001It is 10:35 on April 4th. This is the uh normal standard April meeting of the uh policy and instruction subcommittee for the East Adam Board of Education. Uh the first item as always on our agenda is the pledge of allegiance. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. Thank you. Um, now there have been some developments, so I'm going to start out by asking, does anybody have anything they'd like to add to the agenda? I do. I have two items, please. I'd like to add a discussion on the elementary school reading program so that we can move that to the board. And I would like to revisit policy 0521 non-discrimination.
002That's you guys can see each other. We can see you on the YouTube video. I will ask Matt about this, but other than that, the YouTube is working fine. Okay, that's fine. Um, does anybody want to ask any questions about what Dr. Drio just requested? Can I have a motion to add them to the agenda then? All right. All right. Thank you very much. Um, any discussion? hearing. No, can we have a vote? All in favor? I I I I. Unanimous. All right. So, what I'd like to do is work on the rest of our stuff in order and then just pick those things up afterwards if it's okay. Sure. All right. Um the first policy we're looking at um is a policy that I'm proposing and for the record I'm not sure how this
003would be numbered. That might be a question for the attorneys or Cape uh or Cape. Cape didn't have a number and I got theirs. Um so I I I don't know if they've got one. I could check with Jody Goldberg, but I'm just saying one way or another, even if we send it forward, u we're going to have to come up with the correct numbering for it. I'm assuming that it would go somewhere in the bylaws. Um that would to me make the most sense. In any case, um there has been so much political division and squabbling that there has been a movement to for boards of education to adopt a policy that says we're not playing that game. We're focused on kids. And um one of the things that has made me very happy
004um since uh things changed on the board and Patty became chairman and all that kind of stuff is that we have people from different political walks of life who really we don't ever talk about national politic nonsense. We just focus on the kids in the school system. I would like to formalize that by adopting this policy. I don't know how other people feel. I don't know if you're okay with the way it's worded or with any of the suggested changes I've made. Um so all of it is up to grabs. And um why don't we just usually I just say are there any questions? and that sort of works. But on this, I think it's really important that we get everybody's input. So, let me start with Sean and then I'm going to go to
005Jackie afterwards if it's okay. Yeah, from what I I absolutely totally agree with everything that you just said and, you know, reviewing the information or reviewing the added verbiage um in regards to the differences of opinion and controversial topics. I I have absolutely no issue with adopting um adopting that into our into our laws. So, um I'm I'm just uh refreshing it. But as far as right now, uh I have absolutely no problem with what I see. Okay. I don't think I've done anything to it in a few days. Actually, I might be wrong. I forget stuff, but I just cruising through it. But everything that I do have from what has been I'm I'm I love the idea of what you're just what you're saying. I'm I'm glad to hear that. Um Jackie, any
006questions or concerns or any ideas? Tell us what your reaction is, please. Um I have a few concerns um just with some of the things. I'll start with uh the employee use of social media. Um hang on, I got to find it. Do you know what page that's on? I don't. I'm on my phone. Yeah, it's tough for me. Number three or page five. Okay, here it is. Yeah, go ahead. Tell us what the what you're thinking. My concern where it says it requires employees to include disclaimers when expressing personal opinions on personal accounts. I feel like that could get really mucky um from anywhere on the spectrum of anything political if if an employee well say for myself I know I'm not an employee but as board of education member if I'm speaking for
007myself I'm speaking for myself and I think that should be expected of the staff as well um I don't think that should be a requirement for a staff member on outside of school hours on their own personal account to have to say every post that could be considered controversial to anybody a disclaimer. Okay, if that makes sense. I think it's sense. If they're personal, then there's no reason to identify that you worked wherever you might work. I I don't disagree with you either. Um I I left most of it untouched as you could see. Uh Sean, you had a a comment? No, I was just saying I agree with that statement for sure. And then just to kind of go off of that, under employee conduct, it says require that employees avoid any actions that
008could create a perception of the district's endorsement when engaging in political, religious, or social activities outside of work. Again, if they're outside of work, they're on their own personal time, and they're not wearing like a I work at East Hatam schools t-shirt, it's their own business. For example, like I'm just going to throw this out like me and Sean. Like Sean attends political things. I attend political things. It has nothing to do with my and Sean's ability to work with the district and it it's kept separate. So I think we should have the same expectation of our staff and teachers that if they want to engage in religious, political, social activities outside of the school day in the in the day and that's on them and it should not transfer over to how they're doing
009in the district. I think you're saying the same thing that's actually here because you just said like they could be wearing all gear that's all identifying the district. So that would be that's what this is really referring to that you're not somehow out there wearing all identifiable district gear because then that will give the perception. I think what you're saying and what this says are the same. Okay. I think my concern with it was that say I was at a rally for saving the bears. Yeah. And you know our community really wants to hunt bears because the bears are eating our crops just because I'm there I'm concerned could be perceived that I am endorsing it. But if we're all on the same page that it's pretty explicit, then I have no concerns. Yeah. I
010I think your um how do I say this? I think your concern is justified but not wellounded. And what I mean is that I agree with what you're thinking, but all this does is say is you can't take any action that explicitly makes it look like it's an endorsement of something. If you're at that bear thing that you were talking about and um it says, you know, I'm a teacher at in East Adam school system or I'm a board member and therefore then that's a problem. You're taking an action that makes it look like an endorsement. If you're just there doing your thing, you're just there doing your thing and it's got nothing to do with you. And I don't think this polic this line of the policy really um I don't think it impinges
011on people in the same way as the one you mentioned prior. I think the one you mentioned prior as I was listening to you, it felt a little bit to me almost like prior restraint. Um, I will say that when I put things on Facebook that are politically oriented in anything local, I always say although I'm on the board of ed, I have no right to speak for the board of ed and this is just me saying what I'm saying. Um, right. I think it's a good practice to have. I just would wouldn't want it to be a punishable offense. I agree with you. I I I completely agree with you. I don't have any problem with that first change. The second one I I'm I don't I think what you're concerned about is understandable,
012but I don't think it actually applies. No, because they can go to any event they want. It's just don't present as if you're presenting for the district. That's the only thing. Chris, did you have something? I totally agree. I'm What's in my brain is the worst case scenario. What's in my brain is if something is said done in the political platform, either social media or in an event, then maybe you're not wearing East End public school anything. But when it what impact will it have on the classroom and does it affect your ability to maintain order for lack of a better term in your classroom? You know what I'm saying? Yeah. But that's not something we can like theorize like that. If that were be to become a disruption in the school level, we would
