Uh so I I think there's a lot of interest especially at the lower grade levels. Got it. >> Okay. Thank
101you. I was just curious where we where we were on that. >> Go ahead, Maddie. >> Just a quick comment. It was great to read the feedbacks how they they enjoyed it even more than some of their summer camps. They've never raved about summer camp and that they raved about this. That was great. >> And that's really a testament to our D57 teachers. They are amazing, so creative. And I I know it was a joy to read the feedback truly and just to see how much our students love this. So go ahead, Pam. >> I think the joy is transferable. So So finding out that learning is fun doesn't end when they leave that enrichment class or or any of the bridge classes or anything. Just to have that that um specialty of doing something
102extra in summer. So, thank you. I I just when I saw it, I just remembered my son going to the enrichment classes and it just, you know, brought a tear to my eyes. So, thank you. Thank you, Dr. Vonar. Um, I was also really excited by this whole process. I'm glad it turned out to be something that was so valuable to everybody. So, yay, keep going. Um, and also I just wanted to say thank you to Dr. or for um bringing forward that recognition that the Lions Park was able to get. That was really that's really exciting. It is nice to see ourselves um up in prestigious company >> indeed. Okay, can we move on to the 2526 tenative budget, Dr. Keys? AB: >> Absolutely. Um so, uh last month, uh I brought to you
103uh an initial budget. Um, and this year or this month we're talking about the tenative budget that we'll approve. Um, and so last month you you saw a presentation. Uh, I'll talk through some of just the changes we've been able to make over the last month and then um, this tenative budget we'll look to approve tonight. Um, with then a budget hearing in September at our board meeting. Um, so our tenative budget here, um, it you'll see in the memo that it starts off by just explaining and making sure we're all on the same page about all the different funds that we have within our budget. And it's really important um, it's always important, but this year more uh, than ever because um, trying to pull out the referendum dollars, both revenue and expenditures to
104make sure that we know what we're talking about. and and when we look at comparisons and when we're looking at a surplus, we really don't want to include those uh that money uh within this. So, um as you can see in the memo, um the surplus for our operating budget and our operating budget does not include capital projects and it does not include debt service. And so that operating budget has um just over $2 million in surplus. Um, when you look at the fact that we have earmarked $2 million for construction, it leaves a surplus of about $180,000. Um, which is an increase from last month. I know that was a request. Um, that really came from, um, knowing that we're receiving additional revenue last month. If you remember, we didn't include all the grant
105money as we hadn't um, heard um, that we were getting all the grant money. We now have been able to plug into the budget title one, title two, and title three. We have the dollars that we'll be receiving. um for those grants. So, we've been able to put in that. Um a couple other little things, but uh really um all more on the revenue side. Um no, luckily no additional expenditures that we see. And so that's where the budget um falls out. Um, with that, I know, um, budget and cash flow are a little different, but just want to make sure everyone is aware that Cook County once again is changing their, um, system and and somehow they're they're changing things and expect delays in when you're going to get tax bills, um, when they
106will go out, which impacts us with when we're going to receive uh, property taxes this year. So, we know that we are anticipating uh we right now for sure are good through November, probably end of December. We expect that um property tax bills will go out at the end of October. So, uh we'll start receiving um some of those the money then in November and we should be good to go. And it's just about and it's not that we don't have the money, it's just that um the we don't have the liquid money. So, the money's invested in places and we and we're fine if if it continues to move further. We hope it doesn't. Um the last time that this happened, uh we did start receiving money at the beginning of December. That was
107the really late one. So, we feel like we're fine. We've worked with our institution VMA to make sure that we are uh a couple other things. Um just when you look at the referendum dollars then that are in the memo. Um we know that in July we um approved and sold more uh referendum bonds um just around 35 million. We expect to um have expenditures around 24 just under 24 million this year knowing that that'll continue. Then in the following year we'll sell more bonds next year um to get up to that 85 million that was approved. But um I will continue to try to keep th those dollars separate. Um, I think it gets confusing if you try to put them together, but um, I just want to make sure you're aware as you're
108looking through, uh, the memo. Um, I want to make sure I talked about everything. Um, yeah, questions uh, for me about budget um, or anything with the tenative budget >> other than thank you for raising the uh, the surplus by absolutely that. I think it was like 40,000 like >> it was it was pretty close. Okay, great. >> Thanks, Dr. Case. >> Sure. >> It's going to go right back to Dr. K's because he is on the forefront of building brighter futures. >> Excellent. Absolutely. Um it's exciting. Uh there are definitely milestones through this process. Uh last week was was a big milestone. we um went and presented um at the or I we say we attended the um zoning uh commission, planning and zoning commission uh for the village. Um and I appreciate everyone
109that was there to support um the it was it was um definitely a huge milestone. We've been working towards that meeting towards getting everything prepared um in order to go to the village um and uh speak with them. they uh were very supportive. Um I think the community members that came um asked good questions. Um I I didn't hear things that were upset about what we're doing. I think there's always concerns um and just questions about how things are going to work, but I think that um we've we've really tried hard to keep the community informed on what we're doing to work with the close uh neighbors of Lincoln as well. Um, and I think that came through and and I think the feedback we even heard after the meeting was that sometimes those meetings
110could could go very long and and be a very long conversation. Um, and so I think that just the fact that it um it went as smooth as it did was exciting. So, um, that's exciting. We'll be going to the village board meeting on September 2nd um, for the now it goes to the village board, but it was approved by the planning and zoning commission 70. So, we're excited about that. Um, other things that are happening in the land of construction, we um had a pre-bid meeting for Westbrook on Tuesday. Really excited. We had about 60 people show up. So, that's great. Um, because of course the more people, the more bids, um, and the more um, competitive it'll be. So, those bids are due soon. Um, and then uh, Lincoln's pre-bid meeting is tomorrow
