06/10/2025 Educational Services Committee Meeting

001appreciate. [Music] It's okay. Got it. Good morning everybody. We are in session for the June 10th meeting of ED services and uh we have a lot of guests with us today. We're going to share. We're going to move the schedule up so that we can do the uh act 20 reading program first. And so these ladies can be released to join the last day of school. Yay. So, um, if you remember, this was something that was scheduled for a prior ed services meeting. So, we just wanted to follow up with our spring scores from the Ames assessment. If you remember, Ames Web is the required state assessment under act 20 that has to be given in the spring to 4K through grade three. um attached to the agenda, you probably saw the uh sheet that

002kind of shows the students uh the breakdown of students at that April assessment window. Um you can see how our students who are still on a reading plan were new to a reading plan and those who also did exit K through three. You can see our 4K results. 4K does not require a reading plan and the assessment is only given in the fall and spring. The assessment this spring was the first time they did have that. And then that final little pretty graph there, you can see the uh number of students who were on reading pads in the winter and then how many are on reading now. Just a reminder that what that's just show showing here is just one component of act 20 right plus is the mandatory screener that DPI has identified for

003school districts in our state and next year we'll test or screen students three times a year. Um this year we only did it twice because the state was late in informing us what assessment to use. So they gave us some grace in the fall and so this year we tested these students in the winter and the spring and so that's reflecting on this data. Thank you D. Okay, any questions? Craig, what um what what is the what do we use for a screener then to our test uh uh a standardized test then to assess them? So this is as web. So it's as web. Yeah. And that's we don't have a choice on it and there are specific subtests. Okay. That we have to use. the first through third grade. The subtest that determines that

00425th percent down envelope is called an oral reading fluency. So it's a passage, no pictures, probably about size 10 12 um font and one minute to read. And so the number of words correct per minute then determines what percentile you're at. At kindergarten level, it is a um looking at letters and having to give a sound for those letters in one minute in bed plus how many join the meeting in a minute. And so those two together make a composite score and that then determines that. So is that in kindergarten for instance that's a situation where that's perhaps proctorred by the teacher. Yes. All of them have to be I mean I mean facilitated by the teacher, right? So, it's a one-on-one assessment for K3. Um, with the kindergarten one, it is a line of

005it's lines and lines and lines and lines of letters, both capital and lowercase mixed. So, it isn't like showing kids a flash card. It's they have to track the print just like they would text. Very cool. We know that reading is important, but the amount of resources and time that have gone into act 20 this year and subsequent years will be have an impact on our work. Can we take a look at data year-over-year to see like last year's kindergarteners, this year's first graders to see if there's So, this um is a new assessment for us. We haven't been using as web. We have been using STAR in the past as well as our Heggerity assessment for phmic awareness. Um most of our assessments in the past have been more comprehension driven um because that's

006kind of what forward measures and so when you're kind of measuring comprehension per se uh you don't want time to be a factor. So a lot of our assess assessments have not been driven by a one minute timer. A one tom minute timer does kind of even the playing field and makes it more efficient. But that's not how we've usually assessed our kids. We especially even at kindergarten, we do not haven't used a timer. We would use our letter names and our letter sounds or high frequency words. Um see if they could read emergent level text. And so this is kind of a diff this is a different spin on how we've looked at kids than in the past. Thank you. Anybody else? Thank you, Dasha. Thanks for all the teams work. So, appreciate it.

007All right, we're going to move on to uh some access uh data and celebrations. And just uh to ground us in the same conversation, we know that our multi-ingual or EL or ELLL uh learners take most of them take the access test and that access test is a required assessment from the state and Ashley and a great number of other uh professionals support our ML learners and that assessment every year and Ashley's here to just give us a highle overview. view of some data that I want stemming from this year's access. So, thank you, Ashley. Yeah. So, um starting out at the top, that graph just shows the total number of multilingual learners that we've had in our district over the last few years. Um so, as you can see, that number has grown. Um

008and then the second graph is showing how many multilingual learners we have exited each year. Um, so we were averaging, you know, 11 or 10 over the past few years. This year we exited 17, which was wonderful. Um, and so I did list what that exit criteria looks like. Um, just for everybody to be familiar with, this exit criteria is set by the state. So if a student receives an overall composite score of a 5.0 or higher, 6.0 0 being the highest you can um get on that assessment. The student has to be reclassified as English proficient or former EL and they no longer receive services. We continue to monitor them for the next two years, but they are done receiving that direct support from an ML teacher. Um, if a student has an overall

009composite score that's between 4.5 to 4.9, that student can be reclassified. And we use something called the M.Y.I.P. protocol, which is the multiple indicator protocol set by the state. And that is a classroom observation where you're gathering evidence and looking for proficiency with speaking, listening, reading, writing as students are interacting with their peers. And so by gathering that evidence in um correlation with their score, we are able to exit students that way as well. Um and just from research with the state, if students aren't exited in that kind of 4.5 to 4.9 um range, they typically become long-term EELs, which means we see them continuing to need EL support in middle school and in high school. um they're much more successful if we can get them exited out earlier. Um and like I said, after

010that reclassification determination is made, um we notify parents and guardians that they um will no longer be receiving that direct support, but that we will be monitoring them for the next two years. Um and if concerns would arise, then we would relook at those students and see if they need additional supports at that time. So, that's all I have for tonight. Any questions? I have a question. Um, do you see something over these past four years that's common like perhaps there's English speakers at home or, you know, something like that that's causing those kids to, you know, uh, move on, to exit out? Yes. Um, I think it's uh a mix of different things. I think we've added different supports um whether that's pushing in or some specific English language development classes at the middle

011school and high school level that I think has really helped um give kids what they need and help them to exit out. So Dan, I can add a little bit more to that. Uh when we talk about adding supports, you know, people will say, "Well, how how are we adding supports when our budget is is tight, right? Um there's a a mechanism through the Wisconsin um budget for school districts that allows you to do what's called transfer of service. And when you have new uh to country uh new to state or from another school, a transfer in of an e, you can apply for more dollars. Those dollars are added to your levy. So um and they're added for that specific reason of the transfer of service. You can do that for EELs and you

012can do that for special ed students to some extent. So I just want to make sure that people understand that the way and the reason that we're able to add is because of that mechanism. That mechanism is used for those supports only. Good. Anyone else? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Mhm. Going to transition to our teach plan. And so, uh, a few things to start us off here is that I always want to start with gratitude. So, thank you for the to the members of the the board for continued support of teach across the district. I also want to thank the members of the teach that are here today and the folks that have worked on this uh, plan that are not here today. But I want to pause here and allow our

013team members to introduce themselves. Please Dave Logstein, network supervisor. Ry, computer technician, database specialist. Chris Malloy. I'm the supervisor of data and assessment. And now across to me, uh, Tyler Leo, computer tech and network admin. Thank you. And so, uh, what we have today is really a culmination of some work that's taken place over the course of two school years. And, uh, last year, um, we brought together a small team to do a survey. Uh, DPI has created the future ready plan. And the gears here that we'll talk about, each gear has a comprehensive survey for a small team to navigate to really uh allow us to uh prioritize what where are the strengths and what are the gaps that we need to fill. And so last year predominantly that team uh took time to

014complete the survey and analyze the data that came from that. This year um another small team came together and really thought about the priorities. talked about some goals that uh we would like to achieve by 2027 and then what are the action steps uh really the last quarter here that we wanted to achieve to towards the accomplishment of those goals. Uh I think it's important to note that DPI unlike it's different than the future ready library plan there is no expectation from DPI for this to be approved by the board. This is uh an internal uh document, internal work that will continue to come back to ed services and give you updates throughout each year. Uh we really put together a why, what, how, and some next steps. The full plan is linked u but

015for your review, but we'll really stick to the why, what, how, and next steps, and then we'll take questions and feedback from the team. And so with that, I'd like to turn it over to Dave to start us off with our why. I think you just covered it. We're done. Any questions? Yeah, I think you uh so I will just add a little bit um as as just echo Jason. Um this uh and thank you. Um this is going to look very familiar. It is a framework that the um that is required for the library plan. um they recommend that any districts who are doing a tech plan still um so you use that framework and so which we did um brought in um stakeholders from across the district uh teachers, library media specialists and

016so on. The reason why we're doing this um meeting I think the number one question that I get uh over the last three years coming to these to this meetings is how are we changing the way teachers teach? How are we changing the way students learn? And this is exactly why we're doing this, why we have an assessment. We want future ready is designed to help change the way we teach students when it comes to um center or student centered uh personalized learning. um just allowing us to build a framework, build a build a road map essentially on how we can transition the use of technology in the classroom to make it more personalized, to make it more student center, to make it uh to start increasing our teaching with digital literacy um and so

017on. Um I think we actually have one of our one of the founding uh uh contributors to the future ready sitting in this room, right? Uh Jared? Yes. So um so yeah so that's that's our why we we want to have a road map that we can follow. Uh Jason really likes road maps um and uh to be able to uh look at the data have our stakeholders in place to help make decisions uh so we get buy in and um and you know do what we can for our students. Any questions? Is there more in the presentation or just based on so we can stop there if you want? We could stop. All right. So the what um we determined three smart goals after reviewing all our data. Um one was by 2027 we

018would have 100% of the district staff um integrated into wise- local and looking at the data and utilizing that information. Um, our second one was to have all teaching staff by 2027 participate in list at least two professional development sessions throughout the year um annually um so they can determine like we'll have a tech session hopefully and some other more personalized PD sessions for them to go to. And our last goal, we would like to enhance our security within the district, whether that's um our audits or reducing compromised credentials. Chris, you want to start with goal one? Yeah. So, um we have three goals. The first one is kind of one of the ones that I'm kind of working on the most and that is the Y stash local. So, we are um just did

019a pilot actually where we had 13 teachers um one or two from each building that checked out the classroom access for us starting in April and have been using it for the last two months to see what data we have there, how easy it is to navigate, and then to ask them questions about what else would you want and would you use this next year moving forward, how often, and um what did you find valuable? So, we kind of finished that. I just got my feedback from I think 70% of the members gonna kind of get a couple others to fill in there and then overall I would say that they found it um highly useful. Um the how the frequency of use depends on the amount of data that's uh available for their particular

020area. You know some teachers the science teacher there's not a whole lot of science data. We test that every four years. So if you just teach science, there's not stuff you're going to go in there on a monthly basis, but looking at other data, we can get in there and help them find things in one platform that's very easy for them to use kind of what we're looking to do. So then with our second goal with profing on to the professional development part of things is we've always usually our department's done one-on-one training. Uh we wanted to expand it to allow more um a little bit more broad scope of uh teachers coming in a larger group and helping train them with some more technology aspects of stuff. So, we want to offer some professional

021development days and stuff. Um we're leading with that. Um plus people who are going to lead it, what subjects we want to cover. We're still working on that, but that's what our goal is for the next two years. Um as well as our recently we rolled out multifactor authentication to staff. We're looking to do it for students, too. Uh, one thing we're we've already noticed out of this is uh a lot less compromised accounts where students are sharing them with other people or they take a picture of their password or um that's um or stuff of that such where one you're protecting the students data as well as your own data if you're a teacher. um just makes us more secure as a district. Um and we want to make sure that as we go

022through we double check um auditing our own systems as a part of the process. All right. And then uh our next steps we um we as we as we said Jason said we had a road map. We do several few months at a time. Um, so we're going to come together as a team this summer and evaluate how we did from January to May on the goals pertaining to those three goals. Um, and then, uh, we're going to develop action items to again the next three months, August, you know, September, October. Um, and then we're working on developing an AI guidance for the district. um as you AIB and in everything now um being able to help uh set some ground rules and and how to properly use and so on. So we've already started