013have to identify and address it individually. Well, that that's what I'm saying. Is this prevent us from doing that at all? addressing on an I don't no I don't I don't think it does that. Um the other thing I would add Chris is if for example um a teacher is flaming somebody locally politically um for personal reasons and brings it into the classroom that's a problem. If they flame someone locally for political reasons for their own stuff and don't bring it up in the classroom, if somebody else does, that's on somebody else for bringing it into the classroom. Okay. So, you're saying you're going to strike bullet point two. Is that correct? Up on top where it says employee use of social media, right? Bullet bullet. I'm saying I'm okay with that if that's what
014you I'm in 100% agreement. Okay. Um, Terry, are you okay with that? I am fine. All right. Um, are you okay, Jackie, with us leaving the second one as it is? Yes. Thank you for helping me um understand that. So, yes, I'm good. Jackie, you know, we don't always agree on things, but you ask really good questions, and I don't want you to stop. Um, any She won't. She won't. Good. Damn. Did I say that out loud? I'm kidding. Um, the scarity. Any questions, concerns, thoughts? Yes. All right. So, my first just go back. Jackie covered a lot of what I was concerned about. So, thank you, Jackie. Um, in the paragraph that is on page under curriculum and instruction, if we could put the word factual in front of balanced page what? On page
015two. Oh, the second paragraph. Teacher shall so you want to replace the word balanced with factual. No, no, both. She wants both. I have no problem with that. And the the addition I know what you're trying to say here. I think it might not be 100% clear to a lot of folks because it's almost like a double negative. It says this does not require teachers to provide misinformation or disinformation. It's it's it's like a double negative. there's a if we could kind of clarify this. Well, if if you have an alternative phrasing, you know what I'm like. I I don't have any problem being edited. Yeah. I What I'm thinking is um something along the lines of while differing opinions should be presented, teachers are not required to include or validate misinformation or disinformation. Does
016that make sense? That's fine with me. It doesn't. But why would you give validation? Why would that word be there if you're saying don't include it? So in other words, if it we're explicitly saying you can't do that, you can't do that, you shouldn't do that. It it's almost the same as what's written here except it just clarifies it a little bit more. We can totally omit it if it I don't I I won't lie to you. I don't think it clarifies anything, but I'm also not offended by the change either. If you took out that first sentence and it's changed that this does not include and if you started off your your sentence with when information does or includes misinformation or disinformation, teachers are expected to share corrected information. That that would be fine.
017Yes. I I'm pretty Do you see what I'm saying? I'm not I'm not disagreeing, but I didn't quite catch the wording. So, take away your first sentence that starts with this and ends topics. Hang on. Um starts with this and ends with what? Topics. That first sentence. So, the whole first sentence does not require teachers to provide misinformation or disinformation what they're saying. So, delete the second sentence in the paragraph. Oh, and then you're going to start with when information includes misinformation or disinformation. Teachers are expected to share corrected information in written or verbal form. See, I I guess my problem is I don't want them presenting the misinformation or disinformation in the first place. I don't want them to correct it because I don't want it to be in the classroom. But if it's
018a student, so in high school in the history classes, there's a lot of teachers teachers not presenting that. We're talking about what the teachers presenting here. But what about when the students are presetting misinformation? I would assume that they would know that they need to correct it if you think that we need to make that more explicit. Oh, I see what you're Okay. Because this is a direction of what teachers do. So you don't even need that, right? You don't even need that whole thing. Yeah. So you don't even need those sentences because you already put in there factual balance perspectives. So you don't need any of that in the grade. Is that what you're saying? That is what I'm saying. and the fact that if they do present that information or it somehow gets
019presented in class that they have the wherewithal to immediately correct any misinformation. I mean it would be an assumption but I mean if everybody feels that we need the language then we should put it in there. I could go either way. Well um but that's why I you guys know me. I don't die on hills for this stuff. If you're asking me my preference, I put it in there for a reason. If people don't want it, it's a committee. It's not my universal decision. We'll do what the committee wants. I think I hear what you're saying. You're saying, don't take it as an opportunity to start to present this is misinformation. this is disinformation to really just focus on the factual balance perspective as opposed to highlighting other I think that's what you were trying
020to say maybe would yeah well there's out in the world we'll put it that way there's lots of people saying things that are untrue and there's lots of media that says well to be balanced we have to present both you don't you know when when a when A guy is uh talking about the weather and he says it's clear outside and somebody says no it's rainy. He you don't present both. You look out the window. Exactly. I have an idea. What if we were to Okay, let's go back to the sentence that Patty just talked about. What if we were to say it in a a different way? Any non-factual information that arises, whether it's from the teacher or the student, will be promptly corrected by the teacher, either verbally or in writing. I don't
021want the teacher presented incorrect information in the first place. I I want no part of that because that's just a license for teachers to then get into their own political views and and that's what I'm trying to avoid. You know, I hear you. Can I say something real quick? Yeah, absolutely. Um, so as I'm listening to this, I'm thinking back to previous policies that we've worked on that stated that like on topics that could be considered controversial or a little bit of like a a hot button issue in general that all sides should be presented whether it's religion or etc etc. This how it's written to me contradicts that. um saying that we shouldn't offer all views. And Jim, I hear what you're saying is we don't want teachers presenting misinformation. We also need I
022feel need to give them some space to be like, okay, you heard that. I'm sure that's what some people believe, but the facts are the facts. Um I disagree with your interpretation respectfully. Okay. And here's why. Um, I'm not saying you can't present controversial information with different views. I'm saying you can't prevent present stuff that's nonsense. Those are two different things. I'll give you an example. You know, I was an English teacher for a long time and I read more term papers, persuasive term papers about why people should or should not be able to have an abortion or why guns should or should not be allowed and and all those hot button issues. Those were backed by whatever facts they came up with and they were opinion pieces and they were controversial views. What they
023weren't was saying things that weren't true and they weren't allowed to. If they couldn't be, you know, I used to tell kids all the time, your argument is only as good as the evidence you can present to it. And evidence isn't, well, this is what I think. That's not evidence. That's an opinion. That's a different thing entirely. Um, and I don't think that telling people they can't present things that are inaccurate or untrue uh is is I don't think that's a bad thing. And I'm also concerned about the idea that um I could imagine a scenario in which someone from the right presents something um in a classroom and then im or someone you know and then immediately pres presents why it's wrong. What are the factual problems? It looks like a setup. I'm just