111morning. Um, so we'll be meeting for with them as well. And then um we should receive all the bids are due. I know Lincoln are September 11th. I want to say Westbrook's I think the 4th is is the number in my head. Um and so then obviously the plan is to bring that to the board on September 25th. So excited about that. Um, wanted to make sure um, also it's something tangental tangential to the um, I'll just say tangent that's easier to say. Uh, a tangent to this, but um, we are going to be doing our safety audit that was approved by the board last uh, year. We'll be doing the safety audit in September and so excited to get that work done and bring that back to you. Part of that work will be
112looking um showing the company what the new building um and the addition of Westbrook will look like um to get their feedback about that as well. We've we've definitely gotten feedback already twice uh uh from our police department. Um but we'll we'll get feedback from them as well and and and see what other things they can offer. So I think that's everything. Any questions about building brighter futures? >> Thank you as always, Dr. Case. uh on the safety audit that you mentioned will be done in September. I I assume we won't have that will not be we won't have a report to see and discuss by the September meeting, right? Or will we? >> Um I will not I I would be surprised if it can turn around that quickly. I don't think so. Probably
113October is what I was thinking. >> Okay. >> Yeah, we wanted to we we had talked about when to do it and they had recommended you don't want to do it right at the beginning of a year. wait about a month. And so we we waited at that exact month and then we're going to do it then. >> And then one more quick my favorite question that I always you probably already know it's coming, right? Uh any further clarity on what the impact of tariffs is going to be on our >> No, I I I think I think honestly that the no news right now is good news. Um we, you know, we we we continue to revise our estimates with uh Nicholas um and uh our architects weighing in, but uh really Nicholas and
114um they'll continue to revise estimates throughout and nothing is coming back going, "Oh, we think, you know, it's going to go up a lot and now we're, you know, we're a month out from from hopefully approving some bids." So hopefully all is good, but let's talk on September 25th. >> Thank you. >> All right. And before I report the foyer report, I also failed to mention the amazing first day of school we had for first grade through 8ighth grade today. Um, so that's seemed like an important thing to celebrate. Um, but we were really grateful for a smooth first day. We obviously are excited to have our kindergarteners and our preschoolers start next week. Um, but I think connected to the smoothness of the first day was really um all the front-end work that went
115into the preparation, the coordination, the alignment with the new bus company. Huge shout out to Jason and his team and Mark for doing all the frontend work to make sure that that was as smooth as possible. We were pleased that um we did have representatives from the company there on the scene. We thought that was a impressive sign and we were glad to see that they were on top of that. Um and it my understanding is that many of our drivers did not end up coming to the new company if not any. Do you have that? So none. So that is just to say that that's even I think more reflection of how much work had to be done because these were brand new drivers. They didn't have some of those pre-existing relationships and knowledge
116of the community and families. So, we're we're not calling this a grand success yet because someone might be submitting a complaint letter as I write this about an experience today, but for the most part, we were very pleased with how smooth things went. So, >> if I could just add one great anidote. Um, yes, I think I think it was a a great first start. There's definitely some things we're going to fix for even tomorrow. Um, but I will say I just there was a bus driver uh from the company from Grand Prairie who drove summer school this summer. Um, and requested to then come here and be with the kids that she was with at summer school. It was a really neat thing and I saw her today and I saw her driving over
117at Westbrook and she was so excited. It was really neat. So, >> see, >> great. >> The word's going to get out. >> Great relationship, >> especially when they see that Chicago magazine. >> All right. Um, we had two foyer requests between July 18th and August 18th. The responses were sent and details are in your board packet. >> All right. Thank you, Mary. Um, let's move on to the consent agenda. Can I get a motion to approve with the consent agenda? >> Who did the bills? >> Oh, I I did. Why is this turning on? I did. And Dr. Case did an amazing job as always. >> Awesome. >> Go moved. Second. >> Member Derer. >> Yes. >> Member Fay. >> Yes. >> Member Qualche. >> Yes. >> Member Leto. >> Yes. >> Member Nelson.
118>> Yes. >> Vice President Choke. >> Yes. >> President Benil. >> Yes. >> All right. We have some some unfinished business. We need to take action on the press policy issue 119 update. Can I get a motion to approve the press policy issue 119? >> So moved. >> Second. >> Member Fay. >> Yes. >> Member Qualch. >> Yes. >> Member Leto. >> Yes. >> Member Nelson. >> Yes. >> Vice President Choke. >> Yes. >> Member Dorner. >> Yes. >> President Bennett Kell. >> Yes. >> All right. We've now come to the uh second community comments that the public may address the board of education. Would our community member like to address the board? All right, seeing none, uh we do have some new business. We to approve the 2526 tenative budget. So, may I get
119a motion to approve the 2526 tenative budget? >> So, moved. >> Second. [Music] >> I even had this on. >> Member Qualch. >> Yes. >> Member Leto. >> Yes. >> Member Nelson. >> Yes. >> Vice President Cho. >> Yes. >> Member Dorner. >> Yes. >> Member Fay. >> Yes. >> President Bennett Kill. Yes. All right. Now, we are going to move on to communications. So, let's start out with member Leto with the NSSEO report. >> Thank you, Karen. So, lots going on at NSSO uh in your board. So, I should I guess first say that the governing board met on Wednesday, August 6th. Uh and probably the the most important topic to convey and discussion to have. Uh and again I you'll see several items in your board packet uh related to a extensive discussion
120we've been having around the governance structure of NSSO and some proposed changes. So to recap uh there's actually a video uh in the board packet that uh I think we're going to play. But just to tee that up a little bit, uh as you all remember back in January, uh when the strategic plan was implemented, one of the four strategic pillars was around governance structure and the need to review that. Uh and so out of that strategic plan work, there have been a lot of discussions about well what's the best way to try to close those gaps, right? And by gaps I mean the frequency of and quality of communication between NSSO and the member districts. Uh you'll recall that the last time we met as a governing board in June and in our meeting
121here after that uh I reported that the decision had been made to uh in an effort to close that gap to have Dr. create a superintendence council uh that consisted of all the eight member district superintendent where they would meet once a month uh have an agenda, a discussion and really allow for that communication back and forth. Uh and the governing board agreed with that and off we went. Well, just before our last meeting in August, a couple weeks before that, uh Dr. Schnore came to us and said, "You know what? I I I think we need to rethink this. I think we need to look at this a little bit differently. Uh and there is a lot of concern that yes, the superintendent's council is is nice. We should still do it. But if
