001rabbit problem. So you can't this. So they make a a fencing kind of thing, but it takes feces and dead animal kind of stuff. So you spread the powder. So I got that. Okay. Yeah, it was different clothes, but I can smell it on me. So if you all can't, that's good. But I'm staying away. Quietly, right? just I'm just here to like try to get up to speed and learn. I'm going to try to uh quietly slip out at 4:13 because I have another meeting with Beaver. Well, no one believe that that clock is accurate back there, just to be clear. Just don't rely on that. That was a loud well and I had this one guy who or gal I don't know who it is but just they they don't follow the proper
002like range protocols because of a certain pattern that they have to do in each crossing. Yeah. And I think he just lays on it. I'm like come on. Okay. Certainly effective but not but you're supposed to be doing it and doesn't need to be that much right. Two longs, one short, one long. Yes. Two longs, one short, one long. All right. Not many people know that. You get 10 extra. Jared, I'm sorry to tell you this, but when Sam gets you gets here, I'm gonna make you give us your file policies, but I want to make sure that I get his notes. So, I should sit there because again, I'm here just as a resource today. Perfect. And I have plenty of other um that I will continue to work on and you may have
003to go through. Hey. Hey Jared. Hey Jared. This is the size. Are you sharing with somebody? Oh yeah. Because I don't like those. So I I got them because Diana doesn't like chocolate and I don't like those. So Oh, peanut butter and thanks. Thanks. We'll give you the not so good candy. That's what he just said. We'll give you the not so good candy. So clearly subcommittees are far less formal than regular committees. Yeah. Are we ready? I am as ready as everyone else. Well, it's 3:30. So let's But I am I don't I uh I started the recording. I'm going to be honest with you and tell you that I'm a little bit kurfuffle because this uh screen works a little differently than what we're normally used to. thoughts. I will just start by
004saying I am incredibly excited to be here today because I have been anxiously chomping at the bit to get rolling on these uh policies so that we have uh guidance for teachers for next year. Um it was noted that you will see that some of these policies did have some work done on them previously and I can review kind of what that work was done and why that work was written the way it was. But obviously any changes we want to make we can go ahead and make them. Um my goal impression is that we will take what we get through tonight to the first read in uh June um policy committee meeting. But our goal tonight is just to kind of do another working session on these to make sure that we are getting
005uh reflected what our um folks want reflected in these before we take them to that first read. You'll note that I put a ton of pieces in the agenda today. Um, including some different policies, the will model policies that I thought related. Um, and then as well as some administrative guideline. I will just say I put the administrative guideline there because I know sometimes when we're talking, we just mention, oh, there's administrative guideline. We'll get to that. I just wanted that to be reflected there. My intent tonight is really just to work through that policy piece to talk through what those processes might look like. And at the end of tonight, I would love to be able to have drafts to move forward to first read of uh one, two, three, four, five different policies.
006Um and then obviously those administrative guidelines we beginning to once we pass that um policy book or once we get through the second read on those. Um, so I just kind of wanted to mention that as well. I do know that the right to review instructional materials model model policy 20 from will was also um uploaded previously. Um, I did want to point out that we did finish the mola policy as it relates to public request, suggestions or complaints. That's policy 9130. Um, and I do have a copy of that if you want to take a look at it. Um, but just as a reminder that if there are complaints from the public about any of our materials that we do have a policy that would handle how we would work through those pieces. So,
007that is my opening statement if anyone has any questions kind of before we get rolling. Did you get Tammy's email? I did get Tammy's email. Yep. And I have that printed right here. Okay. So, I'll kind of walk through her questions as we are working through um those questions. I will just say some of those policies, like I said, I had started to work through a little bit um with Lynn on and that's why some of the things are marked out. Um I know she had commented through like strike out some of the things that talked about like gender identity and transgender. Those we have not yet looked on yet. So, that's why that's still there. I know we could just strike out. I was not suggesting that we leave that there. It just that
008I hadn't worked on that yet necessarily. So everything that's crossed out, you crossed it out. Is that correct? Any of I think it was only the first two that we had actually gotten to. Um 2210 and 2220. Um and I can talk through why I had kind of crossed out those pieces and if we needed to add those back in, it's not a problem at all. Where was that now? the first two pages here of 2210. It's 2210 and 2220. Yep. Do we want to just start with 2210? That'd be a great place. Okay. All right. So 2210 was the idea of the curriculum development piece. And this one I had started working on um with uh Lynn when we decided to put it into the parking lot. So you can see like some of
009the basic changes have been made on it. Um in working through curriculum development in my mind this is sort of the overarching piece of curriculum in the in the school district. So when I had made the choices that we were making it was just sort of like what is our definition? Um why are we choosing what we're choosing? um throughout the piece if there were very few changes made to it and I'm open to any suggestions that folks might have if there are other things that we want to add or subtract from here. To me, this is like the basis of where we're starting with and then each one of the policies kind of takes a different look at it like the the course the course guide the adoption of the courses of study the
010textbook adoption piece but this is sort of the overarching policy. Um, I know at one point we had talked about a seven-year cycle for um, uh, the evaluation process for curriculum. Um, in here it's listed as five. I'm not sure if folks wanted to leave it at five or switch it to seven. Um, what I have outlined in the past when it comes to our curriculum review cycle is I have outlined it as a sevenyear line, but I can easily adopt that to five if folks would be more comfortable with five. It's completely up to what you guys are thinking. If I if I mean um the the curriculum review cycle, I feel um a a seven-year cycle for for the actual um work of curriculum replacement. that that seems appropriate at seven years fiscally.