024trying to embarrass the people who believe this. I'd rather not go there in the first place. Let's just talk about what's real. Well, they're going to be citing sources is what I'm hearing you say, right? So, if if Well, they may be citing sources. Patty's right. Kids bring up what they bring up. Yes, that's true. And you can say that's not our topic. That's We're going to focus on the learning target for today. You can certainly redirect. That happens all the time. Even with little ones, that's notorious for the little ones. They have all kinds of stories to share really. And we don't really want to know what you know might happen in your home. They they disclose a whole lot of stuff. But um they're cute. But so I think they really do. But
025um you do have teachers shall provide factual balance perspective. So what Jackie was just talking about that sentence right there aligns with the previous policy. What I'm hearing Jim say is there should not be an effort to raise issues and actually highlight misinformation and disinformation. Like let's stick to the factual balanced perspectives. I mean that's that's my hope. Um I don't think we need all this extra information in here. You want me to delete the stuff in green? I think, you know, I'm gonna go with the consensus of the group on this. Whatever you guys want. I I I just I'm I think that when you're looking at your elementary and your middle school, Yes. When I'm thinking about classes in psychology, philosophy, philosophy is full of total, you know, different parts, you know, and
026psychology too. They use researcher. So there's research that comes forward with that though, right? So, you know, there are groups that believe in Darwism, there are groups that don't. And like you could say that's misinformation and it's it actually is misinformation. I don't want it in the classroom. It's misinformation. The creationism is a religious belief Patty. It is not a fact. So but when you are talking in psychology theory is a theory like you're gonna theory. So I think it you just have to be careful and I think it's really on on high school level and especially when you get into science I I'm not as worried about history is history like you know what happened but when you come to science and they're discovering new things and you know genetic I I honestly don't
027see how this has anything to do with science at all and I don't mean that rudely. Science is science is like math. It's black and white. It either is or it isn't within the realms of what we know now. And then tomorrow we're going to learn something new. That's what it is. Science is constantly changing. It's this theory is believable today until somebody disproves it. Right. And that's why we're always always adapting to science and this doesn't prevent that at all. Right. Right. And so you're looking at the research. You're looking at the research. Why do people believe whatever it is? Well, here's the research behind that. Why do people believe whatever that is? Here's the research. That's because we study world religions like when they're younger. We study a lot of things. So, you
028have to look at the sources as opposed to my opinion, your opinion. It's based and grounded in text and sources. Yeah. So, Chris, I'm gonna ask you one more question. And I'm playing devil's advocate here for seventh and eighth grade when they are doing um a a large concentration or at least they used to in the Middle East. There's so many controversial opinions on I mean it was it was a very very hot topic when my kids were in there. I because the teacher the teachers were teaching history, but there was such a strong concentration from the parents saying that this is not factual. So, I think you're just going to have to look with some of this as it comes up to the question. You said you were going to ask Chris a question.
029Where's the question? Oh, the the question is how are you going to be dealing with some of that? Because when you're looking at that curriculum in seventh and eighth for that world history, it it's very controversial. Well, I I can't seventh and eth would be the the middle school. So, I don't necessarily review those that curriculum, those standards, but I would imagine that as teachers are approaching those units and those things, they're having conversations with their administration to make sure that they're presenting factual information. That's right. from both sides. Yeah, that's devil's advocacy coming up factual. As long as evidence is presented in a balanced way that's backed by evidence that's backed by actual facts, then I don't see any issue with it. I that's kind of and there's always multiple perspectives. the example you
030just gave, right? I think what you're talking about if is if there was a complete ignoring of a perspective or of a people's and you're only focused, for example, under current events is what I'm hearing. Not how a nation evolved in populations and geography. That's not what you're talking about. You're talking about potential current conflict and the discussions are happening in with in the history class. But I I think it'll it would be fine. This would address all of that. And if a parent ever has an issue, they please we would want them to they follow the normal reach out chain of command to reach out and find out what they're concerned about. Absolutely. Talk to the teacher. If that's not satisfactory, you go to the principal. If that's not satisfactory, you go to the
031superintendent. That's and and you have to remember Patty for what little this is worth. Um the neutrality policy is going to be new for us. But the problem that you're discussing has been out there since approximately 2 AD. And I just know that I know that there's been so many controversial conversations in regard to that, but that's more of like a curriculum and what you're and you're right, kids will say things we we're not going to put a muzzle on them. And so it's how we interact when that is presented, right? And that's that's the critical aspect, you know, the respectful manner and does it align to the learning target. How is it presented? Like it's so contextually based that I can't even just like randomly think of one. Like all the details come up
032with an example. All the details matter. Context matters. Like we would address it individually should it come up. And and teachers are supposed to be professional enough to to be able to deal with it. Sure. Sure. Absolutely. I I can remember a English teacher who I had just hired plunking himself down in my office and saying, "I'm gay. Is that a problem for you? And I looked at him and I said, I don't know. Is it a problem for you? I said, my sexuality does not belong in this office. Your sexuality doesn't belong in your classroom. Other than that, I don't care. None of my business. All right. So, um, oh, I still have comments. Okay. Can we just finish this one piece off, though? Of course. All right. Can we just um, whatever the
033consensus is, just tell me. You want to leave the green language in there or do you want to delete it? Sean, what do you think? I prefer to leave it. Jackie. Jackie, just thinking, can you come back to me? Sure. Um, Jerry, I would prefer to delete it because we're already saying what should happen, pro providing factual perspectives that are balanced. So, whichever side it is, they need to present the facts. Patty, do you have any strong feelings either way? You're not officially a member, but you are the board of ed chairman, so you're an ex official member. What the hell? I I think that you are saying the same thing when you're adding in the word factual balance. Okay. And Chris, any insight? Uh I think you're I think the statement when you add
034in the words factual balance kind of hit home the statement. So I don't know if the green is necessary. Okay, Jackie. [Music] Sorry. Um, I I don't think that we need the green edition. I think it covered it enough with the blue. Well, um, that presents us potentially with a little bit of a dilemma because we're split two two. So, I'm gonna recuse myself and say we shrike it because I don't see any value in um in in frankly I don't see more any value in investing more time in the conversation. I do understand the value of adding the word factual. So, are you okay with that, Sean? Can you live with that? Yes. Yes, I can. All right. So, we lost that one. Sean, we'll live through the horror. Okay. Go ahead. Next. Okay.