122we're really going to close the communication gaps, what we really need to have is a separate operating board that would operate not instead of but in conjunction with the existing governing board. Uh the operating board would be OLMA compliant. It would be obviously transparent because they would have open meetings. It would consist of the a similar group to the superintendence council. And the idea would be that operating board would be responsible for a lot of the the more dayto-day decisions around the governance of the co-op. Uh and so we had a a rigorous discussion around that. Uh, and I will stop talking now and if we hopefully we can play the video if uh Mark has it or maybe not. We can't can't play it. >> We we were asked to play it if we
123can. >> Yes. >> I apologize. >> That's okay. >> No, sorry if I if I was uh if I didn't make that clear. That's my fault. >> If we can't, that's okay. I I can summarize it. >> Yeah. If you go to uh NSSO uh operational board video transcript, it's the first link there. >> But there's a link at the top that has the video. >> Sorry for throwing this at you last second, Mark. That's it's always the It's in the transcript document. Mark the NSSO operational board video transcript August. >> In that file, there's a link right at the top. Mark, I apologize. I owe you one. >> I know. It's >> There it is. Cool. >> All right. Well done, Mark. >> Hopefully, we can hear it. and from your busy board agendas
124to view this video and the important information shared regarding the governance structure at NSSO. This is Dr. Meg Schnore, superintendent of NSSEO. And as you know, we are a special education co-op serving your district and seven other area districts, enabling the provision of special education services for the most complex educational needs. In fall of 2024, NSSEO along with all member districts and a variety of NSSO shareholders met to develop a strategic plan to guide the cooperative in meeting the needs of member districts for the next 5 years. Four key priorities emerged. Governance, finance and facilities, instruction and programs, and highly qualified staff. This evening I am presenting about the governance priority. For the more than 50 years NSSO has served districts, the governance structure has been that of a single tiered board, the NSSO governing
125board, which is made up of one elected board member from each of the member district boards coming together monthly to govern the work of the cooperative. During the original strategic plan meetings in fall of 2024, as well as the action plan meetings in January of 2025, the shareholders agreed that there needs to be another layer of governance added to the structure. This layer of governance would be composed of the superintendent from each of the member districts and the NSSO superintendent meeting in alignment with the open meetings act to collaboratively make decisions of how best to provide for students with special needs in all member districts. These decisions would be made in alignment with the budget established annually by the elected governing board members. Making the change to a two-tiered board requires the change of the
126NSSO articles of agreement, which were already overdue to be reviewed and revised. A copy of a draft of the new NSSO articles of agreement is included in your board packets. Naturally, the question, why do we need to change has arisen in many discussions. NSSEO exists to meet the needs of member districts and member districts want to share in the decisions that are made on behalf of their students including those attending NSSO program. Another question has been the superintendent already meet monthly in an advisory capacity with the superintendent and administration of NSSO. Isn't that sufficient? While the implementation of the NSSO superintendent council has increased the dialogue between superintendent and NSSO administration, it does not hold decision-making power. An operational board would have the formal authority to make operational decisions on matters such as the e-learning
127policy, program design, staffing models, and transportation services, giving districts a direct role in shaping the outcomes that impact the students and their budgets. Unlike advisory groups, an operation board would meet publicly under the open meetings act. This creates a legally accountable structure where all deliberations and decisions are transparent, documented, and accessible to the public. This helps build broader trust, which has been a key concern raised in the strategic planning process. Further, an operational board will also help NSSE reduce the sharing of misinformation and back channel problem solving. The operational board removes the ambiguity. Instead of conversations happening offline or in silos, key issues would be addressed through a structured visible process. This helps eliminate conjecture and fosters mutual accountability. The question of how was this decision made will no longer be an issue. Additionally, the
128operational board with superintendent representation from all member districts in a formal capacity ensures that decisions reflect the diversity of needs across our entire cooperative, not just those with the loudest voices, most urgent needs or lowest or highest fund balances. It helps us function as a cooperative with shared priority, not just being a service provider. Ultimately, this is about building confidence in how NSSEO serves students and stewards the significant fi financial contributions from member districts. The operational board will provide a platform for member districts to shape strategy, monitor value, and affirm that NSSO is indeed delivering on our mission. The superintendent advisory council is critical and will continue to be, but an operational board offers the public an empowered and equitable forum of collective leadership. My goal as the superintendent of NSSO is that by the
129end of this year, every member district will not only understand how decisions are made, but will also see clear evidence that NSSO is more than a value added partner. We are a shared investment in a better future for our students with exceptional needs. The addition of the operational board does not in any way diminish the importance of our governing board. The governing board will continue to set the budget within which the operational board functions as well as hire and evaluate the NSSO superintendent. But their role extends far beyond that. We need our governing board to continue to bring the needs of NSSEO back to your member district boards so that resources can continue to be allocated to meeting the needs of all of your students. We also need our governing board members to ensure that
130our students continue to have a place and a voice in our community and that their needs are considered beyond the school from community events to employment opportunities and the generation of supplemental resources to provide for their needs. We have a cautionary tale that has taken shape this summer in that a neighboring special education cooperative will no longer be in existence this time next year. We want to strengthen the collaboration between member districts and NSSO to ensure that we can continue to provide the services for our students in their home community. The time to move forward is now. As board members of eight different school boards, I am asking that you review the draft articles, ask questions, and eventually ratify them so that we can move forward in a highly transparent and effective manner as we