023working on a draft document of that. Any questions? I do. What I said I do if anybody else does. Well, go ahead. All right, I'll go ahead. Um, thank you for addressing the curriculum question every year and and continue to have that. My question is a little deeper in that at this point in time and it's still maybe premature because we're at what year two, year three, we're still kind of at the infancy stage. Um, we talk about personalized learning in there. I'm one, and again, this is nitpicky. This is the educator in me. Personalized versus individualized. Personalized allows kids to choose their own pathway kinds of things. Yet what I'm hearing you describe is more of an individualized where it's based on teacher. So I just want to check to see because if it's

024personalized, yeah, there's a lot of things that kids can do. Is that where we're hoping to go or are we hoping first of all it's more individualized based on teacher need and then maybe five, six years from now. I know we can't predict the future, but what's the more immediate step? Because you've said personalized. I just I don't see that coming here yet with the plan or the action steps. So can you please clarify? So personalized the goal so I believe the goal is to go to is to get as personalized as possible. Um I will say one of the roadblocks is that it takes time. We're constantly like we just got done a few months ago approving the the uh course curriculum for next year. Right. Um so as we're continuing to teach digital

025literacy and and teaching these um these fundamentals in elementary and middle school at least with technology based um and the computer science end of it eventually my my goal is and and I'm hoping that is the district goal is to um by the time they get to high school they can do personalized so they can choose at that level if they want to do programming they can do Khan Academy or they can do you know things where the teacher is more of a guided um you know um teacher or um counselor almost or whatever and helping them find the path that they want to go into. That's that's the background in history that I had before I came to this district is that we you know taught the fundamentals lower so that when they got

026to high school we weren't having to teach the fundamentals like try to teach you know middle schoolers how to read. We don't wait till then we we teach them when they're young so that we won't do the same thing with digital literacy so that that'll follow their way up right. Um but that takes time. I mean, it takes a lot of buy in. It takes a lot of changing a lot of gears. And we're honestly, we're we're technology. We're supporting the district. We should be an afterthought. I mean, we're part of the conversation, but I feel like if we're the ones that are dictating, it's kind of the dog, the tail wig, and the dog. Um, so we just want to be part of the bigger conversation saying this is where the district should be

027heading and this is what our recommendation is, but they we still have to have other people help us move that. And I'm asking that question also as a baseline because if that's the goal of the district, then from a curricular standpoint, it's more of um teachers offering multiple choices, whether it be paper, whether it be digital, whether it be whatever. And while I agree with you, it starts younger and then moves its way up. But we can't wait until they get to high school for that to happen. So then it becomes a professional development thing. Are we talking professional development? Where is that in the calendar? And I'm not asking to pose that right now, but where does that fall in the calendar this year? As we look at budget restrictions, we're talking about differentiation.

028We're there's so many other facets in there that I'm excited that this becomes our framework. It's like, you know, it spoke into other things. There has to be buyin, but there also has to be that professional development moving through. So, I'm just hoping that that's a piece of the conversation. And I think we've had Sorry. Oh, go ahead. I I we've had conversations with teachers on how to do voice and choice and and do different things to allow students to show how what they've learned in a way that they like to be able to show it rather than writing an essay, create a movie or some. We have done a little bit of that. Um not as much as I'd like, but there has been some of that and we do um hopefully we're working

029on getting um some days specifically tied to sim uh PD um which that can be a real focus. And my other followup, as you talk about professional development, are we thinking at some point moving into like when I left my district five, six years ago, whatever, they already had things built in where it was 247 access to professional development. That's that personalized that you kind of have been describing. As you start creating those, we then have a hub that yeah, you have teacher trainers, but you also have something that teachers can access whenever they need to and then they can go to their teacher counterpart. Can you help me walk through? So it doesn't have to be the oh we're doing this on a Wednesday or we're doing this on the Monday PD day. It

030might start as that but then it comes personalized for teachers as well. So I know I don't need anything here but I'm hoping that we're moving into that. That's what I was going to say is that I'm excited that I believe we'll be able to have two days dedicate two of our PD days next year dedicated for some time for technology and our early conversations is to provide a menu of options for our professionals to self- select one that is really um exciting for them or speak to them. We have not talked about it but I would love to have those recorded and uh house somewhere. Um, but the first step is to get on the calendar. I think we're really close to h that happening and then the hard work is uh next to

031make it happen really well. Thank you guys for all of the energies and efforts. I know it's not easy. [Music] Okay. Anybody else? All right. Thank you very much. just going to turn us over to folks in the ecampus contract and uh just transition us there small introduction. I know that um we have talked about uh the ecampus contract at the May ed services uh meeting and then the May board of education meeting. And so I still want to start with gratitude. So I want to thank the members of the board for their continued support of the campus and our innovative charter schools as whole. I also want to thank Tracy and Bob that are here today and the entire eCampus team and just crowd this year. I ask that you introduce yourselves as well,

032please. My name is Tracy Coaches and I am the lead teacher of ECampus Academy. I'm Bob Logan. I'm the supervisor of digital learning and technology. And so we have some additional pieces stemming from the conversation at the May board meeting that we want to walk through. And um at the board meeting in May really heard three things that we should be thinking about for this conversation. One was contract language that I I think we've addressed and take feedback. Uh we'll talk about some student measurables just to make sure that we're all on the same page and then the length of the contract. And so with that as a starting point, I I wanted to uh start with um just a reminder of some presentations that this team has provided in the past. And so on

033September 12th, 2023, uh eCampus team members came to ed services and provided an overview with some uh quantitative and qualitative data uh about ecampus. And this document was kind of the the anchor document by which that presentation was navigated. At that time there was a request for more enrollment and financial data. And so uh November 7th, 2023, the team uh brought forward this data specifically around international programming and the cost and enrollment and uh uh longitudinally and of that year. In addition, uh, in December of 2024, uh, Chris Mallaloy and I, uh, worked with every school to create an a report card, kind of a summary of programming as well as some data and the campus, uh, was certainly part of that conversation. So, just wanted to make sure that we're on the same page

034as as in the last year and a half what presentations or data have been brought forward. I'll pause there. Any questions about any of that? Just a reminder. Yes, please. Um, is that the report card that is in the um in the pre um on the agenda today? The this report card I just Yeah, the report card you're referring to. Yep. Okay. And so, just a reminder, uh, in December, uh, we put together, Chris and I put together a full board report of the state report card and then every school, uh, did something. This was the template and every school completed that. It was part of that package. Okay. So, this was in there with the rest of the other schools. Yes, sir. So, this is a district thing. Yes, sir. This report card. Okay.

035All right. Thank you. And then um I think there was some question about uh contract language and I just wanted to highlight one section that I took some notes on during the main meeting. It was around this specific highlighted section around demographics. And so I connected with our uh DPI representative first and foremost around is this section needed? Is it necessary? And the DPI representative confirmed that some iteration of this is necessary. Uh we worked with the eCampus team and our DPI representative to revise this language. So this highlighted section is a reflection of the revisions and it speaks to the fact that we want eCampus enrollment to be reflective of that as as much as closely as possible to the entire district, right? We don't we wouldn't want ecampus to have 90% uh students

036with IEPs, for example, right? We want it to be reflective of the district. And so this is um a a revised version of that language. Again, uh shared this with our DPI representative and confirm that the language meets the the expectations. Any questions there? So I mean whenever whenever I see language of this nature in a particular um document, I have to sit back and I have to wonder or ask a question. Uh does this then uh prohibit a child to that that wants to be part of the program to not be part of the program because of of a certain quota that that the that the uh program has hit? because I if we're trying to maintain a certain level of let's say you use the example IEP students yet they're you know we

037happen to have a need for some child with an IEP to utilize ecampus for whatever particular reason we're going to somehow say no we can't because you don't fit within that particular mold the answer is absolutely not well then why are we putting the language in there it's a DPI requirement And so, but would wouldn't it be better served if we put like uh line one only in there and leave it at that? All district uh non-discrimination policies of the district will be adhered to the charter contract specifically stilates that each campus academy will not discriminate. Yeah, maintaining a demographic balance certainly sounds like um you know social engineering I think for lack of a better word. Can I speak to that briefly? Sure. Um the original uh verbiage from here came because when we

038were initially putting this together uh five years ago uh we were applying for federal funding and the the language was very clearly spelled out as to what needed to be in there. So the the concern was making sure that there was a um uh uh representative distribution within the school. Now the the intent is basically to meet those federal requirements if we do seek federal funding. But but it also is just basically to to ensure that we are not we're not trying to just have a certain uh demographic within our within our uh school. Um from my perspective, I don't care how we write it. I just want to make sure that we are compliant with state and federal requirements so that we are not uh prohibited from getting funding u grants etc if we

039do apply for them in the future. I would just echo that in the fact that we're here today to get feedback and certainly open to revisions uh and any revisions that we uh think about today. I can certainly get feedback from our DPI representative and I I will tell you and remind the the board that um anything that is changed uh between now and our board meeting has to be changed before our board meeting because that is uh the 30th is the last day um that we can uh enter into an agreement uh with uh eCampus for charter extension I I'll say this. I think I think the this sends the wrong message. The focus should be on every getting every child what they need. And that has nothing to do with discrimination. Um and

040me personally, I would like to see sentence one of that pay paragraph um stating that all district discrim non-discrimination policies of the district will be adhered to. The charter contract specifically states stipulates that eCampus will not discriminate. End period. End of story. We don't discriminate. Done. And the and laws um statutes all stand on their own merit. I mean they will be enforced accordingly. There's no need to put extra language that seems to elude that we are going to discriminate by not discriminating. Yeah. And I mean, if we're talking about following federal guidelines, we just just a month or two ago, we signed uh an affirmation that we were going to be in accordance with u title six. Yeah. Title six of the civil rights act. I think uh the idea of maintaining a demographic

041balance was kind of the main focus of that of that title six discussion and uh that kind of flies directly in the face of u equal access and civil rights. If you're choosing and maintaining a demographic balance, it just seems completely irrational. So I would agree with Craig. I would say at the very least that paragraph that talks about maintaining a demographic balance uh doesn't really have a a place um if we're actually you know being fair to students, families and everyone else. I do know that uh part of the conversation with our DPI representative is that we need to outline the strategies that we will work towards or implement to achieve a balance. So that section um um needs to be considered as well. Yeah. Who's our DPI contact that we're interacting with for

042this? Senator Benedict. Okay. Gotcha. Um would you guys be able to uh get me the specific uh DPI guideline that they're referencing when they say that we need to contain or we need to have this language included? We can give you the crosswalk that she provided us. Sure. All right. Thanks. Was there any any indication what DPI would do if we would just simplify this language? I mean, uh, last I checked, there's no DPI jail. So, I didn't I didn't inquire as to the implications if we I don't think there's expectations for complex language. Okay. I think the expectation is for us to work towards an enrollment in this charter school that is reflective of the district as a whole and how we how we outline that whatever words we use I think is up

043to us. I appreciate that answer. I think in the interest of um you know getting this acceptable I I'm fine with whatever wording we have. This is not like something that we are married to. We were just trying to meet those those uh expectations from the uh guidelines from from federal grant writing. And again, that was most of the language here was from five years ago when the original charter was was uh put together, much of it from a boiler plate. Much has changed in five years. Absolutely. So I guess my question is is to the board members who are challenging Are we challenging the achieve and maintain a demographic balance or are you challenging numbers one, two, and three being appropriate to what the school is looking to accomplish from a strategy perspective? Uh,