035And just to say that like if we because again this is a brand new policy that we don't have. If the admins and the teachers and students and community find that like there needs to be more specific language, we can absolutely revisit this and and do what's needed then. I think this is a really good jumping off point to start this. I I think you're exactly correct. Thank you. Go ahead. What else you got for us? Okay. bottom of page four under professional conduct, we have two sentences, two bullet points that are stricken, one is notify parents and guardians when controversial topics are scheduled to be addressed in the classroom and the other is provide opportunities for parents and guardians to review curriculum materials and submit feedback or concerns. In my opinion, I I kind
036of like that Cabe included this as part of their uh curriculum or as part of their suggestion because in my viewpoint, parents have the right to know and see what's being discussed in any classroom. Well, um I I'll tell you why I struck it. Um and this might be a hill I'm willing to die on a little bit. Um, I think teachers and educators are paid to be professionals and make decisions about this stuff. I am not against parents knowing what's going on. I am not suggesting that generalized policies about, for example, publishing a syllabus that says these are the things we're planning on. I have no problem with those kinds of things. The way this language reads, teacher is planning something for Thursday and by Wednesday night has to tell every parent and then
037wonder what's going to happen. I want no part of that. That is essentially giving parents prior restraint over the educational process. I think it's disrespectful to the profession and I think it's really bad policy. It is bowing down to whichever side might choose to raise hell about something before you ever go anywhere. And I I do feel strongly about that one. I just it's it's in the law. Connecticut law mandates that local programs include regular contact with parents, including opportunities to review their child's curriculum, develop strategies for parental involvement. policy though it's under connect stat section 10-4G and 10-184 outlines parents roles in their children's education including curriculum review so I don't think CA like arbitrarily put but a parent could so I I mean but this policy doesn't prevent that from being activated it
038just not having that language there doesn't draw attention and and and say here come and tell us what you're saying. Yeah. We're not saying you can't do it. We're saying this is not part of the policy. It's covered somewhere else. Understood. However, if if if I'm just looking at it from the vantage point, say that discussion takes place and parents didn't know about it in advance and the kids go home and say, "We talked about this today, blah blah blah." and that parent then goes on Facebook, which we all know has happened in the past. All I'm saying is it would be prudent. I mean, we're not teachers aren't planning, and Chris, correct me if I'm wrong. How far in advance is curriculum planned? It's not the night before. It's planned well in advance. Not
039curriculum lessons. The daily lessons different. She is talking about curriculum like when you know what are the big ideas that are going to be discussed what are the standards right like everybody knows that well in advance exactly but but Jim did say it could it really should be in the syllabus there at openhouse when you come in and you find out what is my kid going to learn this year all of that should be outlined there shouldn't be an effort to um prevent the parent from having the knowledge of what's going to be taught this year. I agree with that. Um my concern is how that language could be interpreted. As I said, essentially giving parents a right of prior restraint. So could we clarify it in a way that states, you know what, let's
040get some of the people from the TV talking here. I'm not trying to I just I don't want to interrupt, but I don't want to lose No, go ahead. Go ahead. Working with similar to Terry. So, I think that the notifying parents when controversial topics are scheduled to be addressed in the classroom is going to be impossible unless we have a district-wide list of what those controversial topics are to know what is considered controversial because what again I use me and Sean all the time. What I find controversial and what Sean would find controversial for our first graders to learn might be different. And because of that, how would our first graders teacher notify us that they're going to be learning something controversial? So, that I think is just going to be opening up a
041can of worms that it's just not going to be possible. That being said, definitely we need to keep in there providing opportunities for parents and guardians to to review materials, ask questions, get involved. We know that those options are out there. This just clarifies even more that yes, there are those pathways to be involved and know with what your kids are learning. And to what think uh to what Terry said, if I was a parent that I had a list of topics that I did not want my child to be discussing in school, I think it would be probably more than okay for me to reach out to my my children's teachers and say, "These topics are things that I don't want my child to be a part of. Please remove them." So, I don't
042know if I'm too much off base, but I just think unless we're willing to create a solid district list of what is considered a controversial topic, there's no way to notify and and I that's a better explanation of why I'm so against this language. That's a much better explanation than I came up with. Sean, what have you got? I would have to agree with exactly what Jackie said. I I and and yourself. Um I don't like the uh notify parents guardians. I just think that can open up a can of worms. I don't think that um is necessary. But I al in so that as far as that statement but to provide opportunities again I know where where we do give opportunities and that is mentioned but I don't think that statement hurts to just
043in um you know reinforce and the the fact that we do have other pathways for feedback and uh opportunities but you know I don't like the nitpicking of you know the the micromanaging I don't need to know on a Wednesday and because it kind of gives ammo to uh a parent to open up an opportunity to make an issue. Um I agree and I it occurs to me that there may be a fairly simple way to wordsmith this a little bit so that everybody gets what they need. And if you give me a couple of minutes, I'm going to try that right now if it's okay. Sure. Well, and just real quick because I know that I had so Gabe has a policy for controversial topics um that we don't have and I've been wordsmithing
044it a little bit and I know I sent it to Jim but it wasn't a priority obviously because we're all these other things. I think perhaps after this neutrality policy, it might be worth us going into that controversial topics policy that gives more specific language to the roles and expectations of admins, teachers, students, and their families at home that connects everybody to have to know where to go when they have an issue, how to address it. So, that might be something to look forward to like to work on in the next couple months. Um, I I don't again I don't think you're wrong. Um, give me two seconds. I got an idea here. All right. My concern like like um Jackie's is founded on the idea that um you really can't come up with a
045definitive list that is in any way meaningful and also the idea that I don't want teachers hamstrung because something comes up in the news and they want to address it tomorrow morning and you know it's just nuts. So here's what I'm suggesting based on some of this feedback and you guys can tell me if this works. This policy requires teachers to provide syllabi or other documentation at the beginning of each and then we need to choose year, unit, quarter, whatever you guys think is best um of planned curricular work. Parents retain the right to examine curriculum upon request. So, you're going to change you're going to keep out the first bullet point that's in red and you're going to exchange the last That's where I'm offering. That's what I'm offering. Can you repeat that, please?