131work to implement all of the priorities of the NSSO strategic plan and provide for your students with the most complex special needs. Thank you. >> So, Mark, that just shows how agile you are to just handle that. So, thank you very much for doing that on on short notice. So, uh so just to summarize what the ask is tonight, uh what we are being asked to do at our September 3rd governing board meeting is to approve the revised articles of agreement with this operating board defined in it. uh at that meeting uh if the governing board approves it to move forward, it would go through a 90day ratification period essentially where it would be reviewed and presumably commented on though not changed. Uh I did make I was I asked that question about well what
132happens in that 90-day period and it cannot be substantively changed at all. So any comments, modifications, changes that anyone would recommend, we have to have in place before that September 3rd date. So, and one other thing I want to say before we discuss this u obviously I have many opinions on this but my I'm sure that will shock you all to to hear but uh my my role as uh this district's liaison to NSSO is to act on the the will of our collective board and not my own opinion. So, uh, I will, uh, at our September 3rd meeting vote in whichever direction our board advises me to vote on. Uh, that said, I I'd love to hear your thoughts. I I certainly do have an opinion, which I'd be happy to share, and I
133have already with a couple of you. Uh, but would love to hear thoughts, questions, comments. I I would like to hear your or share your thoughts on what your concerns are regarding this because you are there for all the meetings and you're sure. >> So I would like to hear your idea on it. >> So >> keep it concise. I'm just kidding. >> I I will try to be concise. I I want to first before I say what I'm going to say, I want to I do want to just point out I have a ton of respect for Dr. and the role she's in and the difficulty of her job. Uh I really do I know it's not an easy position to be in. Um you know Dr. Gore has seven bosses. Dr. Schnure has
134like 50 bosses or or or something like that, right? And and she does an amazing job. NSSEO is an incredible organization and and very special to me personally. And so I I want what's best for the co-op. And the fact that Dr. Schnure, who we as a governing board all hired and empowered, really wants to go in this direction, it it does mean a lot to me. But that said, I I I have a lot of concerns with going this direction. And and one of the biggest ones is I you know to me I I always look at whenever a change is suggested or recommended no matter where it is it's what problem are we trying to solve and why do we think this is the solution and to me if the if the gap
135that is there and I'm not disputing that it is is one of communication between NSSO and the member districts in my opinion There are many other ways to solve that including one that has already been implemented the superintendence council uh that can achieve that goal without creating this level of upset to the governance structure and it's a significant one. So that's one point and the other thing I will say I I have a philosophical problem with the governing board seeding decision-making authority to this operating board and and the reason I feel that way is the the governing board is the only group that is directly accountable to the taxpayers. Right? So any decisions on how NSSO is spending money in my opinion needs to stay with the governing board because the the operating board in
136its new incarnation is not directly accountable to the taxpayers. The governing board is I I was not comfortable with how the clause to initiate this operating board is written. It's quite vague in what they can and will and won't do. And honestly, when I raised that concern at our meeting, the answer I got was, "Well, we'll figure that out after the articles are ratified." I have a problem with that, too. So, so anyway, if if it isn't clear already, I personally am not in favor of going in this direction, but as I said, I I will certainly vote the will of of our board. Uh, and if the majority of you think we should, I'm happy to vote that way. I I had just I had a couple more questions of Chris. Um actually I'll
137get to answer one of Mary too. Um this is more work for you. >> I honestly I want to know how you feel about being on this superintendent board. And I mean you do have a lot of work and this is just adding another thing to your plate. And I just want to know how you feel about that. I think that's important. >> It's a great point. >> Thank you for that question. >> I don't no um so first and foremost I want to throw things out there. one NSSO is a cooperative and I think um though we know that in title I think one of the pressure points in this at least from from interactions I've been involved in and you know my knowledge of you know I've tried to be diligent in watching
138the meetings and understanding and obviously hearing sort of analysis is maybe a desire to tighten the um tighten the um way that that is reflected in the actual day-to-day interactions and decisions and also strategic planning around resources because instead of NSSO there's there's some feelings among stakeholders that NSSO historically and for maybe good reason has come to operate as a its own district and I think um in that way although there have been representative board members I would argue Dr. has eight bosses because she reports to eight board members. I report seven as do um our neighboring and historically they haven't reported to um you know member boards. They haven't been accountable and I don't mean that slanderously, but they've been accountable to their board and their board has been charged at kind of reflecting
139and and all of the work they're doing. Maybe there's been flaws in that and maybe that there haven't. I don't think, you know, anyone's pointing those fingers, but why we're here now is interesting in that there's been different um players maybe around the table. There's been really some concerns around decisions that have been made about things like ESY and just the significant um capital issues that are at hand when it comes to um the spaces they have. And I think those were highlighted by some of the issues around the spending and maybe some need for more long-term strategic financial thinking around how we're going to meet the needs of this cooperative. And I think there is definitely a feeling among um neighboring districts that are members are that there's there's room for improvement and feeling
140like some of these decisions are not being made um with sort of the owners at the table as much as maybe could be that it's not its own district. It's a it's a really reflective of the cooperative and that the strength of it and the lasting value of it is going to be directly tied to the feeling of the cooperative. and when certain member districts do not feel satisfied with how things are going, I think that's that's come to to at least be the background of where we here. I I have said to um member Leto and I've said over over time, I don't have much comparison is this is the only special ed cooperative I've ever worked with. I had great respect um for Judy Hackett and the work that happened. So I I
141didn't I would not have arrived at this um need myself and our own experiences. I would also go on to say that I don't think we've been um negatively impacted in that our proportionate share as a member district. We feel generally really satisfied with what we get from um our investment in it. We are a smaller district and so the way the formula works we are not as much um the percentage of our contribution is significantly different than 214 for example um or even a larger elementary school districts like district 21 or district 59. So I think that's another layer that is is at play here. Um in terms of the work I'm committed and as is I know Dr. K's and Miss Taberski, we are hungry to keep collaborating and um willing to devote