011Uh the for the purpose of of why I believe some of these are in front of us is because some of the other um courses didn't have any type of review in quite some time. uh and that over the course of uh that that 7-year period uh curriculum kind of evolves, you know, things get supplemented, things get added, things get subtracted, and after a while it doesn't look like anything the board has approved. though. Um perhaps maybe uh it is not a complete review process that we should be focusing on when it comes to uh um the timetable, but maybe maybe like a a mid mid cycle um checkpoint or something of that nature, which is like an every three type of thing where we look at what's going right with the with the curriculum,
012what's not, what we have to maybe evolve. Um, you know, and and maybe that doesn't require more approval or a large in-depth study. It's getting out once like the curriculum guides are made and everything else like that, getting out the curriculum guides, making sure that we've had a check in with the teachers to say, "Hey, is there anything drastically different or what the board has approved or, you know, if they want to see permission to do something different?" There's at least a checkpoint in time where they can do that. Is that something that would easily fit into that calendar? Because my initial thought was, yeah, it needs to be consistent five, seven, whatever. So, this makes sense to change this to seven if that's seven. But if there's an easy way to just fuse that
013into your current plan, then yeah, that makes sense. And I know there was some review. I don't remember distinctly, but it was some kind of review to see, do we need to move to something else or not? Was that already built into that? Yeah. Process. Yeah. Like we haven't kind of like checked out like year by year by year. And I think more refinement and more definition of each one of those years does make a ton of sense to me. I agree like fiscally these are not small investments. Um and when I go to negotiate it makes it a lot easier when I say we're committed to five years and one year. Um but I think refining this by what our checkpoints are and ensuring that we're looking at our data pieces. I agree with
014you and I I I knew this wasn't going to be a super linear conversation. Um because I think the piece that I feel like out of all of these that were maybe um tripped up the most on is that horse guide piece. And the piece that transparency is something that I feel strongly about and I know that you feel strongly about as well. Um, if you give me a moment, like we just were talking about 2210 before you go deep into the thing, looking at a checkpoint like uh in the first semester of year four would be good because doing it any sooner than that. You spend the whole first year just getting used to that new curriculum, right? So they're not going to be making huge changes, but by the time that that year
015four comes, that first part of the year, they're going to be like, you know, having some ideas and or thoughts or suggestions if there's going to be any changes that they want to put into that. So I think that that's, you know, you know, probably a good place to put it in, unless Jenny's got other, you know, deeper thoughts when she gets deeper into it. But just knowing how when I've done it in the past, um that's about when you'd start getting those questions. And some teachers would be like, "Oh, we can't change anything for another couple years." So, you know, it might be good to have that in there to say, "Well, no, there is a checkpoint." And there's a possibility as long as it's not, remember, we're not overhauling, we're just making changes,
016you know, if we need to. So clarifying because my original was year three. Um but clarifying so teachers can still make tweaks. It's a major change that you're talking about for year four or are we saying you're following the curriculum lock stop to the letter the first three years? Well, I just want to make sure I'm hearing to to the extent that uh any like I'm I'm careful about how I answer that and always have been because lock stepping into the letter doesn't necessarily mean that you're getting every day's lesson approved by the board. Board doesn't have that level of oversight, right? They have like state standards and uh you know uh basically guidelines or outline plans like here's the here's the chapters or discussion points themes whatever you want to call them right that
017you're going to be teaching right and the learning targets underneath those and that's about as far down into the daily uh curriculum that a board would want to get right because the teachers and the building principles and directors then take that that you have approved and said, "Here's how we're going to translate that into daily lessons." Right? They have the latitude to do. But if they want to change some of those learning targets or get at a standard a different way and say, "I want to use this approach to teach that standard instead of that, you know, that's something that should commut." Right. Right. Uh and if they can't do that except for every seven years, like Craig said, that that's too long. No. And what will happen is we'll we'll get degregation. They'll do
018it anyway. We won't know about it. you guys won't know about it and it'll be um a process by which then people will go well how come you know a parent will be looking at that and say hey how come you're not following this right where is this in the learning targets and then we get all crazy and people start saying this isn't transparent and whatever else we don't want that to happen and I think that the the curriculum guides that we're talking about with the learning targets and those by reviewing those teachers actually they're their working documents I think you're going to see it even quicker than every 3 to four years as they minor tweaks maybe. I minor tweaks. Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Sorry. No, you're okay. This is a great conversation. I'm happy