046Yes. Actually, um, it would replace both of them. Okay. Okay. This policy requires teachers to provide syllabi or other documentation at the beginning of each and then like I said we decide what the term is going to be um of planned curricular work parents retain the right to examine curriculum upon request. Isn't that already another policy? I think that is I don't know but if the concern is that cutting it you want both that's the you know if the concern is that cutting out the language that I don't like um is maybe creating a conflicting policy where you know it's acceptable here but it's not acceptable there. I don't think that's the case but if that's the concern I don't have any problem explicitly stating what we all know to be true. It's the law
047that parents can see the curriculum. So, is everybody opposed to uh at the beginning of the school year providing at least a general outline of what's going to be discussed in the class? No, I'm not opposed to happen at the open house. Isn't that's what we do? So, that's what she's saying to kick that off at the beginning. I don't think you need these two because I think the ones in red, right? I don't think I don't either. number two because that is covered in another policy. I think that's under your curriculum and and stuff. Like I said, I I didn't want them. So, I'm just trying to make people happy. I I'm sorry. I am not comfortable with this at all. If the group feels that this is the way to go, then, you
048know, obviously I will accept it. But I'm sorry. I'm I have a serious problem with anything that doesn't provide any notice to families if if even if it comes up in the news. I know and I understand exactly what you're saying. Sometimes it's impossible because things happen so quickly. I get that. But there's got to be a way to provide even if at the beginning of the year you put a bullet point at the bottom of that curriculum page that says is there you know this is how we will handle topics that come up in the news. If they choose to include it in the curricular in the lesson plan for that day or that week, then parents have the right to reach out and discuss it with that teacher and do it in a
049one-on-one basis as to how they want it to affect their family. Does the substitute section that I just read to you, which requires prior notice, and I said just pick whatever term you want, does that satisfy your concerns? because it's not explicit enough. What would be more explicit? Where is it in our curriculum, in our um policies that we do go over some of this? Because I know that when you you have the right to pull your child out of there are very specific ones legislated that is legislated of when a child can miss lessons and what policy speaks to that for Terry's concern. I I just don't remember offhand and that one's very specific. I said to only certain right it's not an open you said open whatever I have a question sure go
050for it um I'm just is because I'm just having a hard time with um you know it seems like we'd be putting a lot of onus on the teacher and especially if to you know to notify with a controversial seems like we're putting a lot of onus on each individual teacher to understand what may or may not be a controversial topic. Is there a list of controversial topics somewhere? And like Jackie said earlier, what may be controversial to one is not to another. So forth and so on. So by getting so micromanaged just again here is the curriculum. If you have any questions, feel free to ask, talk about it, whatever. But to get so specific on you know notifying when controversial topic is I mean what is that and by each teacher is gonna
051well decides what's controversial and what's not. I I completely understand what everyone is saying. What I'm saying is and you're right Sean it can be interpreted many different ways. What I'm saying is if at the beginning of the school year we can have a blurb on that sheet of curriculum that we are letting families know that if in the event something that is perceived as controversial should come up then that parent can reach out to the teacher. That's not putting the onus on the teacher. That's putting the onus on the family. I'm just What if controversial? I'm just sorry. I'm just controversial. I mean, is you is that somebody should be putting something out right now in the high school because of the tariffs? I mean, letting somebody know. I mean, what's controvert? So, I'm
052just trying to understand. That's part of why I really don't want any part of this. Um, and I think you're right, Sean. It you're we're putting a lot of potentially a lot of burden on teachers. And not only is it a burden in just a general sense of how do I manage this and what do I do um when you put something in policy if a teacher fails to follow that policy now they can be disciplined. So what happens if I'm teaching in my English class and I go to address something and I don't see it as being controversial. It doesn't even occur to me that I need to notify parents, but some parent goes wacko on it and gets really angry. Maybe even justifiably, maybe I should have had better judgment, but that's, you
053know, now this person's u at risk for discipline or worse because of a disagreement like that. I I I just don't like it. It just Can I ask a question? Sure. How are we dealing with and I know this has come up again I think at the middle school level the higher middle school level when you are reading books and a um parent or a child is objectionable to that book and I think we have that at the high school too. How do we deal with that now? because that kind of speaks to what what we're doing with controversial issues or topics. Do you know Chris? Um how are we dealing with the controversial books? Yeah. Like if a student doesn't want if my recollection is in seventh and eighth grade if they were going
054to read a book and you found it to be objectionable as a parent, the teacher would work with you and you'd get a different book. And I don't know what happened. I think those are very individual Yeah. cases. Um but does that speak to this? because that's kind of like, you know, I'm just I'm playing devil's advocate trying to help, you know, understand Terry's concern. I I think she's really looking for um an overview at the beginning of the school year that identifies what the kids are going to be learning that year in that course. What are my kids going to learn? What are the topics of instruction? That's all that's all I'm hearing. That's all I'm looking for. I don't know what you're saying other than then tell me this is at the beginning
055of the school year. This is not teachers notifying every single time a topic comes up during a lesson plan. Okay, this is the beginning of the school year. Here's the question then. If that's what you're looking for, why doesn't um a a policy language that requires a sylli or other documentation at the beginning of whatever term I said you guys wanted, why does that not satisfy the concern? what you said it wasn't it wasn't explicit enough. Go ahead, Jackie. Again, I know I said it before. This policy that we're working on right now is not just controversial issues. It's all it's all-encompassing. There is a policy that we can work on and adopt that is just controversial issues that we could iron out all of these details that would be a separate policy connected to
056this one. We don't need to all the meat and potatoes into this policy when it's already out there like Cape already has one that I've worked on and I'd love to, you know, have that show up and if we even means tableabling this until we get the other one so that they can code together so that it's all covered for everybody's concerns. I just don't think this is the policy to put all that into. I I personally I have no interest in tableabling this. Um, I h also have no problem revising it if we learn from experience or addressing related issues in a separate policy if if that's okay. Um, what I want to do right now, we spent a lot of time on on this one bit and um I think we need to
057just we have other things we got to get to. We need to move forward. Um, so I'm going to ask um I would like to strike those two sentences. um the the sec the red bullet points and then you guys can tell me if you want me to add the bullet that I just wrote as a compromise. Sean, um are you okay with striking those two sentences? Yes. Jackie. Yes. Okay. Um I know you're uncomfortable. My vote is yes, so they're gone. Do you want me to add in the the line, this policy requires teachers to provide syllabi blah blah blah? Do you want me to add that into the policy? Sean, um I do not think it hurts, so I would say yes. Okay. And Jackie, um I I don't think it's necessary. That