044specifically maintaining a demographic balance reflective of any given population is social engineering on the basis of race or some other immutable characteristic. And that's flying directly in the face of the very concept of civil rights. So, it's specifically that paragraph. Thank you. That's helpful because to me, if if that's the piece that is potentially up for debate or conversation, but the sub points aren't, and that gets to the strategies that the DPI is asking for, then do we instead have a conversation, you know, or or whatever just about that phrase more than anything else? Well, that led to my question because we brought up a number of topics. I'm not clear on the verbiage and where the direction is going because we we talked specifically about the first paragraph in there, but demographic balance is

045in both of those and given what Jared said about the timeline, you know, that we're we have to have it done by the end of the month, I think it would behoove us to to have that specific what are we looking to get at so that it's not um a deeper conversation at the full board level that it's taken care of here. I understand and appreciate. I did when I read through it. I didn't read through it through the same lens that it's being challenged to because when I look at okay there's a demographic balance we're talking international population whatever but I also understand well it in the second paragraph maintain a dem demographic balance reflective of the WSD's population. Yeah that's in both of them. Yeah that's you know so and I would even

046say you don't even need the word balance. I would say uh strive to have a demographic that emulates or mirrors that of our district. I think that's the same thing. I think taking out the word balance doesn't make a difference. So now you're telling me that uh if we have 100 kids, five of them are Swiss and 30 of them are Irish, we can't have more than uh the corresponding ratio of Swiss kids in the program because it's not reflective of the demographics of the W USC population. That seems like racial discrimination to me or ethnic discrimination in that case, I suppose. So, uh, my question that I'm trying to understand here is this. I I agree with what your statements are about we don't want to discriminate any way, shape, or form, right? Um,

047however, my question is this. Uh, do we want to have programming, right, that only um is geared towards uh those who want to enter into it? We don't want to try to reach out and grab more students and try to find students of varying populations to to be in that programming. I mean, because otherwise, you know, uh it may be discriminating the other way. But that that's why I'm trying to see the balance is to understand what what you guys are looking for. I don't understand what you're looking for. But there's nothing in this language that would drive me to have any type of understanding for what you just articulated. Yeah. It says the opposite of what you just said. Yeah. What you just articulated was that that this particular language is somehow more inclusive

048of the population. And that's not at all what this language says. Actually trying to be exclusive. No, I'm trying to um You're right. I'm trying to make a statement that is getting towards what you're looking for, which is a more inclusive statement. That's why I made the statement I did. And you're saying, "Well, well, Jared, that doesn't jive with this language." I'm like, "I know. I'm trying to get to what you want." Okay. Uh and in a way that still meets the needs of the charter contract, right? And so I if if you're looking at that kind of language to open it up, right? But it still gets to what we're looking for. Uh, you know, that's what I'm trying to aim for. Craig, just thank you. I looked up uh school report card as

049potential language and on the school, you know, state school report card, the the language they use when thinking when uh thinking about like students with disabilities, economically disadvantaged English learners, they use student groups. I'm wondering if that might be something we would be open to. So, uh, we'll strive to achieve a student group balance reflective of or balance among student groups, something like that, right? Something of that nature. Again, would uh reflect the language that's on our state report cards. How would that be different? Um, it's not talking demographic. It's not talking ethnicity. It's talking about individual needs, whether it's special ed, yellow, um, advanced, you know, you pick the different groups that we service. Again, it would be reflective of our state report card. Our challenge as a group here is to try to

050find language that means what we mean, but also satisfies what we need to satisfy in order to move on, right? Um and and I will tell you that um you know I I doubt that the um DPI is going to shut us down, but the DPI can say uh we you guys may approve of this, but we're not going to let you move forward with that charter, right? And so we're going to try to find a balance here to get done what we need to get done and to emulate what we believe in is a non-discriminating process. Um, but I I don't see anything wrong with uh number one or number two. Does anybody see anything wrong with number one or number two? No, certainly not. I think the phrase WUSD and E ecampus will

051share access for all students through multiple means uh perfectly reflects what we're talking about though. We're going to ensure that the campus is going to be uh attendable by civil students. My question is is we're we're only um we're only um in disagreement with sentence number one, right? The rest of the highlight is good, right? And and sentence number one in the second paragraph as well, but yes, those just the words demographic balance, right? It's in both. So, how can we change those two to mean what we're looking at, but still have a way to say we're watching our population? Because that's really what the DPI wants to know. How are you watching your population? I guess that's what I'm that's what I'm confused about. So, DPI wants us to watch our population. What does

052that mean? That's why I was asking like what's the specific language that DPI is using to say hey we want you to do this because I know that DPI has a history of you know encouraging encouraging uh affirmative action and things of that nature. So I I don't necessarily want to Okay. So I I think um one of the things that DPI is worried about that I think we would be worried about, right, is this um tool was a tool that our district was using only to allow certain groups in, right? And and that's that's what they're worried about. They're worried about us using this to say we're only using this for the Irish, right? Because that's all we want here is Irish. Okay. I mean, is that what we we were doing that at

053one point? What group of people were we doing that with? No. What what I'm saying is that's they thought we were secretly doing it. No, they didn't. Or No, I'm thinking that they're wanting to have some balance. Okay. Right. And they're wanting to assure that we have if we have a public school that we have it open to all groups. Right. And they want to make sure that there's language that says it's open to all groups and that you are not discrim. Yeah. So, you can take out the first sentence. You have the statement WSD ecademy will assure access for all students through multiple means including the following items one and two. Then you have e access or ecampus academy charter school will utilize a variety of strategies to assure access for all students through

054multiple means including the following but not limited to and then one two and three and then you have your language there that I think is sufficient. What about your title? I would call it uh open access procedures perhaps. or student access procedures. I'm not I'm not disagreement. Yeah. No, I'm just I'm I'm just I'm more interested in the fact in exactly what DPI is asking for there because I wonder if any of that language is something that DPI is specifically requesting, if that's the thing that they're saying that they're looking for, or if they're simply looking for us to verify and to state clearly, hey, our intent is to make this open for all people. So, I think it's the I I believe it's the latter. It's the latter. Okay. Yeah. I I don't believe

055that they're uh they have any interest in us coding and making a balanced program. I think they they have only interest in making sure that our program is open to and the only reason I ask is because we know that for multiple years they were interested in that with affirmative action at least on the college level. This is a language that's very reminiscent of that. I want to make sure that we're staying away from that because that's probably not the best practice. At least not right now. I I wouldn't have even I wouldn't even oppose to that that title being equal opportunity procedures and even that, you know, I mean because that's actually what we're trying to accomplish here. It's really about reflecting the equal opportunity. Yeah. Yep. I like that. Now, um Jason, do

056you have what you need to I'm trying to capture this one because again, timing is of the essence and I think I don't think anybody's in disagreement in the room. It's just trying to get at the wording we're looking at here. So, I'd like to just uh make sure I have this correct. Um demographic balance procedures. I'm going to change that to equal opportunity procedures. I'm going to strike that uh the next sentence uh al together and I'm going to strike that to this end that's not that doesn't flow. So it's just going to begin with WSD any campus will share access for students through multiple means including following. And then uh one of two I heard was uh uh no revisions. The next full sentence starts with eCampus Academy. I'll change that to uh

057maintain equal access uh reflective of WSD's I think it's population uh procedures including but not limited to. I think that works. And then as a followup uh I just did a quick uh control F on the document to look for other instances of the word demographic. You go down to uh page nine where it's in the midst of talking about you know some some details there and uh you have an item called titled guarantee of non-discrimination and it does in the third line in the middle of the line a sentence starts and it says enrollment de demographics will be reviewed each semester to evaluate racial and ethnic balance among pupils that is reflective of the school's the school district population which is again what we're talking about. So, I think uh you know, maybe we're

058if we're trying not to socially engineer racial and ethnic balancing, we should remove that sentence as well. How about if we said uh enrollment demographics will be reviewed each year uh in accordance with our non-discrimination policies? I like that. I think if we're looking at it anyway for the purpose of report card and you know and we're or we're I don't know if we have to submit any of that data as part of the state report cards but if it's being reviewed I like that. Yeah, I don't know. I guess uh let me look it over. I guess I I suppose I don't know exactly what the purpose is of reviewing enrollment demographics outside of ensuring that we're socially engineering racial and ethnic. I I ensuring the latter part of my first statement which is

059that we don't have a program that only um in itself um whether by choice or not by choice is being discriminatory because we only allowed one. So, so what if we allow for equal access? We look at it in a semester and we find out that all the students are Irish because it just so happens that all of the students who have applied are Irish? What what do you do then? Do do you then have an obligation to start messing with things because you have a perceived inequity? No. that I I think what we do is we make sure that we review our marketing and other things to make sure that we are trying to be open to all students and that we aren't um accidentally uh or inappropriately attracting only Irish students with what

060we've been doing with our marketing or other things. You know, it's just a review to make sure that we are trying to be open for all. Yeah. And I mean, I suppose that kind of gets at what I'm talking about because it seems like that entire and not I'm not saying from you specifically, Jared, don't get me wrong, but it seems like that entire kind of uh perspective really stems out of this idea that people can uh be secretly racist, you know, the systemic racism and things of that nature. And I just don't know if uh I don't know if I'm comfortable with that line of reasoning. Again, I'm not saying that that's you. No, I know. And I'm not even saying secretly. I'm just saying we might not know that. um our program that

061we have, right? Uh feels like there are entry barriers for anybody, right? We we don't want we want to be open and available for anybody who cares, right? And in in the way we present our materials or other things, we may be um and not wanting to but accidentally um having it be an entry barrier to somebody. Can you provide me an example of an entry barrier in advertising that would maybe create an exclusionary environment because I have a hard time picturing that because I'm not representative of every group, right? Uh and so I wouldn't necessarily know exactly. Can you tell me about something that would make that would be exclusionary to you then? At least maybe give me an example there because I'm having a hard time imagining. Yeah. I mean if if it's

062for eCampus, right? M uh and let's say I'm a struggling learner, right? And um in our materials it says that this is a rigorous self-engaged process, right? Where where I don't see an idea that there's help there, but we could say it's a rigorous self uh process that comes with a lot of uh tutoring and support for those who need it. Now, it's open to everybody, right? And that may be like just in review, we we we reached out to people who were struggling learners and we were saying, "Hey, we don't have struggling learners here. You know, let's let's think about how we can reach out to struggling learners a little bit more." And they say, "Well, it's because I don't think there's any support or help there." Uh because I don't see that anywhere

063I look at it. Does that make sense? I suppose. I mean, I feel like it would be better for us to just reach out to student body in general who aren't signing up for it and ask them what the reasons are instead of maybe trying to focus in on specific rale for why we would want to have language that says we're going to review it just to make sure that we're following our policies so that way um we can make sure that we understand that programming supportive evolves. I can give give you a very specific example along those lines. When we first began, we were getting a lot of students who were um uh struggling students. They they were running away from a traditional setting and we weren't getting as many of the high-f flyers

064as what we wanted. And it was in one of the initial meetings with one of our incoming freshmen um that we found that there's a perception that we we are not a challenging school. uh despite the fact that our curriculum has 30 to 50% more than a traditional classroom because we don't have to shoot to the middle of the group, we can challenge even the the top flyers. So we we started we we adjusted our initial meeting to make sure that the students understood there's an opportunity for challenge no matter what level you're at. And we were unintentionally prohibiting our our top flyers from wanting to be involved because they they're already good at school. They don't need a different option. are going to be successful wherever they fall, but we want those kids, too,