142whatever time necessary um to get this right. Um I think we tend to wonder, you know, is this the structure that needs to happen in order to get that right? We think we we want clarity and information and timely information. we want to be at the table to have that input and feedback um so that we can push um where we need to to advocate for not only 57 but also the the sustainability of the cooperative. So I'm less concerned with like the impact this will have on our time and energy because it really is um these are our students and the health of this organization is directly going to impact you know district 57 um for years ahead. But we we do want to be um diligent in making sure that all of these
143changes are done with the correct um changes, not just the title changes. So I guess simple answer is we can take it, but we want there to be some other communication improvements to help us. >> So do you would you think that the advisory committee would be a better form versus going straight to that operation? Again, I um I'm a little I I've expressed this to my colleagues. I I'm I'm willing to do with what the group feels. I some of the other um superintendents who I collaborate with in who are member district superintendents have had the um background of working part of cooperatives in other districts and other um regions that they have spoken highly to a governance model that has an operating board and a governance model. But as I've pointed out before,
144the cautionary tale of True North happened to have an operating council and a government's council if and to me the takeaway is it's less about those structures than it is about the quality of that work whatever it is. So um they they tend to I do think it's my understanding is that the majority of member districts have indicated a desire for this change. Is that a safe? I know there hasn't been formal action, but maybe informally that's the >> Well, it's an interesting question. >> I I think there was in the three years I've been on the governing board, >> not one time has anyone on the governing board said in a meeting or even not in a meeting, >> I have a problem with the quality and frequency of the communication that I'm getting.
145my supervis or my superintendent isn't happy, >> my director of special ed isn't happy, we need to do something different. I've not heard that once. >> So whether that's just because the governing board is is unaware of how their superintendents feel, which is certainly possible. >> Mhm. >> Um I don't know that this this Well, let me put this way. This was not this initiative is absolutely not a governing board driven initiative. It it came out of the in the strategic planning process which I I know Dr. Gore Dr. you were part of and Mr. Terski, >> it did become clear that at the administration level there was some angst there, right, about we're we're not involved. We're not part of the decision-making process. And >> and I do not doubt that that's a problem.
146If if they perceive that to be a problem, that's a problem. >> And I'm not I I do not want what I'm saying here to be perceived as this isn't a problem. You're making this up. Just go away. Right? I believe this is absolutely a problem. My question is, is this really the way to solve that problem because my my feeling is if you need an OMA compliant operating board to solve this issue, you've got a bigger issue, right? That there are underlying problems there that we need to solve that an operating board is not going to fix on its own, >> right? >> In my opinion. >> Yeah. >> I had couple more questions. uh within that uh the terms and whatever there was something in regards to an executive director. Now is that
147a person that would be additionally hired and that would be more costs salary wise because it had like superintendent chairperson and that and that and in essence to do I guess to keep record of that work and more organized of that work there there was mention of an executive director. I'm just asking if that's an additional person that would be additional cost. It's not somebody that's already within uh NSSO that we would rise to executive director and take that role, but someone that we'd have to hire. >> It's a great question. To my knowledge, it would not be it is not planned to be someone that would be additionally hired. >> Okay. >> That's not already on staff. >> Okay. And then there was only one thing in I mean in the slides it had
148you know um this operational board being the formal authority on like decisions like e-learning policy program design staffing models. Now that I can see why you'd have the superintendent on there but in um that document that there was mention of collective bargaining. So what is that process >> and and you have touched on one of my biggest issues is that it is not clear >> exactly what the operating board will be doing and not doing right and and I have a major problem with that. I think >> there are decisions that the governing board should not seed to anybody. >> Yeah. And I would even argue that that decisions like what to do with the extended school year. I think there are decisions made when those changes are made or modifications that do affect the
149budget, do affect how dollars are spent and should be made by the governing board. Now, the the superintendent and admins of the member districts absolutely positively should be aware of what's being proposed, should weigh in, should discuss it with Dr. Schnure and her team. That absolutely should happen. There's no reason that can't happen today. It needs to happen. And and Dr. Schneer and her team's recommendation to the governing board needs to be informed by the member district admin teams. It has to be. But I believe all that can be done without upsetting the structure to this level and creating something that currently does not have well- definfined guardrails, does not have well-defined this is what you're going to do and this is what you're going to do and and again I I'm trying to be
150as neutral here as possible and and just provide the facts and information and so you guys can all kind of make a decision on your phone, but I I I think there's a lot of issues with this. >> I'll let you go now, >> please. >> No, I I think I have two questions. >> Water. >> I know. Go open another one there. You got another. >> I don't have anymore. >> Oh, no. >> Problem. I was going to keep asking. >> We got to stick to still water now, unfortunately. >> Um, so the superintendent council, how long has that been in place? >> So, formally, well, I will say, let me back up. I I I understand that Dr. Hackett used to have this this used to be a thing that she led. I
151don't know for how many years, but well before I joined the the governing board. Um the this new incarnation of it was really just put in place a couple months ago and it was it was again we had this whole discussion around an operating board. You all probably remember that when we talked about it and said you know what we discussed it as a governing board >> decided this was a bridge too far. >> Mhm. the superintendent council seems like a good step toward closing the gap and what we said at the time is we can try this for a year. If it turns out it's not working, we can do something different and maybe at that time we would take a more radical step. So I think it's only really been in place since