058being said, if that is a compromise to make uh everybody more comfortable going forward, then I'm for it. Okay. Do you want me to add? Yes. All right. And you said year, so I'll use year as the term. Is that fine? Where would you use that? This policy requires teachers to provide syllabi or other documentation at the beginning of each and then I had options year, unit, quarter, whatever you wanted. beginning of the year. I would say beginning of the year or beginning of the course because if it's a semester course that changing at the beginning of course that makes more sense right for high school in particular. Okay. Um so I'm going to move on from there. Do you have others Terry? Uh yes under employee use of social media. Okay. I agree with
059exactly what Jackie said. So we can um where is it? Require employees to include disclaimers. That line. Yeah. Yeah, that's already removed. Okay. So the first one, that first bullet, prohibit employees from using district affiliated accounts or platforms to advocate for or against political, religious, or social ideologies. Oh, you know what? My note is in the wrong place. that strike that I put the note in the wrong place. It was It should be under clubs and organizations. Um, where did I put it? Ah, okay. This is where it is. Under number four, if you go down to the the next section, guidelines for school sponsored activities and events, um that second bullet point, avoid scheduling events or activities they that may appear to endorse political, religious, or other personally held ideologies. Um, I kind of
060want to expand on that a little bit because there's some organizations that claim to be secular but they still have ties to religious ideologies. So, if we could add what language do you want to add? I guess that would be a great sentence in itself or add in or those claiming to be secular with ties to religious or social ideologies. Let me ask you a question and now I'm becoming uh out of here playing devil's advocate. Um, what about there are religious organizations out there that provide service to communities and and and I think that some go into schools and provide beneficial services and um assemblies and things like that. If they're not procilitizing while they're doing those things, do we want to lose the support? Are we willing to risk that? If you're talking
061about total neutrality, I'm wondering if we allow those groups in, then other groups are going to claim or could claim the same thing. Well, again, it in my view, in my understanding, it would come down to what are they actually doing? If they're coming in, they're proitizing, the answer is no. If you're coming in, you're providing a service and you happen to have a viewpoint or a religious persuasion or, you know, whatever it is, um, then their religion um is kind of beside the point, just like a teacher ought to be able to post something on Facebook on her own page for herself and not have us looking at her and saying, "You can't do that." where you have to have a constant I am not speaking for my district line. You know, we agreed
062that um is as long as the other things are okay. I I don't I don't want them doing what you're concerned about. I don't disagree with you at all. I uh Let me think for a minute. I I think what I'm concerned about is because there might be a perception out there that if a particular religious group or even a non-religious group that is secular but religious may have a religious title for for example um what's to prevent anyone from thinking well wait a second they just denied my group the ability to go go in and we're not going to do anything secular but at or anything promotizing religious anything but then you allow this other group to come in and they are religiousbased. Well, again for me it comes down to what's the content
063of what you're doing. Um, and as a former administrator, um, I've had to have those kinds of conversations and sometimes people get mad at you because they disagree and you know what? Welcome to our world. So, how do you Secretary of the Navy before he came to speak? Is there a way to uh I I guess what I'm getting at is not opening up a can of worms or Pandora's box by not having a clearer language that speaks to I mean I like the fact that they wrote educational mission um because it is actionbased to your point. So, I don't know. I I almost feel like we need a little bit more language in there that clarifies not protizing. Um I again, you know what I'm like, give me the language and we'll talk about
064it. I'm not sure exactly what would make you happy. What I will tell you, um I think what do I want to say? Um, I'm as concerned about making that kind of an overt statement, praising hell as not because it's going to look to some people like we're against religion. You're anti- relligion. You're trying to you know what I mean? I I that makes me nervous in the same way that what you're talks about makes me nervous. But I'm not unwilling to look at the language. Just tell us what what you would substitute or add or you know whatever it is you want. Preapproval for guest speakers presentations. Well, I I do like the fact that it requires pre preapproval. So maybe an action uh something that speaks to the action. I'm just trying to
065think of how to wordsmith this concern that it's going to align to one of these because the first bullet says requires preapproval to align with the educational mission here polic If there was a way to add in language that speaks to um aligning with the educational mission in purpose and action and adhere to the neutrality policy. Okay, if that would clarify it for me. In purpose and action, just those four words. Yep. In purpose and action, right after educational mission and then get rid of the second bullet. Yes. All right. Um, we were talking originally I thought about the line under clubs and organizations because that's what you had originally cited and now we're moving up to event planning. It was under guidelines for school sponsored activities, right? But she had mentioned clubs and organizations
066at one point, right? So that's what I Yeah. event planning. Event planning. I think I missed something there. My apologies. No worries. Right after the first bullet, educational mission in purpose and action and adhere to the neutrality policy. Okay. And then you want to get rid of the next bullet. I'm not a We can leave it. We can leave it. You don't need to change. Sean, are you okay with that change? Yes. Okay. Um, what about the language that you were originally looking at under clubs and organizations? Are you okay with it? I'm okay with it. Okay, good. Anything else? That is it. That's all I have. All right. Sean, did you have anything? No, I did not. All right. I have one question for you. Sure. Does where in your policy does it say
067anything about um um political signs or um personal things like that in the classroom by the employee? That's in definitely in a different policy. I can't remember because I was looking at that in uh The board of education and its employees shall avoid endorsing or opposing political candidates, parties, or partisan political initiatives when acting in official capacity. You can't put something up in your classroom that violates that. So you do you have Well, I read you what's there. If you want to add something, I don't have a problem with that. I But to me, it's covered, you know. Um right under policy guidelines a page page. Um hang on. Oh page one policy guidelines. Yeah it's the first policy you're the first page. You're talking about images. Yeah. I'm talking about you know you can't
068have you know your right your photos of you and whoever up in your classroom or definitely something I can't remember because I was looking at that not long ago. I can't remember. I don't have it in front of me, but it's you know definitely in a different um what was it under? Dang it was more specific to the what you're talking about. All right, let me suggest a slight revision here. You guys can tell me if it's okay. Um, the board of education and its employees shall avoid endorsing or opposing political candidates, parties, or partisan political initiatives when acting in an official capacity, including by posting or displaying such items in the classroom or workspace because it should or even in the school in general, district building. And I'm sorry, where are we looking under?