065because this is a great opportunity for them. Sure. Thanks. I appreciate that example. Sorry, Jason. I won't let you hold your hand up any longer. Go ahead. I uh I have a suggested revision of page nine. And so the sentence that says enrollment demographics, I'm wondering if we could uh use enrollment data. Um enrollment data will be reviewed each year to evaluate equal access among pupils that is reflective of the district. If I may, we're getting down this dangerous road, this dangerous logical fallacy of correlation equals causation. That's what that's what this is all about. You know, because the data reflects one thing doesn't necessarily mean that that is entirely true. That that this is that this is the reason why we're educating these kids is because this this data set happens to be u

066indicative of something. I mean, no, we're we we exist for the purpose of providing the needs of children and education and every kid happens to have unique individual needs and that doesn't necessarily correlate to anything. I I we I can only speak for myself. I totally agree with you and uh there is no causation here that I am promoting. What I am promoting is uh what I think Dr. Burke is commenting on is that we want the language to meet the expectations of the DPI but also meet the expectations of this group. And so I I am not we're all on the same team here working towards providing opportunities for every student that will help them grow, flourish and and look to next steps. I'm just trying to get us language that that meets the

067criteria of DPI, but also that we are as a team are excited about. I think we were closer before when we when we spoke about when when we eliminated the discussion about data when it comes to that purpose. I Okay. I still think though that it's important for us to review any and all programming to make sure it matches up with our policies. And that's that's the statement I said like I want to I want to make sure that we have a statement in here that says we are going to re review our programming to ensure that it follows along with our non-discrimination policies. And again, so discrimination is now you're talking about advertising versus allowing admission or being open example, right? One reason why we would want to evaluate our programming. We may want

068to evaluate our programming for a number of reasons, right? Uh but I I don't think there is anything wrong with having a statement that says we're going to evaluate our programming to ensure that it follows our policies and I think that will also suffice this language that the DPI is looking for right in a way that we can interpret that how we need to interpret that which is we're going to make sure that we're going to make sure our programming is open to all inclusively. Yeah. I suppose before I would want to move forward on that I would want to see exactly what DPI is looking for. I think there's just a little bit too much that is ambiguous at this point for me to feel comfortable with moving forward with this uh this item

069um with how it is. I understand you have seven days per I understand. I mean if DPI is if DBI is telling us that what they want us to do is they want us to be looking for uh systemic oppression in the way that we advertise ecampus to people. I am not interested in moving forward with that. I think that's completely unreasonable and I think you're moving into a bad spot. This whole thing reeks of systemic systemic racism, systemic oppression, all of those ideas that's laced throughout this discussion. Not from you guys again, from the the language and from the kind of idea that I'm getting about what DPI is looking for. And I'm not interested in moving forward with that at all. I'm not understanding that and I need some clarity simply because if

070we go to the slides on enrollment trends for example um our international population there's 142 this year that's 45%. So when we look at there is some ethnicity and things going on. We do have an international population that has various races and things like that. It is not just the demographics of Watertown Wisconsin that we're serving. And so to say we're not going to have any conversation or anything with that. I I can hear pieces and understand pieces of where it is, but then we get more to a different end of it. I'm not understanding the the hangup on the language because of we've said for a number of years that we have an international population. We've been seeking that. And so as we have this balance, um Jared's statement about programming and things like

071that, I think that I liked I don't remember what your last statement was because I didn't write it down, but that last sentence that he had, I think achieves the best of where we're coming from right now given the full picture. If we didn't have it open enrolled internationally, I mean, we're thinking the world, then yeah, I could kind of lean into more of what you're saying, but because that is some of our demographic with eCampus, we have to be responsive to both in that balance. And that's I just don't think that we should look at people with a lens of race. I think looking at people through a lens of race is not the path to take. His last statement didn't have anything to do with the lens of race. I didn't understand that.

072Yeah, I would I would say that that's what he was giving was its own separate example. If we're talking about advertisement, now we're getting into a different area where we're talking about uh subconscious bias and things like that. And that's that's a whole other discussion that we could have for three hours. Using my my my most poor example that you put me on a spot for. Well, I'm I'm more going off of the language that's just, you know, here and the idea of non-discrimination and what that means. Well, I know what it means to us, right? because we have a policy that says it and it means that we want to be inclusive of all you know without barrier right yeah and I think will not deny admission or participation in any program or activity

073on the basis of etc is sufficient for verifying that you are not going to discriminate right but also I think though um and what the DPI is looking for right is that we are going to hold ourselves accountable to that by evaluating our programming and that's why I said um a statement that says we'll evaluate our programming to ensure compliance with non-discrimination our our non-discrimination policies will be suffice for them but it's also a good thing for us to do right to make sure that there aren't barriers for any yeah sure that's I I can accept that yeah that's fine that's not talking about examining demographics to make sure that there's a certain balance or that that things are reflective of uh some idea of how many people of one racial group or one uh

074learning group you need to have in order to be fair. That's a completely different deal. So, what you just said is evaluate our programming, right, to ensure that we're following our non-discrimination policies, I think will be sufficed for them and it gets at what we need and what we would want to do, I think. Yes. And I'm sorry I used a really poor example on the spot. No, not your fault at all. I know how hard it is. I you know, it's it's it's hard to come up with examples. I appreciate you coming up with one when I asked. I'm just interested in kind of where that goes. It was on the fly and it was really great. No, I mean it's it's an interesting question. Um, but I think that's more like uh I

075think when it comes to advertisement, advertis advertisement is a whole different game. Um, I think advertisement oftentimes actually markets to specific subgroups of people. So I mean that's, you know, that's a discussion for another perhaps, but that is an interesting example. So just for my clarity here, I'm going to remove the sentence on page nine that starts with enrollment demographics and replace it with uh um ecampus will evaluate uh all programming to assure ensure alignment to district non-discrimination policies. Is there any agreement in that? Mhm. And you think that's not rolling the dice? What do you mean rolling the dice? Well, that mean that the DPI will accept that language. You feel they will? Well, I I believe that they will. I I would rather have something that the board is comfortable with. Sure. And

076if the if DPI comes back and says we have to review this, we can do that after the district has demonstrated that they're going to support the charter. Okay. And my my big concern is if the charter ends on June 30th, all of our open enrolled students go away. Yeah. Because we cannot have an open enrolled students so that the 89 students that we have coming to our district that wouldn't be here otherwise, right, are now gone. I I agree 100% with Bob. Our first hurdle is making sure that this board is comfortable with what what they written, right? If we get challenged by DPI, we can always then uh work through their process to say how do we seek balance here? Okay. Right. And then if not, then it's the DPI, you know, like

077we we've tried and we can talk to our teachers and our students about what what we wrote and why we defended it and whatever else. But our first hurdle is making sure that we have everything that you guys need. um because I don't want you to approve something that um satisfies the DPI but doesn't satisfy you. I we can work on the other hurdles if they come and if those come it's okay if those hurdles come and are achieved after the 30th of June as long as we propose and they will they will because they they will uh have a review process. Our deadline for our internal process is the 30th. Thank you. Right. they will have a review process that extends past that and if they have questions right they will pose them and

078we will bring them back to both the eCampus board as well as our board right and we will talk about how do we work that through to have a charter that is um something that we can all support and then we um answer back their questions and they will have questions I' I've met with Cassie four times over the last year and they the things that they focus in on are we would probably consider them ridiculous and intrusive But we have an answer for it. We're not we we don't discriminate on kids coming in. If you want one of my first lines in the initial meeting is just to be clear, this is not a screening. If you want in, you're in. And I mean that that was added specifically after a conversation with the

079DPI just to let them know we're not trying to, you know, uh engineer what what we have coming in. If they want in, they're in. We just want them to know what we do so that they're not coming to something thinking it's one thing and it's something totally different. Good. Wonder if there's a member of the board that would be willing to just double check my uh uh revisions before we bring it into the full board. Okay. Thank you. I'll send you that with the crosswalk as well. Thanks. I appreciate you. You're welcome. Charity, any comments? No. Any Okay. All right. All right, thank you. Uh, we do have some enrollment data that I thought would be good data for us all to to think about. So, Bob is going to cover some data trends

080and then Trace is going to bring us home with some student vegetables. So, the first graph here is is basically um running uh graph of the last three years of data that we we keep internally just for our own own purposes. uh you'll see a a trend in 22 23 of 202 students um up to 317 students this year and they're broken down as as you can see in the the chart. So um kids that live in WSD live within our our borders are the blue. Um so we see that 80 86% of uh of our students are students that are that live in the district. They they've chosen to come here. the choice retained are um and and uh the WSD they they've always been at WSD students. They they started in kindergarten. They're

081just they're here. The choice retained, those are kids that have come to us from parochial schools or homeschooling. They live within our district, but they now that eCampus is an option, they've chosen to send their kids to eCampus instead of the prochial school or or homeschooling. So, we we've added 23 students in that that category. Um the restorative retrain uh retained these are students who for whatever reason are on pre-expulsion obeyance agreements disciplinary issues their their option is no longer at the school uh brick and mortar school because of concerns whatever they may be uh 12 students were were uh uh elected to come to ecampus rather than be expelled or uh open enroll to other districts. um you see the 142 international students and the growth of that over the years. But uh this

082is just kind of the breakdown. And so if you look at the open enrolled students, those are students that are coming to us from outside of our district. Um they they fill out the open work enrollment paperwork and they they come here instead of going to their home districts. Um but between the the restorative retrain uh retained the open enrollment and the choice retained those 89 or so students are students that would not be in our district if we did not have have ecampus. So we are serving a a strong purpose uh in terms of retention and uh recruitment if you want to look at it as as a recruitment. Any questions on the the first graph? Yeah. So me being the the math person as I look from one to another comparatively in 23

08324 we had a category called new enrollments. Sure. We don't have that any longer yet. In my tenure on the board we have been looking at new enrollments. How many are coming in? Um has that name just changed because open enrollment doesn't necessarily mean new enrollment. Right. The name the name has changed basically. Um we um this this is from a spreadsheet that's got multiple tabs and from year to year we just update data. Like I said this is mostly internal. I can change the I'm just curious how many are new enrollments because a student can be open enrolled but not a new enrollment. Correct. And so I'm just curious how many new enrollments did we have? You know Sure. And I can get that data for you if you want. Yeah please. the open

084enrollment because they're different categories or embedded within um a new enrollment could be a WUSD student as well and so I understand how new enrollments doesn't really make sense in the graph but maybe just a separate piece of how many are new. Sure. Thank you. Um so you want new enrollments regardless. I'm just curious how because how many have been new coming in? Yep. Yeah. Um so there's a little bit of fluidity between the schools. We we have some families that are with us and then they go back to brick and mortar and then they come back to us. Do do you consider those new enrollments or so I guess for me and and the members of the committee and members board can correct me if I'm wrong. Typically when we look at attendance things

085we have our first Friday counts and things like that. So I don't know what you use to do that. If if we're going to do that for regular enrollment maybe we do the same here and look at first Friday counts if that's the easiest. So that way um it's consistent among attendance situations. Third Friday, sorry, not first Friday. The first weeks are there. Thank you. So moving forward, we'll use the third Friday counts for the for just when we report how many are newly enrolled. Okay. Do you do you need me to go back to previous years to figure that out? That be a little bit of a challenge, but I'm happy to do it. I just, you know, as we look because we had the category for new enrollments before just as we go