152May maybe. So I guess that's my question like what happened to that year and like why how is that going like what I I guess that's my >> that's actually maybe a good question for Dr. Gore not to put you on the spot again Dr. Gore but but I I do not sit in those meetings so I cannot speak to how effective they are or are not. So I I'm sorry. No, it I think they are all um it is a it is a group of very um focused and um you know we have a shared mission of you know caring about the success of this cooperative. So no one's around that table um from any member district or NSSEO for that matter who doesn't share the same um prerogative of you know collaborating around
153what are the goals. I will say it's been helpful to have those more regularly. I think a lot of our time though has been a little tripped up and interpreting what is the direction and the the work ahead. Um I think there's a desire for whether it's a formal or informal. My perspective is we've got a lot of work to start doing if there's going to have any hope of an impact to try to address what are the long-term capital improvements, what are going to be the long-term funding models. Um how are we going to ensure um you know the costs? it really is a they have their own challenges um because they don't have the same leving authority you know that we do. So I think when it comes to just sustaining and having
154a you know is really around concerns around that and then there are some other structural things. So the the work the group is collaborative the group is not I think concerns have been from our superintendent group is that there's a impression that this is coming like a power grab from the superintendent and I don't think that fairly represents the the intent of any of the superintendents. I've heard that kind of um maybe in some of the board meetings I've listened to and trying to understand you know what are the interpretations. I from my point I would not at all describe this to be a power play kind of specifically to um member qual's point is no one really is looking for more work to do or everyone's pretty busy with their own districts but I
155think there's a collective responsibility to say >> look if you know for example if we're going to cut ESY short because of facility issues let's make sure that we make that decision as a group so that we can't potentially hedge off or come up with alternative alternatives that would be at one of our neighboring districts to to host. Um if there's going to be some, you know, um contract negotiations, you really want to work within the limits of our existing um you know, guard rails of member districts so that they're not operating on an island of possibility when really that funding comes from the member districts. So, I think there is a little bit of um there's a greater need for consistent um calibration and it's tricky because when you have those eight member districts,
156although we're locally um close or geographically similar, we have very different um resources, fund balances, um even usage needs when you look at a high school district's needs versus a small elementaryaries like ours. So there's some challenges around what is what do we all define as success and meeting the needs of our respective districts. And yet um so I in summary I think it's really important to have these I am less tethered to the formality of them than some of the other member districts that I'm aware of. But um it's it's a bit it's to me it's more about the substance of whatever is the structure than it is about the the name or the title of the structure. >> Yeah. And I think that's where I'm just I think that's where I'm a little
157caught up is like I don't know that this has been going on long enough to make a change right like I I don't know. I'm not quite at the point where I'm like is it working? Is it not? Do we know? >> And like where are the pain points? And like what like does something need to shift? And I think that year, you know, I mean, I think you have to give something at least some time in order to >> to make that. >> I was pretty takenback when Dr. Sh came back and said, "No, we need to do this now." >> Um, okay, that's helpful. I think the other question I have just around and this is I guess for you Mary also in some ways. Um, so the OMA requirements like I assume
158these are superintendents you meet with often outside of just this. So it would be applicable to like subject you know the topic would be the important definer. So I think that should this go forward my understanding is that the OMA restrictions would kick in when it came to um discussions related to an SSO. >> So there would need to be the same um awareness around you know majority of a quorum and having those discussions. Yeah. which in some ways um would be its own challenge because you want to have productive collaboration around things without sometimes the limitations around notification public you know all those iterative >> one of the things we discussed when we debated >> the path forward in May was exactly that is that you >> you can sometimes have more substantive >>
159deeper conversations without the the um the regulations around OMA And we actually looked at that as a potential positive. >> Mhm. >> And and and just to to be clear though, >> every single decision around what NSSO does today is made in a public compliant governing board meeting. Yes. Right. So >> there is there are no decisions made that are done in a smoke filled room somewhere. Everything that is decided, every dollar that is spent, every significant curriculum decision is made in a public meeting today that's already happening. >> Yeah. I think what what would be the potential, you know, room for improvement would be the theory that when you layer in a formal kind of um consultative role, there is another layer of um input and correction potentially to make sure there's more stronger
160alignment between um what are the terms of the you know member districts and NSSO. I mean, these are these are examples. I know, you know, just terms around contract stuff and how different maybe some of those look versus member districts, financial planning, future planning, making sure that we have a really long-term forecast around how to deal with emergency situations with capital issues as well as expected ones. Um, you know, there there are concerns around that. So, I think that's like a major issue. Obviously the staffing, the professional development and just um yeah, but these are fair questions. Um but again, I I think that the feeling is that through the um strategic planning process, this really was the area that um at least in the meetings that I was at and the conversations, this was
161overwhelmingly an issue that was discussed in strategic planning. I I'll also point out that this topic has really prevented us from moving forward with the rest of the strategic plan. So, it has been >> a bit of an anchor around our necks, which is unfortunate, right? Because to Dr. Gore's point, there are real >> discussions and decisions around long-term facility planning, which is pillar two of the strategic plan, and we haven't gotten there yet. So, >> I had a couple more questions if Oh, no. Can go ahead since >> go ahead. No, you're doing followup. You >> um I had a couple questions more about the agreement. Um the towards the end where it's like liquid assets liabilities like if it dissolves um like things in regards to uh for a period of 10 years
162following the effective date of the draw the withdrawing districts shall participate in the process to determine the district of assignment for all NSSO certified staff with contractual continued service is I mean are they expecting all staff if it were to be dissolved has to be taken through I mean I we probably would be taking it, but that each district would be taking a certain amount of certified staff. I I'm I'm just curious as to, you know, how that impacts us and our budget. I mean, and do they really have this expectation that this that NSSO would dissolve? I mean, I can't imagine I'm shocked that this other place dissolved. I just can't imagine where everyone would, you know, you have the the ability to bring back in house, you know, our special needs kids that