069What are It's on page one. We're displaying such items in the classroom or schools. And and I want to add to that if we're going to make the list, I want to have it say such items in the classroom, comma, schools, or board offices. Should that go in employee conduct at the bottom of page two? Um Yes, I I think this is a generalized statement and I think it's worth, you know, if we're looking again, I think it's worth having that broader application if we're going to make that point for what that's worth. Jim, what what does the list include? Pictures. Here, I'll read it to you again. Um, the board of education and its employees shall avoid endorsing or opposing political candidates, parties, or partisan political initiatives when acting in an official capacity, including
070by posting or displaying such items. So, I'm leaving it open anything that does that, such items in the classroom, schools, or board offices. Does that work? Yep. Patty, is that working? Yep, that works. Okay. All right. Um, can I have a motion to move this forward to the full board? So, move. Second. All right. Um, I'm not sure what happened to Jackie. She seems to have dropped out. Um, so we'll have to vote without her, but we have quorum, so we can. Um, can I uh call for a vote? Uh, all in favor say I. I. I. And me too. So that's three. And I believe there was under advertising. Uh, it definitely addresses things about signage. And it it definitely does. You're right. Third party stuff. Okay, let's um see if we can go
071on to the next thing and that will be um this is uh policy that uh Terry Gity had wanted to address and uh took the lead on. So you've got, you know, uh, the original policy, meaning the one that's currently on our books, and then I put the cave policy in and added what are mostly, um, Terry Gar's edits, and I had one or two things that I did, too. Um, and Terry was nice enough to add some language just as an explainer, not that it would stay in the policy, but just to clarify things. So, um, Sean, do you have any things about this that you want to talk about? Any questions or concerns? Um, actually, I'm not as familiar with this one as I'd like to. Don't have any comment at this moment.
072Okay. If you can skip me for the moment. Okay. Um, Cherry, you have anything you want to tell us? Uh, no. other than uh hoping we tighten up what CAB has wonderfully began. Um that's it. Oh, on page 15 under exclusionary timeout, um the definition of seclusion at the top means the involuntary confinement, but there's language added about explosionary exclusionary timeout becomes involuntary. Page 15. Yeah, 14. It's on 14. Sorry. I don't know why on mine it's different, but that's all right. Exclusionary timeout in the green. When exclusionary timeout becomes involuntary, it's already defined above it. Seclusion means involuntary confinement. Well, um this was Terry's addition. I believe disagreeing. Yes. The reason why I added that was just to make it abundantly clear that it becomes seclusion. That it becomes seclusion. Okay. The reason I
073also added it was I attended a um a training at the state level and this was actually in their presentation. Um if the team wants to see a copy of it, I'm happy to to forward that. No, no, it's it it it meets I'm just saying the definition was at the top. That's anytime it becomes involuntary confinement, it's seclusion. Yep. Okay. Can I ask you a question, Terry? Sure. If an exclusionary timeout becomes involuntary at any point in time, this constitutes seclusion. Wouldn't it be wise to say and follows all protocol and say must be reported? Don't you want to follow all protocol? That's what she's saying. The protocol is to report. I think I'm saying is you're just saying must be reported. I'm saying follow all protocol. Why don't we say must be reported
074and follow all opposed to it. So I'm going to add to it and follow all seclusion protocols. Okay. And then I added something um since we're looking at this uh this was something I added based on descriptions of issues that have come up um in the district from special needs parents I've talked to as well as Terry. Um, so I added the line. Each such determination will be documented with contemporaneous notes stating the time and marked with the initials of the person making that docu or that determination because I think there have been problems in the past where things haven't been properly documented and um, since she was calling things out to be explicit, I decided to join her in that venture. And just to add to that, Jim, in uh on page 16 in
075section F, it kind of explains what you just said, so it goes into a little bit more detail so that people understand what the law is. So, thank you. No problem. Now, just for the record, um at the on page 16 at the top, you got a bunch of language in purple. Again, that's stuff that is intended to explain um what um Terry was adding and that comes out before it actually becomes policy before it even goes to the full board. Right. Right. And one thing I just wanted to add to that, I uh in hindsight, I should have also added that the law only provides for notification, not consent. So, just keep that in mind. That's why this I wrote all this stuff, put in the uh the site just so that it puts
076it into context for everybody. Any other um questions or anything else you want to tell us or um Terry? Nope. That would be it. All right. Take a look at page 18 if you don't mind. Um Terry had added school medical staff to the required trainings and I was making a point. I don't have any problem with that at all. But just understand that when we do that, we are incurring costs because the the nurses have to get paid for that time. So if you guys are willing to incur that cost, which I don't think is a bad idea, just make sure you realize that's what you're doing. Well, I mean, they're already school professionals, they're already a part of it. Um that we may provide such training to whoever we need to provide training.
077We already do that. So Okay. Not a problem. Yeah. Yeah. I'm just being careful. Um and then the last thing on page 19, uh under crisis intervention teams, Terry adds, "Please note if any student has an individualized educational program in IEP. This policy requires that all staff in direct contact with the student demonstrate a comprehensive understanding of and the ability to effectively implement any related behavior intervention plans. This must be done with appropriate oversight and guidance provided by district administration to certified staff. Now, I think that's correct. I only question whether this is the best place for it, Terry. And the reason I'm saying that, this is limited to people looking at exclusion and and uh and seclusion. Um what you're talking about is really a broader issue. It's you got to do all your
078stuff for for special ed. So we can put it here if you want to. I don't have a quarrel with that, but we might want to look and simply make sure it's in a different policy and add it to it. Even if we do put it here, we might want to do that. That's that's up to you. Um, but it just occurred to me that that might be a question. Personally, I I would rather leave it in um simply because it would be considered part of somebody's knowledge base for restraint and seclusion training. So, I would be more comfortable leaving it in. Like I said, I don't have a problem with that. Um Sean, do you have any feelings about it either way? No, not at all. I have no problems with it at all.