086and if there's uh movement in the day just so we're consistent then. Absolutely. Thank you. Other questions? All right. So the the other sheets are basically just kind of um highlighting a um another service that ecampus or function that ecampus has. Um the the um we'll look at the 2425 uh page here. uh the high school students at risk. Uh this is just looking at the high school students and I've defined at risk as being students who earned less than four credits uh the previous year or they're six or more credits deficient or they're habitually truent students um uh prior to coming to eCampus or if if they were with ecampus that we would include those in the at risk students as well. So we have a high percentage of kids that are coming to

087eCampus because they're running away from uh what a traditional school. One of our one of our primary focuses is to try to get the non-consumers of education to become consumers of education. Okay. Um kids that aren't aren't having particular success. They don't feel a a connection within the environment they're at. They feel like a square peg. They they uh they struggle with anxiety. They you know whatever that situation might be. um we want to get those kids to a point where they're they're not only functioning but thriving in a um a learning environment. And if you look at the second uh graph, this shows us uh what we did is we looked at the um the year before they came to us or if they were a mid-year transfer, the the trimester before they came

088to us. And we we took a look at how they did the rest of that year and whether or not the there was an improvement. In other words, they earned more credits than in their previous situation. And uh we we've uh seen that 53.7% improved over their previous placement. 10.5% did worse. Um and about 35.8% had no change in in behavior. So between the no changes and the improvement, we're we're not hurting hurting the kids. So even though they're struggling before they came to us, they're they're Yeah. They only earned one credit all last year, but they've earned two and a half with us. Still not necessarily on track, but they're doing better. Yes, sir. So, the the data that you're citing, I just want to make make sure I understand the data set. The

089data that you're citing for improvement is whether they took another class and earned a credit in that class. It's whether or not um so for example, if they were not with us last year and they were with us this whole year, did they earn more credits this year than they did last year? So So So you're saying it it's it's impinging on whether or not they passed that class and earned that credit. Correct. Okay. Okay. I mean it's not based on any other standardized testing or anything. based 100% entire entirely on credits earned for this. I can look at other data if you would like, but yeah, I'm I'm going to look at other data. Yeah, this this is specifically what I was looking at. Credits earned um you know, part of uh earning credit

090in eCampus, they're required to pass a proctor final at the end. So, if they've got a B going into the final and they fail the final, they're not going to earn the credit for it. We we have options available for to help remediate. we catch it well before they get to that point, you know, because we can we can tell from the data whether they're googling answers or whether they're actually doing the work. Well, that is one of my questions. Yeah, my one of my questions is how are you able to um uh verify that children aren't uh or students aren't uh utilizing like chat GPT AI or Google. we can guarantee you that they are and they're doing it in the face brick and mortar rooms too. But how can we verify that they're

091not? Um, typically we can verify when they are what I do is I have a meeting with those those kids. We we our teachers each have an advisory and they uh every student has an adviser and the the teachers are responsible for looking at the progress from a a weekly basis and if there red flags that pop up they they send them my way first. they'll they'll reach out and say, "Hey, um I it it appears you're using chat GPT. This is not indicative of your normal writing. Uh it looks like you you're maybe um not using it." And most of the time that'll that'll correct the behavior. Um but if if it continues, then they'll send them to me and then I look at a whole bunch of data. I look at how much

092time they've spent on um on their work. And typically what happens is if they're spending six seconds on a, you know, six minute assignment or 6 minutes on a 10-minute assignment, we we know that there's red flags. And I'll have the conversation. I'll say, I'm not accusing you of anything, but it looks like the data is implying to me that you are not doing what you should be doing. And that means you're probably not going to pass the final at the end. And if you don't pass the final, you're not going to pass the class. Yes. Yeah. So, the the proctored final, how is that administered in a virtual setting like this? Um, most of the kids will come in and take the the test locally, and I I shouldn't say most. A large number

093will come in on site here. Um, they'll sit at a table in my office and they'll take take the test here, or um Mrs. Logan will sit in her office and and uh she'll proctor it. We basically make sure that they only have the notes that the teacher allows. um they they can't have other um windows open. Uh so we we go through a whole process to make sure that they're not using other items. Their cell phone is set aside. Uh if they're doing it virtually, and some of our students, I I would say about at least half of our students do it virtually. Uh we have a process where we we start out by doing a 360 view of the room uh to make sure that there's nobody else in the room. There's not

094another computer there. uh their their cell phone is placed on a shelf or something behind where they're at so we know that they don't have access to their cell phone. Um they leave their microphone on, they leave their camera on so we can see them taking it. Um and then they also share their screen so we can see what what's showing up on the screen and not just one window but the whole screen. So in the 360 view we know that they don't have a second monitor. We know that they don't have a second computer. Um, and so we we have a integrity process that most of the the for paid proctoring services have. Um, and then we make sure that they're when they take the test, we're watching them take the test to make

095sure that they're doing it the right way. Okay. Thank you. And we we're also uh right now in negotiations with a company called Honorlock, which is a um professional service that does this for universities around the around the country. And that'll be a little bit of a game changer if we can have access to it. But it'll it'll allow us to do the proctoring. And that has a combination of live and AI um monitoring uh to detect whether cell phones are being used. Um if a cat comes into the room during the test, it'll flag flag it. Um it records the whole thing. So, we can we can uh go back and review to see if the the reason for the voice in the background um was mom just coming in and saying, "Hey, dinner's

096ready." or if it was someone whispering an answer to the to the kids. Question. Getting back to Yes. the slides. Um the graph on high school at risk local. Yeah. What population are we talking about? Then when you say local, are you talking just WSD? Are we talking those that have choice? And are we talking everybody except international? We're talking everybody except international. And specifically, um, this data, uh, was taken from just our high school. I didn't look at our middle and elementary, but that's a much smaller population. I could certainly pull that data out as well. No, but because it says high school, I kept that. I just wanted to see where that is. I didn't label high school in the second one, so that that's the only reason I pointed that out. No.

097Okay. Thank you. Um, and then the other piece in the future, can you just have a number as how many we're talking about? So, we have a percentage. Sure. But what's the overall, you know, if it's 32 students, 82 students? Yeah. Whatever. That's helpful as well. Absolutely. Thank you. All right. Um, any other questions on any of the graphics here or proctoring process or my philosophy on anything? Just looked like there was improvement over the three years for the the the decrease in the the the nose over the course of three years. So, congratulations on yeah, you know, increasing that performance over the threeear span. Appreciate it. Uh sometimes the data is a direct result of what we do and sometimes it's just a blip in the data when we have a small sample size

098like we have. But we we have a great staff and we think we're doing a lot of great stuff for our kids. So I choose I choose to reserve judgment on whether or not that that's indicative of whether there's improvement being made or whether that's an indicative of of the the um the rigor of the class. Sure. because because I'm not I'm not seeing that correlation yet. I have other data to suggest otherwise. So, one thing with some of the other data, um, one of the problems we have uh testing our students is that many of them opt out. Part of the reason they're coming to us is because they they don't want to be in the building. So, getting them to come in to take those standardized tests are difficult. And I know some

099of the like the um I I don't remember which piece of data it was, but we had like two students do the testing. Um and so most of I shouldn't say most, a lot of those um test results that show that we have low literacy rates are because we had two students come in who never do the work when they're supposed to, but they come in on the days when we give them snacks to come in to take the test. And I'm not saying they shouldn't be coming in. We want everybody to come in. And Tracy, you can probably give me numbers on we had a huge increase this last year. Yeah, I can't I can't give the exact numbers, but we had we had a really nice increase in the number of students who

100tested us with us this year. And we changed our our procedure um into how we reached out to those families and um that it seemed to be really effective for us. So, we're constantly going to look at that and revise it. So, that sounds promising. Yeah, we identified that as a gap last year and um became a focus for the team this year. Tracy is our school assessment coordinator has done fabulous work on communicating, educating our families about the importance of those assessments and working for ways different schedules, different a variety of ways to get our families to come to the building and engage. Uh the part of the problem is that you cannot take standardized test state standardized tests offsite. We are uh there's a pilot through DPI this for next year that we

101are going to apply for that would allow some of that state testing to be offsite. So we're excited about the possibilities there as well. Okay. I just want to remind members of the board that this demographic is different than the regular brick and mortar schools. And I taught at an online school, not ecampus. And I initially went into it thinking, you know, I'm very big on rigor. I'm very big on on so many different things. And I want to say twothirds to threequarters of the kids, I had 200 that they were running away from something. And so then it wasn't necessarily I mean my goal is always how can I get them proficient in advance but my mentality changed of how do I get them to pass? How do I get them to earn the

102credits? And when we're looking at this high school that's really what it comes down to is how can we get them that high school diploma that they need? How can we get that improvement? So while we always want them at a higher rigor, we have to get them where they're at. and a lot of them coming in are I'm running away and I just I need to get the credits to graduate. So, it took me a bit to shift my focus. Um, and so I'm just asking us to kind of remember when we're talking about that at risk, how many you did speak to earlier. It's a large number of them. That that's a piece that we also have to take into account. And thank you for that. But I also want to point out

103that we try to meet every kid where they're at and move them forward. There's more. We had we had a student come in. He graduated last year. He came in as a freshman. Uh he completed three grade levels of math that freshman year. Advanced eligible pre-calculus and calculus. And he by the time he graduated, he had 18 college credits. He had 34 overall credits for his graduation. So th those top flyers that want to take advantage of it are are challenged at levels they've never been challenged at before. And we have both. Yes, we have both. But most of those kids don't want to do it because it's harder work and they're already good at the game. Correct. My many of my kids included. I mean, I tried to recruit my own children and I

104only got one of them. But, uh, because they were really good at the game of playing student and they didn't have to work as hard. No, thank I wasn't implying all. I just wanted to make sure that we remember that. Thank you. Yeah, I guess I would remind the board that it's about doing what's best for every student and that the data should reflect uh an improvement uh more in in somewhat of a standardized fashion that that this particular environment of online learning is best for that student to achieve uh success in education and not necessarily that that the the brick brick and mortar institution is a a hindrance to them rather u prove that point prove that case that's what needs to be proven to me and whether or not ecampus is doing is

105the right tool to provide that that solution for them or uh if ecampus is doing uh doing the best at it that we possibly can do uh so is the class rigorous enough compared to what's in the brick and mortar. Is the um are the children going to have more uh more or less interventions at their disposal in a brick and mortar versus in a virtual setting? Is a child going to um be able to have the be if they're if they're for instance if they're not showing up for class they're truent if they're in the high school is it noticeable more so than it is in a virtual setting what is best for that child that's what's important let the data show that what kind of how would you like us or what kind

106of data would you like for us to to focus on to to bring that to I think that's a great transition excuse me I'm sorry but to Tracy's going to highlight some student measurables and I think that might be a great transition to if there are any suggested revisions to that piece sorry that's good thank you okay so um at e campus um as you know we believe that every student should have a voice in shaping their online learning path and our measurable student achievement goals are built on that belief belief. They're grounded in personalization, growth, and meaningful progress. And uh here's how we make that vision a reality. We do offer the students customized learning pathway development. Um every student creates and updates a personalized learning plan with their advisor each year. And these

107plans are more than check boxes. They are student driven road maps, connected academic requirements to personal goals and interests. Um our target is for 85% of students to meet or exceed their personal learning um plan goals which we monitor through advisory meetings and updates in their learner profiles. Um we also uh have company based student progress with that instead of moving through courses um for just completion sake. Our students demonstrate that what they've actually learned all students pursue goals tied to Wisconsin academic standards common core other well established benchmarks. Um their progress is measured through real evidence. So the company based assessments that we we talked about earlier or curated portfolios that showcase what they know and and what they can do. Um we have college and career readiness. We support students in preparing for