163need all these extra services. >> That's exactly the key, right? Is is if it did, then you're right. Then every district would be on their own to meet the special education needs of of their kids. And and none of them, to my knowledge, are equipped to do that, >> right? I mean, we're even a small district that doesn't even participate as much as a bigger district would, and that would be a huge impact on us. Um, and then the one other was with the transportation. Is that anything different? They were something in here about transportation. >> That hasn't changed, by the way. Okay. I just wanted to make sure >> that's all from the and and I will say that the articles of agreement we had agreed as you all will remember to revise and
164update anyway irrespective of this operating board >> because they haven't been looked at in 10 years. So now the thinking was that we would make small revisions perhaps around the margins, right? And maybe look at things like withdrawal agreements and does this even make sense, right? >> Right. >> Uh this is a much bigger change that's now being proposed. >> Well, my opinion it agrees with Jen also with you know they didn't give they haven't given this advisory, you know, superintendent group enough time to see how it would play out. Um I'm also concerned with that financial fiscal responsibility for this operating board regarding collective bargaining facilities. I mean what I know it says within that you have to work within the budget that is given but I I don't think there's enough there and
165I need to speak more to that collective bargaining piece also. So I'm, you know, with the idea of, you know, giving this advisory group a little more time to percolate. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I have very similar thoughts um to what both of you have already shared in terms of the accountability of the elected officials on the governing board. I mean, I understand sort of conceptually the idea of wanting to have a group of people who are like sort of subject matter experts more so than maybe most of the people on the governing board are. Um but the idea of giving that group of people however talented and uh full of integrity that they might be the uh responsibility to spend money that they are not accountable for to anyone else is deeply troubling
166to me. Um I think a much better model is to have that subject matter expert group of people give advice to the people who are accountable to the taxpayers to the uh you know to the voters about how the money should be spent and then those who are accountable can make informed decisions based on the expert advice that they're receiving. And that is precisely the model that's in place right now that has apparently been given 3 months to be effective. Um, so I just I have a lot of pause about that. Um, I also think, you know, as we were sort of reviewing the video and reviewing the the documents that were included with the board packet, the idea to me at least of an operating board seems to create a lot of redundancy to
167the structure that already exists on the governing board. And if the problem is really, you know, member districts aren't being fully informed about the decisions that are made at the governing board level, even though they have ample opportunity to have access to that information. The solution to me I don't think is to create another board like there m there must be some gaps in the current board structure that need to be sort of plastered before we create this whole other a truly redundant structure like if if there's already a problem and we're just going to copy and paste we're going to have the same problems at that level too. So I just I I'm a no. >> Good point. Thanks, Kevin. >> I just had a question. It, you know, what struck me is the
168paragraph we have a cautionary tale. So, I is that the the push is is the fact that another um member cooperative dissolved the the the um is did that instigate the fear? Did that did that um initiate the fear? >> So I I do not want to speak for Dr. Schnore. Uh however, I I I do know that that event has her deeply concerned, right? Because if this could happen to a a very large wellestablished uh special ed cooperative, uh it could happen to us too. And and I do think that that is part of the impetus of what may have driven her to say we've got to do this now. >> I I'm just curious now about the dissolved um and and you we won't know you won't know necessarily the dissolved cooperative. What
169did they do with their students that that are that were um in in specialists hands >> just by the way like this is this is hot off the press >> at the be at the beginning of the school year. >> So um that is true north and they are it isn't an immediate thing. So there are terms that allow for you know the preparation in order to be able to um address the needs of kids. So it isn't like a overnight thing. The process um that happened that initiated that was pretty fast and furious but that it allows for now a period of planning and preparation um is my understanding. So >> that that's correct. Yeah. It's not like they just closed up shop and the next day the kids are all on their own.
170>> And I think that at least my understanding is that some of the districts that made that decision were very prepared and had prepared for a long time to be able to anticipate that that was going to be their their their district's needs. Um, in this case, the cooperatives articles were very restrictive and problematic. And I think there's even been some state legislation to to address terms of cooperatives that have too restrictive of language. So it is definitely a changing environment I'd say within this topic of cooperatives. I don't think from what I understand are some of the specifics of that cooperatives um situation. there's some overlaps in that. Of course, they're suburban and there's, you know, many similarities in that, but I I don't know that this um situation was precipitated by that because
171the work of the strategic plan happened long before I think it was publicly known that these things were >> that is true. >> But you may but there is pretty dramatic course change that's been proposed. >> But also there have been changes in the leadership of the board of NSSO. There's been changes in superintendent and representatives on the board. So those things simultaneous to that I'd say I would argue might have also influenced some of those changes. >> I wonder you had also said Mary though that this cooperative that dissolved had this governing board operating board structure my understanding cuz I asked that. >> Yeah they all call it it's called something a little different advisory board or it's not >> but they did have some similar structure it was my understanding. So I I
172thought it doesn't exactly punctuate the point that this is the solution, >> right? It's not to say that, you know, our cooperative should move to that structure because this is the silver bullet to keep these kind of operations solvent, nor is it necessarily like they had this and so we should not have it. >> That is a good point. It it is true that most special ed cooperatives in Illinois do have an operating board. That that is a fact. But that's been true for as long as NSSEO has been around and been quite successful. So to say that just because everybody else has this, we should too is not a good argument in my opinion. Not on its own at least. >> Go ahead. Um, I guess I'll just summarize my my thoughts about it.