079All right. Um Terry, let me know if you want to go through some other policy that and make an addition to it to reflect the same idea. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Take out the word please note and just start off your paragraph. Right. There you go. Yeah. Okay. Any other questions or concerns? Finding the section, page 16, section E. Those last few words. Section under what? Yeah, I just don't have the pages. It's under the big purple thing. Starts on the top page. Acknowledge it. Acknowledging. It's in purple and then it turns blue and there's a big E. So what is it you were under section A? The last few words there. I think you mean um uh mental health professional shall convene a meeting for the purpose of I I didn't write it. This is
080You missed an opportunity is all I'm saying. I'm shocked there isn't green. I'm being harassed. Let us get this on the record. I'm being teased. Meeting is not being recorded. Sorry, Jackie. Can you hear us? Hey, you're back. We lost you. We'd rather be there. Oh, definitely. Is she there? I haven't seen her. Yeah, she's gardening. Okay. Well, I don't have any problem adding that language. Yeah, that was I was just saying those two words. All right. Having said all of this is and if there's nothing else and Chris, I haven't explicitly asked you yet, but n I'm assuming at this point, you know, if you got anything, you can add it. It's not a problem. Um, all right. In that case, uh, can I have a motion to send this one forward to the
081full board? So moved. All right. Second by Miss Jay and seconded by M. Wow, it looks nice out there. I'm at the farm that I work at in Colchester. And oh, for the record, I did vote uh yes on the last one as well, but I couldn't get my audio to work. So Okay, great. I thought you had left. I thought something came up on the farm because we couldn't even see your image. Okay. And let's take a vote. All in favor of sending uh the seclusion and restraint policy forward to the full board say I. I. I. I. Unanimous. Once again, you know, if we could get Congress to work like this, we might actually get stuff done. That's a political statement. That that is a that is a historically accurate statement that didn't
082lean on any particular Exactly. All right. Perfectly neutral. We we agreed to add two things to the agenda. Um the first one is a discussion of the reading programs. There were two that we were looking at. Um so let's have uh Dr. D tell us what she wants to tell us and we'll go from there. Sure. So I did meet with um the four teachers who had done um the mini um Witten wisdom pilot and also had done the bookworms pilot just to give them an opportunity to dig into another unit um and give them an opportunity to reflect. and they are, you know, still very enthusiastic about bookworms. So, that's what I would support. Um, speaking just for myself, I've made myself very clear that I'm not happy at all with this process. And,
083um, going on the record, I won't support anything that has a process like this. Again, having said that, I don't see any value in playing games with this and I think um if Dr. Drito has made the decision she wants to recommend bookworms, then I think we ought to back her and um send it forward to the full board on that basis. Um Sean, anything to add? Um, no. I feel like uh I can agree with what you said. Appreciate that. And uh in total support behind uh Dr. Deo. Okay, Jackie. I will keep it short um this time and I very enthusiastically vote yes to pass it to the whole board. Okay. Thank you. And Terry Ditto. All right. So, I'm going to bring it I'm going to call for an actual motion and
084a vote just to make it official if we can do that. Can I have a motion to send this to the full board? So, move. Second. Okay, they're playing reversal here. [Music] Um, can I have a vote? All in favor say I. And that makes it universal again. And then the last thing we were adding had to do with some language in in a policy that we've actually already finished and it's been to uh the full board for a first read, but on reflection I think Dr. Drito wanted to make a change and it's frankly pretty minor. I don't think it's a problem. Um, but let's um have her uh speak to it and if the the team agrees, I'll have it pulled out of the consent agenda long enough to make the shift and
085then put it back in the consent agenda. Sure. So there's um language that was added um regarding any discrimination that needed to be investigated and protocols and that I would need to name a district compliance officer and language was added or the or I would become the compliance officer myself. And so the attorneys looked at this and said that that's incompatible offices. I can't be the judge and the jury. I for checks and balances, we would need to name a compliance officer. Um, and if there are issues, certainly then it could come to my level. But I can't I can I can name a compliance officer, but I can't be the district's compliance officer as the superintendent of schools. And just for the record, when I when I added some of that language, it was
086never in my intent to make the superintendent the compliance officer. I just wanted people to have another avenue to notify someone. And I was thinking she would then tell the compliance officer, "Go deal with us." If there's concern that that's not what it means or how it reads, then I think we should change it. And the change I'm uh suggesting is going from uh you know they'll notify the compliance officer or the superintendent to they'll notify the uh compliance officer who will notify the superintendent so that she is always kept aware of what's going on. I don't want a situation where whoever the compliance officer is is doing some investigation and the superintendent doesn't even know what's happening. That's just not acceptable in a district this size. Um Jackie, anything. No, I'm good. I'm with
087you, Sean. No, it makes sense to me. Terry, I totally agree. All right. Can I have a motion to make that edit and then send it uh you know, we'll pull it out like I had talked about. So moved and Second. All right. All in favor? I I All right. So, it'll go back as a first read now. It'll start all over. Um, I'm not sure that we need to do that. Do you need to talk about it at all or just a second read? Yeah, just put it as an action item. Don't put even put it in consent. Just put it as an action item. Wouldn't put it in consent and then pull it out and then put it back in. No, no sense of it. just make an action. Then we can just
088make But doesn't that mean that we are going back to a first read and delay everything for a month? No, because she's actually going to put it for discussion and then I think everyone's going to vote right there for it to have it. Yeah. Whatever works. Yeah. Just silly to pull stuff out of consent if you know it's going to pull out. Okay, that's fine. We'll do. Thank you. All right. Um, I have um mildly disturbing information for all of you. Um, I met with Dr. Drito yesterday who gave us lots of homework. Jeez. I'm sorry. There's just so many policies. We're out of compliance. Hey, you teased me. Now I get to tease you back. Um, I will immediately start working on a document for next month. keep in mind um two things. One
089is that next month is an evening meeting and two is that in addition to whatever policy work we're looking at um we would hope to be looking at something to do with curriculum at that point too which was part of what we had talked about when we set up the evening meetings. Um having said all of that can I have a motion to adjurnn? So moved. Second. All in favor? Hi. Hi. Hey guys, thank you very much. Good afternoon. Hi guys.