108life after high school whether it means entering college so or another pathway. To measure readiness we use growth data from district assessments on ACT Wisconsin forward and other interim diagnostics. Um our goal is that 90% of the students show at least meeting or accelerated skill score growth in reading and math. We also um have learner profiles. Each student maintains a learner profile updated twice a year with the help of their adviser. Uh these goals these profiles are more than academic records. They reflect a student's strengths, needs, interests, goals and serve as a meaningful tool for reflection and planning throughout their educational journey. And these goals reflect um who we are as a school. We are student centered, growth oriented and committed to continuous improvement. Um they help us stay focused on what matters most which

109is preparing students to design lives that are meaningful and self-directed. Thank you Tracy. I also just remind us that part of the resolution that was brought forward in May was that ecampus would come quarterly to ed services and bring some student fresh student data to the to the discussions. Great. Um you know I I I appreciate uh I appreciate the uh the intentions for the goals. Um this is particular area of where I felt that these are more uh especially uh expand high quality professional development for staff. 100% of the ecampus staff will come uh complete a minimum of 10 hours of targeted uh professional development. That's an expectation. That shouldn't necessarily be a goal. um when when we look at things like uh 80% of 85% of our uh student body uh meeting or

110exceeding their PLP progress goals that I'm I'm presuming that they had some sort of uh intervention with a with a staff in setting those particular goals. But how are how are we using that as a smart goal that's measurable? How are we able to measure that that success and where is that information and data then being uh captured and portrayed to the board uh on that success piece um competencybased uh student progress 100% of students will pursue learning goals well by nature of them being in the um in the course that they're going to be aligned with the Wisconsin state academic standard. I mean that's not really a goal like that's a minimum expectation that you know uh 90% of school students will demonstrate uh median uh to accelerated score growth in reading mathematics associated

111to district testing metrics. Okay, I get that 90% of students will demonstrate some sort of improvement. Uh I get that. Uh and and that might mean might be one of the first uh goals that I can see. How are we measuring that? Yes, ACT assessment got some of that information here too. Learner profiles 100% of the school students will develop and update uh bianual learner profiles. That's another expectation of the of the program. That's not a goal. That's a expectation. help me understand there was uh I guess what I would say I I don't know the question exactly other than help me understand how I see the student achievement goals is common s sure sure if I can clarify um I see a goal as something that like here's a benchmark and here's how we're

112going to outpace that benchmark and this is the quantifiable data that we can look to to say improve pro that we surpassed that goal and then the next year we're going to set another goal that that's above and beyond that because we're seeking for continuous improvement. That's what I consider a goal, not an expectation. Craig, do you have an example of one that would be helpful that you maybe thought through as you look through? Sure. Sure. Absolutely. Um and one example would be our ACT data um for eCampus. Um but remember the large number of students don't take the ACT. That's right. We had 21 students that took the ACT data that took the ACT and um in our in our and eCampus 58 of them 58% of them scored below 15. So that means

113that um we we well over half of the students that took the ACT could only get barely 40% of the answers correct on the 60.8% of the students were at risk students. Um so if I' I'd be curious how WHS lowest 68% scored on the ACTs as well. I mean, I'm just trying to compare apples to apples. If if we're if our measurement is going to be all the standardized test scores, we're probably not going to be effective. Um, but then we need to figure out as a district what what do we do with those kids that are running away from brick and mortar and who do you want to be responsible for that? Right. That's that's where I where I was hoping the conversation would be five years ago. um when when we're still

114in the startup phase of eCampus and having the discussion about where we're moving forward into the future um because right now when when we look at ACT data they are falling short of the high school um and my always will my question is are we are we creating a situation where it's a where it's a rigorous high school uh education potentially for these children or or do we create another Discovery Academy online. Sure. You know, because that that's my concern. But but then we eliminate those kids like the young man that I talked about who's graduating with 18 college credits um at a 35 on his ACT, you know. Sure. But that seems to be more of the exception than the rule. and and right now the data seems to be that but if we

115make it a another online discovery academy we eliminate the opportunity for those kids that are highf flyers that want want to pursue that and our our goal is to meet every student where they're at. I understand what you're saying. That's the direction we understand. If if as a district we have a conversation like this, say, "Hey, listen. We should look at this data. We should look at some of the um lower uh concerns within eCampus and refine goals and plans to to start um seeing some improvement in those those scores. um those conversations haven't been had at this board level because I don't know if that data just wasn't shared till this point in time. I I'm really concerned because now we're asking for another five years. I happen to have um when it comes

116to enrollment data, yeah, we we can we can load as much as we want to say that I I forget what he said 175 local students are an improvement over the p past years, but other school districts are are growing exponentially when it comes to their online programs. uh like McFarland, Wakaaw, uh Appleton, um McFarland has 150 teachers. Appleton has 140. Have you ever heard of a school district in Grassburg? They have 881 students in their program through the Wisconsin East School Network. It's consortium of schools, which we're a member of and they're the smaller one. Um, the data seems to, if we're looking at ACT data, which seems to be the best indicator, we're among like the the bottom 10%. I mean, maybe I mean, the concern the concern is that maybe we're not

117great at what we're doing right now and and we're asking for another five years. I I'm having an issue with that. I I I I'd much rather focus on on what's best for those kids and focus on resources and and um um attention as a district on that and less about the retention and the dollars, the fiscal component of it because that's what's most important to me. I want these kids to succeed and I I realize I come across abrasive by trying to articulate that. But I really have a deep care and desire for these kids to achieve. If we're going to do something, let's do it well. Let's find ways to improve it. I think we're all at the same spot on that, right? There's no one at the table that uh would argue

118that point and doesn't work diligently every day to make that happen. And um back to I think your original question when you said help me understand. Yeah. um the student achievement goal data. What I the way I approached that those markers are markers that uh directly align with the mission and vision of each campus. knowing that we are taking students from uh not all but some are have been unsuccessful in their current brickandmortar uh situation and we're bringing them into a virtual world where we are saying uh college and career readiness for example we are saying we will measure that through standardized assessments and I guess I guess I don't mean to cut you off but that's that's my my argument prove to me that this is the best alternative for that ch child. And

119right now the data doesn't seem to suggest that. It seems to we have 35% abs chronic absenteeism and 16% chronic absism at the high school is a problem. Like these kids aren't even showing up. And then where's where's that information when it comes to their success in the classroom? We we assume that they're probably not using Google uh but yet or forward numbers. You know, you explained how it's challenging to get kids to take a standardized exam. It's promising that we're looking at other ways in which to make sure we we incentivize that or or encourage that type of behavior so that we have a but but I you haven't proven it. you haven't proven that that it's the best possible outcome for that kid that doesn't want to be in brick and mortar that

120those those interventions aren't aren't use uh helpful in a in a brickandmortar setting for that particular child. It's not there 35% chronic they're not showing up. So I think Craig has a lot of very very valid concerns. I completely agree with you Craig. I want to see um the the absenteeism data point is great. I would like to see more data points that give us a fuller picture. I also know enough either former students or present students who have very good reasons for going to eCampus and I know the kind of troubles that they go through whether it's uh dealing with some of the viciousness that goes on when you're packed into a building with 1400 other kids or you know a variety of other things. So I understand the value of having ecampus and

121having a program like this. I think it's it's it is a good program to have. My question then um to I suppose uh pardon the expression but to split the baby is um can we change the parameters and the length of this contract instead of having it be 5 years can we do it for a shorter period of time? Jared do can you give me some insight? We can do it for a shorter period of time. My my worry in doing it for too short of a period of time is that we become reactionary to a shorter length of data, right? Um and what I mean by that is if you're only going to give us a year to try to get towards what goal that we're treating, right? Realizing that um what it takes

122to get all that done um may not be a length of time satisfaction to get there. So I guess What I'm what I'm trying to understand is that um you know I I'm you know trying to understand clarity. One of the things I'm unclear about is is the discussion about our our um our data uh and and where we're going. Are we looking to not renew this contract or are we looking to clarify a contract that is more indicative of what the board's data needs and wants or end goals uh to education are. So, you know, I I just don't know what ends we're aiming towards. Yeah. And I could have some clarity on that topic first because it doesn't make a difference for us to talk through a bunch of data if the aim

123or goal is to say, you know what, we just don't think this is profitable for us. I'm not meaning moneywise. I mean in doing what it is to serve these students. Yeah. Right. Um, I want to hear that first from the the board and committee uh to understand where we're going and if it is profitable for us to enter into this arrangement uh meaning serving those students that it serves in and our aims then we can certainly clarify what more do you want to see in realms of data how your connections with their their board is um and clarify those aims and goals a little bit more as we continue and then tell us what kind of a runway do you think as a board we need uh to uh get to those goals and

124aims with specific uh Craig immeasurable goals that uh the board would like to see happen. Yeah. So that being said, I think and I'm not it's not like I'm making a formal motion or anything like that, but what what I would like to see I think because I agree with Craig, but I'm not at a point where I'm like and I don't I don't know that you are either Craig. I'm not at a point where I'm saying like, oh yeah, like just get rid of the charter school. I'm not I'm not saying that. I think that I understand what you're saying about a short period of time. I'm not looking at super rigorous data goal setting for a short period of time. I'm looking at because anything you do in government takes a long time

125to get done and it's like turning around an ocean liner. Hey, I say aircraft carrier. Yeah, that's Yeah, sure. There you go. Aircraft probably really quickly. Exactly. And so, so what I would look at is in I would look at renewing it for a for a year contract. The goal not being that we're going to make uh super huge changes across the board. The goal being that we're going to figure out how to gather better data points. I would add that to um uh the measurable goals and then uh for and then I would add to student achievement goals. And I think this speaks to what you're talking about, Craig. I think attendance is I always tell I always tell people the number one thing whether it's work or school if you attend you're way

126more likely to succeed. I think uh working to reduce the attendance or the truency rate from what did you say it was 35 35%. Reducing it from 35% maybe I don't know I don't want to say a specific number because if we're doing it for a year that's kind of complicated thing. Um, but maybe we can work on a specific goal that we want to set for reducing the truency rate. And I think that reducing the truency rate would be a good start working on getting some more specific data. Craig, if you want, I'm not force you to or anything, but if you want to be like the kind of go-between and you want to work with the eCampus uh people to work on some of the the data and the standards there, I think

127that we could probably figure something out. Like I said, I think eCampus is a good program and I think that it helps out a lot of students who are frustrated with the format of a regular school system. Um I back when I maybe it was there when I was going to school and I didn't know about it, but blame the advertisers, I suppose. Hey. Um but uh no, I think uh um I would have really enjoyed it myself if I had had the opportunity to go to uh to go to an e campus. I'm gonna react a little bit to the suggestion you made. Mhm. Um, one I I I disagree with the one year. I don't think that is enough runway and honestly I will tell you that the amount of work that a

128charter has to go through with their board and then with our board and to move this on uh our team is going to spend a lot of time working on just reworking the charter if we do it on an annual basis than they are going to be serving those we need to serve. And so I am looking for and I'm hoping for a three to fiveyear uh agreement. And I I know that means that we're putting a lot of trust in you as a board to give our administration the runway to get done what we need to get done on your behalf to make sure that our administration and our staff are working with the charter staff and charter uh uh uh board right to have that happen. That's why I suggested the liaison piece

129between our board, you guys, and their board as another measure so that you can come alongside of us to help have some of those confirmations go. I will remind you that you can also end the agreement at any time only. Well, you told me last time we talked about this that it was only if they failed to meet these goals. Uh, exactly. And that's why I said first question is are are we looking to end or are we looking to say we we still like the aims and goals that we're aiming at but we may want to do some uh refining as to what we're our ask is in the goal section here. Uh and if it if there is a uh refining that can happen then suffices in three to five year in your