173As I was preparing and and reading the board packet and and uh reading the board packet in preparation, I think I was left very much with the question that Chris started off with, which was the, you know, like what problem are we trying to solve and is this the right solution to that problem? And I personally was just sort of left with and especially hearing that we haven't that this advisory council has not existed really long enough to make a adequate determination of its you know benefit or not. I I just I don't think that jumping to an OMA compliant board is necessarily the right step without first giving something of lesser degree of change an opportunity to see if it's working or not working. And I would also I guess further add that I
174also am not convinced that the simple addition of an OMA compliant board is going to fix whatever the underlying problem is either that again if it's really around issues of transparency and and communication. I I guess personally not convinced that that's necessarily going to be the the answer. So, [Music] >> I don't have anything substitute to add. Everybody kind of spill my thunder, but um I would agree with the consensus of the board that this is something that is just not um it seems to be moving too far too fast and uh is a significant change that is actually probably going to um make the waters more murky rather than clarify the situation. So, I would be um supportive of you voting no. >> Okay. So, if I if I gather some of you explicitly
175told me what you think, but am I am I to is it fair to assume that the majority of us are are nos. >> Okay. >> I think you should take a vote. >> Well, we can't have a formal vote. Correct. Just because it's >> We can do a straw poll. to a straw pole. >> Pam, >> I agree with Chris. No, >> I vote yet. >> Agree with Chris? No. >> I say no. >> No. >> I already said I'm a no. >> Okay. Well, thank you all. I I do want to say one last thing about NSSO. We have just to show you how dedicated of an organization is. We have one of our amazing NSSO employees and Mount Prospect residents in attendance tonight, Gina. So, thank you for coming, Gina. And uh
176thank you all. And uh that is that is my short and sweet NSSO report for this month. >> One quick question. If it were to pass, would you be able to at least um clarify what they mean by the collective bargaining those before >> it's not going to be part of this? No. >> No. >> That's one of the problems I have with it is that >> Okay. I thought >> it would have to be voted on as is right now. >> Okay. >> On September 3rd and then ratified as such in December. >> Okay. All right. Thanks. All right, Ed Foundation. Uh, yeah. So, we did have a meeting on August 2nd. Um, it was a Saturday, which was interesting, but hey, you know, we did it. Uh, we had a conversation just about
177upcoming events. Uh, there were no big decisions made, so I don't have anything really new to report other than to say, you know, they're excited to think about new things and new fall activities. So, be on the lookout soon. Um, our next meeting is either next Tuesday or next Thursday. Uh, it's still a little bit up in the air. So, check calendars if you're interested in attending. >> All right, PTO reports. Let's start with Lincoln. Lincoln will have their first meeting on September 15th. Thank you. Uh, Lions Park, I believe, will have their first PTO meeting on September 8th at 7 o'clock p.m., but uh I would encourage you to keep an eye on Parent Square for final confirmation. >> Fairview. >> Yeah, I I'm not even that good. I have no idea. So, definitely
178check parent square. >> Westbrook, >> I have to check. Um, we have not met since, you know, May. That's >> This is a great ad for parent square, isn't it? >> It really is. >> Okay. Moving on to the governance committee report. Vice President Joe. >> All right. That's me. Uh, there was a note in the uh notes that came out, but um we did meet on August 8th um and we finalized the procedure that we'll use in April for the process of electing uh board officers. So, we'll remind everyone as we kind of get closer to that, but there were like a lot of decisions that we talked about before that we made around what to call it, how to do it, um those pieces. So, we'll remind everyone as we closer to April.
179Um we did discuss the book rate on their behalf. For those of you not on the governance committee, you all got a copy of that book um today. So, you do not have to read it if you don't want to. Um but uh we so Chris, Karen, me and Mary all read that um for our last meeting and so we will share bits and pieces of that um especially as we get into our self-evaluation piece. Um I did attach the notes from that discussion. Uh and if I realize that you don't have the actual agendas, so I think we can certainly get you those too. um for Mary I think you can send that or I can either way uh but we did this that was where some of the outcome based goals from uh
180this evening came from was around that discussion so that's what I have from >> can we add the notes to that uh one of these new features and the tool here the diligent community >> I don't know >> maybe Mark can tell us later figure that out. >> We will work on our new tool. >> Okay. >> Can I just ask a question? Go ahead. >> So, you were saying the the conversation we had around like objectively measuring goals came out of a conversation that you all had at the committee level. >> We just were talking about goal setting and that was part of what that conversation where that start of that conversation came from. >> Okay. I mean, we've already had the discussion. I guess I'm just a little uncomfortable with the idea that
181the committee discussed something that didn't come before the board before it got implemented. Am I misunderstanding how that's supposed to work? I mean, I maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it sounds to me like the committee discussed something and then it was taken up as gospel and implemented. And I don't think any of us have a problem with the actual outcome. There's something a little bit lacking in transparency about the process. Unless I'm mistaken and I'm not clear about how that happened. Um it was really kind of out of a conversation on the particulars of um superintendent evaluation that were within the book itself. um it didn't uh we were talking about some using we were using um Marius evaluation as a example since it was something that we were all common with when we were having
182those conversations. So I don't know if that was helpful or not. I mean it it might be a little bit moot at this point because I think we've all given extensive feedback about uh you know the the tangible outcomes of whatever that conversation had been. Uh my surprise is to hear that this was something that was discussed by three board members that was then implemented without sort of the full awareness of the entire board. Uh like I mean at this point, right, like I said, we've already talked about it. We're already okay with the actual outcome. I would just caution against making that a precedent. I it's it makes me deeply uncomfortable to think that that was something that just kind of happened without anybody's awareness. So it's my two cents. [Music] That's helpful feedback.
183Thank you. Okay. the board president report. We have no need for a September 4th tenative meeting and the September 18th board meeting has been rescheduled for the 25th so we can get the um the bids in. We have no need for close session and we have no topics under board discussion. Do we have any topics for future meetings? Okay. Can I get a motion to adjurnn? So moved. >> Second. >> Member Leto. >> Yes. >> Member Nelson. >> Yes. >> Vice President Choke. >> Yes. >> Member Dorner. >> Yes. >> Member Fay. >> Yes. >> Member Qualcha. >> Yes. President Ben