130goal discussion. I want to remind you that it's going to take us some time to not only get your information, take it to that board, have it come back, and then have it go to the school board in our short runway. Yeah. Well, and that's why my proposal wasn't to have a one-year with an overhaul of the standards. it was to add uh to reduce currency by some by some percentage amount which does not have to be I'm not looking at 15% or any from 35 down to uh 10 or anything like that you know I'm not looking for something crazy um necessarily my point was more so let's take a year that way we can review it at the end of the year at the end of that year and then we can maybe

131have some better things in place and we can put together a longer contract with better standards again I don't think a year gives there or right enough uh impetus to get the policies and procedures in place to really make an effect to within that one year to look at what things are going on and to get enough data back by the end of the year to rewrite and redo another contract a year later. It's just it's just not enough time when you're talking about this board working in conjunction with that board and it's just not enough time. I'm just telling you I don't think it's enough time and I know that's hard to hear and that's why I'm saying like give us something to work on so that we can serve you and we can

132make sure it happens. Well, I mean the board can always choose at the end of the year to renew. Even if we're like okay so we've seen we're moving in this direction, things took longer than we thought. still going to renew for a further period of time. It's malleable that way. But I think that having that deadline on there is good because I think that what so easily happens so often in government is that things get pushed to the side because we have so much going on and then we don't get data until we're like a week away from having to make a decision. That's what I say will happen. And I also am understanding you're not hearing my request, right? So I do what you will. We'll move on. We'll try to make it

133happen. So right now we've heard from one committee member. I feel that five years is fine in there. We have a referendum. We have a new strategic plan. We have to consider our bandwidth as well. There are a number of things that we need to be focusing on as we do it. And how long is each thing going to take? Is it going to take two months? Is it going to take six months? Is it going to take a year? Um a number of things have kind of been thrown out on the table as concerns. So that's a couple. we haven't heard from all people as far as what the concerns are. So that in itself, if we take this to the next meeting, we're a month away and then it's so there there's time

134and things that are involved with that. Um I understand and somewhat agree with Craig's concern about the way the goals were written. Um 100% of this, 100% of this, how is that measurable? Yet at the same time, if you know anything about writing a personalized learning plan or if you know anything about those competency based student progress things, what we see is a 100% of the students will meet those goals. I guess in the future, it might be nice to have an exemplar or an example of that because within those goals, it talks about their attendance. I'm sure I I can't assume. I only know what mine were when we had written those. It talks about attendance. It talks about learning. It talks about standards. It talks about those things. So when I read this

135and they say 100% of the students are meeting those goals doesn't say meet, it says pursue. Um in the it has median something something whatever. Okay. So changing the word pursue that would be a much better thing than saying not I have an issue with this whatever that okay pursue is a little too vague. Can we have something of meat? that would have been a much um easier conversation to then navigate and move forward with because then okay yeah pursuing it I would agree with that wholeheartedly that pursuing is is too general so can we do something a little bit more specific that shows the growth within that um but having an example of it I think would have been helpful for our board and our for committee to see what is there because this

136is very general this is better than where it was three years ago. In my opinion, wholeheartedly, we now have goals. We have things that way. We still have a ways to go, I think, is what we're hearing pretty loudly. Um, but what does that specifically look like? I'm going to ask, you know, can we look at what's the objective at hand? The objective at hand is are we renewing the contract or not? I think we first need to decide, do we all agree that this should continue to move forward? That's kind of what Jared said. Yeah. So, if we go to that, if we go to and then for how long if those are the two pieces here and then what words do we need in the resolution to move that? Just for the sake

137of time, we're at 920 right now. I'm in a I'm I'm I agree that we need a campus for that. We have a different populations that need this programming. I don't think that one year is enough. I understand the concerns of how do we kind of um wrap our brains around moving forward and if it's not working in two years, three, whatever that time frame is, then you need to evaluate at that point. I guess I would be looking to Jared to say, okay, hearing that there are some board members that have concern can this be done in less than five years? If so, what's a fair amount considering we have a referendum that we are going to need to have discussion about? Again, we have the potential of multiple um cuts that need to

138be made. We have bandwidth from our superintendent and our administrative team that have other things as well. So using whether we talk about a barge, a ship carrier, whatever analogy you want to use, we have to be honoring that also that there are a lot of other things here and maybe this doesn't get as much um I don't know the word I want to use here. I don't know if it's going to get all of the attention that we're seeking through this conversation today. I don't know how we can have everything that comes to the surface have 100% of the attention. Since I've been on the board, we've been talking about bandwidth. And right now, my concern as a board member with a a failed referendum and moving forward is the concern of bandwidth. So,

139I believe we have a need for this population, for this kids, for this programming. I believe that we need some time to get that through and I'm going to trust my administration to make a suggestion of what do you think that time is. Um, and then I'm going to trust the board to or the administration to go with that. Um, because that's what we hired them to do. Just just a second, Craig. I I think this is a good point to I agree with what Diana is saying that that we have uh two board members who seem to be volunteering for that liaison position. I'm not going to volunteer for it if we're extending for more than a year on the contract though just to be clear. Okay. Are you interested in that position of

140being a leazison? I I don't know if I have the personal bandwidth to take that on. Well, the risk is having Bob and Tracy come here every month. Well, you know, I mean, I'm okay with that, too. Uh, I guess I guess I would take exception to the administration's characterization that one-year contract isn't uh enough bandwidth because uh because I I think that ecampus has been in existence for the last seven to eight years if I'm not mistaken and there I have to believe that there is some uh quantitative data that they're considering or looking at. I'm hoping. Um if there's not, then that that's alarming to me. Um the the thing is I have brought this for as long as I've been on this board every every year that hey, we need to be

141paying attention to this and and it's been falling on deaf ears. By putting a one-year one-year um uh time frame on this particular contract, it it it forces a discussion every year. I'm not and and what the administration seems to uh make an assumption about is that after a year that we're not going to renew ecampus or for not going to renew it for a longer period of time. Can I please share with you again my rationale because I don't think you're hearing me. I think it's falling on my ears. uh which is I hear your concerns about where you're headed and Craig I understand and I hear your concerns about um and their long held concerns for a number of years right that the board had not as a total conglomerate leeched into right

142but the reality of trying to get done what you need to do in a one-year process that is um looked over on on a contract basis um by at least three major entities, their board, our board, and the DPI, right? And having to go through a legal process of that contract along with trying to get done the aims and goals of what you're trying to get done with um improving data and improving the student experience, which I think is laudable and I think is needed, right? doesn't give us enough runway. At at minimum two years would help us because then at least for a full year you would have data from one full year. you would have some indicators from year two and then we can start getting into that uh process by looking at

143the contract again and saying were we on the right goal path are we are we aiming there and what I'm suggesting is that yes uh you leave it to the administration to make sure that we understand those aims and goals and that we make sure that they are worked on and reported to you on as frequent basis as you need to and that's why I also suggest the liaison so that we have better communication between our board and their board to make sure that their board understands our importance of what we're asking, right? And that their board is doing the work that they need to do in order to stay in con in concert with us. And and again, if if we don't have enough runway, we might as well just not enter into a

144contract is what I'm saying because it's going to be difficult for us to monitor that. And and that's kind of where I'm at. I'm I'm looking at I'm looking at a number of different districts that that would be a great solution for those children that that need that resources to consider to enroll into. And that's what I'm aiming that was my first question. Are we are we looking to continue to do ecampus work for those we serve or not? And it sounds like we have one member who's saying no, I don't think so. I or or at least I'm going to make it uh really difficult for us to enter in that process by doing a one-year contract. It seems to be feeling like it has a difficult. So, so Jared, I I feel like

145you weren't entirely hearing. Let charity have a shot. Thanks, D. Um I I look at it from the business contract perspective. Is there a way that we could propo propose a multi multi-year contract with an annual review clause built into it, you know, with an at will clause that would allow us to review at any point. And if it is not what we need it to be, then make a decision at that point. We already have that clause in here is what I was saying. Sam's worry about that clause is that the the goals aren't good enough to aim towards. It's not at will. It's it's it's at will if they do not live up to the standards that are set in place. Exactly. And and that's what I was saying uh uh you know

146and I think that's what you were getting at which is an annual review, right? to make sure that those aims and goals are in place and that they're making pro adequate progress towards those goals, right? Um, and I agree with Sam, the way that the goals are written uh don't emulate what this board wants right now. And two, they don't delineate what sufficient progress within a year is. It talks about sufficient progress towards the end of the five-year. And that's why my second ask was, if we want to make this work, what goals are you looking at? We need to have those very clear and we need to have the annual markers clear so that we can then approach their board and say this is what we're looking to do right they have to have

147acceptance of that and then we have to approve it uh at our um meeting at the end of the month here which is a week away and so that's what I was speaking about initially adding in the truency the truency specification and then adding a measurable goal of getting better data for measurable goals, not of having those having that data set so that we can make decisions, but moving in that direction, right? And building that, would you be in favor of a longer contract as long as we had an annual review of those? If at that annual review, we have the right to terminate the contract if we so wish. And I believe we do compared to our language. Jason, you can tell me if I'm wrong, but I believe that to be true. We

148could also add a number four on grounds for termination that that provides that if it if it's not sufficient. What slide are you on? That's page 11 in the contract. Mr. I feel like I'm I'm on I'm on the the discussion page with you, Jared, when it comes to uh understanding the uh the a multi-year contract. I get that. At this point in time, I don't think it's fair being so late in the game to come to the board and say we need to come come to an understanding about the parameters and the the metrics by which we would evaluate uh a contract uh when it's such late so late in the game. That's why I feel like I give it a year so that we can come up with that, you know, and then

149and then when we have that information, then we can say, okay, now we got something to work with. Now we can give the runway or not to proceed with with the program. I I will share that the only reason we're here, right, uh is is not because it's uh late in the in the game, right? Um we're here because a month ago, right, um this contract was brought to you. Prior to that, information was given, right? Uh and and we're here because late in the game, members of our board had said, uh no, and we want more and we want more definition. That means it's incumbent upon our board here to give the definition required. They only reacted in a way that um conformed to the DPI, conformed to last contracts with this board uh

150and conformed to what they wanted and they they gave it to you um a month and ahead a month and then some ahead of where they were going with us um at at an education committee meeting and at a full board meeting and now we're here at another education subcommittee meeting. So it may seem late and it feels late, but that's because of our own wishes, right? We're the ones who are bringing this question up. That means it's incumbent upon us if we want to serve these students and allow the the charter to serve them that we need to be uh clear in our definition so that they can react to them. It will feel late in the game. I agree. I I I mean again I take exception to those comments because I've been

151bringing these concerns up for the last three years that I've been on one board member out of a board of nine. One one board member out of board and it's it's a shame that the board at this point in time has not had adequate information to to form a perspective on on and the importance of looking into this in greater deep detail. I agree with you. We we've had other things that have um taken the majority of the bandwidth. I agree that this needs some attention and things at that point. I where I don't agree is that this has um if I think about big rocks, is this one of our big rocks right now? I think it is. I don't think this is one of our biggest rock. I think it's a medium-sized rock

152in there. So, if we look at bandwidth, um you said you don't have the bandwidth to be the liazison. You said you don't have the I said I will if we do a one-year contract. So with that well there's one board one committee member says a one-year contract. We haven't heard from two of the others in terms of where we're going with it. I just my point of bringing this up is we have other administrative team members that we have to look at bandwidth there as well. Um seven years. Yeah, you you're right. We've been talking about this for a really long time. And Jared, is this year three or year four for you? I don't remember. the end of my third year. But when I look at what he's done in the last 3

153to four years that this has now moved up, it was very low on the priority. I'm going to speak from my perception when Jared came on and it is moving up in there. I'm just from my view, it's not the biggest rocks that we're dealing with right now. It it's still here. So that's where does this need one year to be done? No. I'm okay if we say a three. That's right. what I I don't want to put a number to it simply because I don't know what the administration needs in there. I just don't think one year is enough to get it done and I'm curious what the other committee members feel in terms of timeline just for time and and let's have a vote here a hand vote as to who would be

154okay with a fiveyear uh the length of it being five years with an annual review. raise your hand. So, does that give you any direction, Jay? it it gives direction, but I also um I want to make sure that if there is discussion about what that annual review looks like and if these aren't the goals, we need to have very clear language suggestion uh to their board as to what you guys are looking for for oversight and contract and meeting the contract. Right? So if there is a goal around truency and what what what do we want to see for truency and what's an acceptable um you know try you know remediation you know to to hit you know realizing it's a goal and if they fall short you you then have a discussion point

155how far short did they fall or not right um if it's they they smashed it then um you really don't have much of a a discussion point there because it hit the aims that you were looking at, right? Uh so what are uh the specific goals and I would pick two, right? And I would pick uh what you're looking for within a within one year, right? Um to to share that and then we write language that says after a review each year, the measurement um uh may may change, right? Doesn't have to change, but it may change, right? Uh, and I think that that would suffice for contract language that gives you the year, right, uh, that you're looking for. It gives a longer contract, but it gives you the year that you want uh

156to be able to say, uh, hey, uh, here's something, but it it takes away the part that I'm worried about, which is diverting resources to review contract, and it gives us resources to look at uh, and do things like measure the data, make sure that those uh, procedures are in place and everything else to make sure that we get to those aims. Uh and and that's that's kind of what I'm trying to and what I was trying to say is we have a way to do it uh where we can still meet the goals of what you want uh in that one-year review period, but it takes away the other layer that would take time and efforts away from what we're trying to do to serve our students. I'm wondering if we can come up

157with something today um around two goals that and have some some real measurement within one year and that allows us to review that measurement at the end of the year to see if we want to change that measurement in future years within the five-year contract or a three-year contract. I need at least a two-year contract. I I we can't just be coming back at this year over year with the amount of effort and energy it takes to rewrite a whole new contract. I I mean I think three members of the committee said that they wanted to move forward with a fiveyear contract. I don't know that I'm the I don't know that I'm uh a door a doors stop in this situation. So I I think that I think that we are where we are

158and we're going to have to talk about you know maybe some of those more specific uh items moving forward, but it looks like people want to move forward with the contract uh with the alterations that we discussed earlier. Okay, that's what I'm saying. ho how can we uh what what are the two goals then that we want to put in it because again I don't aim for five votes I aim for the whole board being on I mean I think you know it's great that we can uh come together uh as a as a board to really serve those we serve and if there's a way that we can do this with a five-year contract but an annual renewal um that is based off the data you want then that's important to Jason, what Jason?

159Jason just have a proposal that under the student achievement goals that uh we would add two more roles. One of them being attendance and around attendance and I will work with the team to flesh that out. Attendance and truency are different things to me. So I would add a second goal around truency. And then um underneath that that chart that which is on page four, I would propose that something uh some language around eCampus uh there be collab continued collaboration with the eCampus governance board and full board of education develop a comprehensive student data dashboard to establish further long range goals. And I think earlier we said you would take a look at the the other suggest revisions. So if you wouldn't mind looking at those. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. That's what I would propose. I'm

160good with that. Yeah. Last comment. Craig. Yeah. I just I just want to I I appreciate the conversation. I'll say that. Um I I do also want to keep people's in the back of people's mind this particular sentiment that weighs on me pretty heavily. We're we're talking about um closing buildings that happen to indicate some strong performance numbers uh when it comes to to their achievement and and that that we have a huge focus on and uh the success of those children. Um yet I'm a little bit concerned that for the longest time that this has been on the back burner and and yet um that's why I feel like this is this is such an important conversation to have. Um it's about getting kids the resources that they need. And I'm not I'm not

161sure that we're we're accomplishing that. I feel like this is a step in that direction. Ken, I agree. All right. Yeah. point taken. My my goal is to try to get to the aims you want, but also in a way that I think it it actually gets us to the aims. Um I don't think a one-year contract gets us to the aims. I think a fiveyear contract or a three-year contract with an annual review on things that you guys think are important really um finally gets you what you're looking for. Um I could be wrong. That's my estimation of that. But but it's also in a way that will um gear our staff over there who works with these students towards that instead of the administrative value of trying to redo another contract. Okay. Are

162we ready to move on? Just uh for clarity, for um action item purposes, I have some um to-dos around providing Sam a crosswalk and I'll provide that with everyone on the committee and and President Wartman. I will specifically work with Sam on some revisions around that demographic piece and I'll work with Sam with uh the goals and then adding that collaboration piece before it goes to the board package and board docks with full board. And then just another added item just goes back to the new enrollments data piece. Yes. With that just as we're summarizing appreciate that. I know. No, but I know that wasn't the contractual piece, but I was just summarizing the action items from this section. Yes. Thank you. Move was to board up director updates. That's okay. Yeah, we just have

163four pieces that I thought would be uh celebrations but also keeping folks in the loop. Uh the first is that uh the library uh team earlier this school year presented the future ready library plan and the goals that you know similar to the tech team that those gears and so the team has been working diligently throughout the year around achievement of those goals. They recently the team recently put together this literature that uh will go out to schools uh at our schools and it's just around celebrations of the work that the team is doing. I won't read things to you but the five star library moments are really around professional growth. So what is the team doing to continue to grow and learn? How are they developing welcoming and engaging spaces? How are we celebrating

164our libraries? We know there's a national library month in April and so how did they do some of the with that work uh getting the word out about the great resources that are in every library and then collaboration and support. So again this is put together by the team be pushed out at schools just a celebration. Any questions about that? The next piece is student rounding. Um earlier I think actually Chris Malloy and I talked about this idea of student rounding and so uh as the year concludes here I think it's important and a celebration to note that Chris and I uh personally sat with nearly 300 students this year and just a reminder that we sat with uh grade three 30 students at these grade levels three uh through uh 12 minus 9. And

165so what that means is grade three, 6, and 10, we sat with students at each of those 30 students at each of those grade bands to talk about their insights about reading. At grades four, seven, and 11, we sat with students and talked to them about their insights and how they see themselves as mathematicians. And then at grades five, eight, and 12, we talked to those uh 30-ish students from each of those grade bands, reflecting on their their years at middle school or elementary or high school and what they're thinking about the future. And we've collected some data. As with any new thing, there are things that we will revise and Chris and I will work this summer to revise the model. Um tweak it, not revise it. And um we're looking forward to having

166those stoop discussions as well next year. questions about student routing is just is there a place where the feedback is located on a Google doc that if we wanted to go and see what some of the students are saying? Yes. So what Chris and I did was took the raw data and looked for patterns in the data and we have that by grade band so I can bring that to future ed services if that's helpful. That'd be great. Yeah, I would love to do that. Thanks. Yeah, you're welcome. Thank you for asking. I want to put that on the to-do list. And then in addition to that, um, if you could speak to, okay, here were the patterns or here were the overall trends and these were maybe one or two steps that we did

167to move forward with that would be helpful. Absolutely. Thank you. This is what we heard. This is what we did. It's time intensive, but I it's uh it's one of it's great to sit with our students and listen to them. Really is. It really is. All right. I'm going to uh next is assessment calendar. We know that we want a balanced assessment uh model for our district. And so um despite the fact that I want it to say final draft, not not draft any longer, we still have a draft calendar. But I've worked with our instructional coaches, our title teachers, principles, and other teacher leaders across the district to have a draft assessment calendar. I'm hoping in the next week or two we can say it's no longer draft, it's it. And then in the

168fall, we typically bring that to the ed services for for your uh information. Um, but we're really close. And then the last piece I thought would be a good update is that we partnered with school perceptions around our student and parent engagement surveys this year. That's new. In the past, we've used uh Stutter. And so uh the reports are coming in. There's a lot of spreadsheets, a lot of data, a lot of summaries. So Chris Moy and I are digging through that. I think tomorrow we're spending a couple hours doing doing that. We'll bring that forward. But right now, uh it's a celebration to tell you that we had 505 parents take our survey and 1,59 students. And so we'll bring some of that data forward either through the strategic plan yearly update or through

169planning or through ad services. We'll determine that as we move forward, but there's a lot of data to dig through at this point. Very good. And that those are the direct updates. Okay. So, what are our action items? I I I would uh just go back to my red notes here, right? Again, I'll work with uh Sam to share that crosswalk. We'll do some revision around that student access procedures that we have. I have some highlighted hopefully good notes. I have some ideas around adding to uh the student measurables on the ecampus contract and bring student rounding uh data patterns to the group next time. And Bob, could you summarize the data because I write that down? Uh you want uh new enrollment data for um this past year and moving forward so that it

170reflects uh new enrollments and not repeatedly counting the same students. And it doesn't have to be in the graph, just how many new we have today. We'll share that with the committee as well. Well, very good. So, uh, future agenda items. Anybody get on? Well, you can always let us know. I did. I had two that I let you guys know and I don't see those on. So, human growth and development um will be a future agenda item uh for discussion. policy is going to get the first well already has had the first kick of the can rewriting policy around it but uh then programming discussions came out of that uh policy committee meeting that we want to have as discussion points and uh Sam correct me if I'm wrong but weren't we looking at

171curriculum and lesson plans that you know some we were looking to get those yeah we were looking to have those I think that she talked about getting those to us for this meeting or for so policy We're going to have a a health teacher come to policy on Wednesday. Okay. Of next week. Uh no, excuse me. Tomorrow. Tomorrow. Policy tomorrow. Uh um and um just share like maybe some surface level if need. But then um we are looking to uh have a more in-depth discussion about uh what it is we teach and how we teach it um at a services committee meeting. Uh because that's really where where that belongs. that it doesn't really belong on policy. Um, but we do maybe need to have some of those like surface level discussions just to help

172us write better policy. Okay. What were the two that you had done? I just found it. One of which was L. Oh yeah. Um, Lah had done an audit a year year and a half ago and I was just looking for an update with that. Um reason being is if we are looking at doing any type of cuts within AP or anything that way. Um the discussion initially was around are there classes that aren't meeting the rigor where it's at whatever. So I was just curious and especially with Josh taking a new job elsewhere that just an update to where we're at kind of a thing. Um if that's a possibility there. The other one was regarding that advanced track at at RMS. Um that was something that a community member had brought up and

173so sixth grade um um advanced track and we haven't had an update on we hadn't had an advance we had had an update on the advanced track at the middle school in a bit of time. So just where is that at? Where's that going? Data around has that advanced track been fruitful? And again it's only by one year. Right. Right. Just kind of looking where it's at. So those were just the two that I had asked to be put on the future. But the one that has a little bit more well both of them are timeliness in terms of you know I'll add those to the minutes and then certainly I believe you would work with Jenny Forest. Okay. Is that right? Yeah. Okay. Right. All right. Well then we are officially done at 953.

174953. I was waiting for you to see what the glare I know. It's It's one of the few clocks in the district that's still working. That's not true. Just because the one in the back room doesn't work doesn't mean it's able to do one that works. It's not true.