019to leave it open to like the conversation of between three to four years you have that mid mid because you don't know you know a mid-process check in then. Yeah. Not necessarily because then you're not cornering anybody into a date either. Right. He's just saying we want a mid-process check in. Right. Right. Right. That's open. I like that. All right. Well, I try to get my Well, I'm just going to do this and then I'll let this next person in. The next policy 2220 adoption of course of study is I tried to align it to this form that we had worked through at ED services, the course proposal revision form. So, this is where we ran into our sticky wicket, if you will, where Jared had asked the board to approve the um high school
020and middle school course books. And I think this is a great answer to that along with the next policy, the curriculum course guides. So, hey Sam, the adoption of the course of study um talks specifically about the like each course of study and each course at the middle school and high school level that would be adopted. And so what you see like accepted and like struck out here and I'm going to be honest with you, I made copies right here for you so that if you want to make comments that I can and make sure I get them incorporated. That sounds great. Start doing that. Yeah, you brought pens and highlighters and also like the pen that was my dream pen from elementary school. I don't know if anyone remembers these multiolor. Oh yeah, those
021are my favorite. I have a couple of fourcolor ones. Yeah, that's really nice. No, I said they still make those eight color old. So you just call me old. Oh, I've got it recorded. She's old. So 2220 is this adoption course of study. Let's skip through this. They have HR hearts 530 Jared. So this one I tried to align to this curriculum guide the I'm sorry the course proposal form. So if there's anything on this that we want to add back in then likely what I would do is just update this course propo proposal form. And then this like I said is where I think we ran into trouble where Jared wanted the board to approve the WHS and the RMS um course the course books. And folks, this is where the concern came up
022that we're approving things that we didn't necessarily have really close feel like we had close insight into. And so I feel like these two pair pretty closely. And so if there's any changes that we want to make on this 2220, then I would probably make similar changes on this course proposal form. So then this would be the form that teachers would use to propose a new course of study that they want us to add. And then what I think is what's going to really provide us clarity and I don't mean to be trying to click through these too quickly but just for conversation is this 2230 the curriculum course guide and I spoke a little bit about this at ed services. Um I have not touched this one yet. Um, this curriculum course guide is
023where I feel like we will have the transparency that perhaps we're seeking for the courses that are currently being taught. I will be honest and say I know that this we started this process pre- pandemic in the district where we were asking teachers to document the work that was being done in their courses um so that we could put it out on the internet for the interested public for families to know and understand what's happening. Now, I know many of our teachers at the high school have Google classes and have that all open to families and whatnot, but I feel pretty strongly about putting this in a very um uniform form and this was like my draft version of it. You'll note that I have draft on a lot of things. Um and then I
024had provided some different districts that do this. I think I put out Middleton, Walka, Jefferson, Beaverdam that have sort of these curriculum warehouses where they have their course outlines. Now, we can tweak this however we want. Um, and I just think that we want to agree upon what it is that we want our teachers to put together um, and communicate that to them so that they can put this out. This way when we provide you a list of the courses that are being taught, you can easily go in and see what's being taught, what are the, you know, main resources that are being used for a course, what are the different units being taught, um, what's the description of the course, what are the standards being used for that course. And I think that's going
025to get after some of the pieces of transparency that are like the questions and the concerns that are coming up. So in my mind, I kind of clump those three together that 2210, 2220, and 2230 thoughts or questions about that. One other additional comment services was just ensuring that with this form that we have um it filled out in a similar way by teachers. So because elementary could look very different from middle could look different from high school look different from one subject area to another that if we have some kind of I only laugh because when we did it the last time the elementary looked join the meeting high school um and and and so that is very true and that's why I want to finalize this brand it the way we want it
026branded and have that form be the form that we want to be using and even if place even if elementary does look different from the high school, that's okay because they're very different beasts. As long as all of the elementary schools look the same, not that this school looks different from this and this teacher looks different from that, just so we have at least that continuity because they are different beings. And I will be honest, at the elementary level, even though we have different buildings, these course guides should be the same for K12 33 4. The only difference would come across in um our dual language program. I'm sorry, I'm having tech technical difficulties because I can't seem to get my mouse to show up on my other screen over here. Stop. So what am
027I missing then between the course guide complete and then the um provision form request for the middle ask me your question again. I'm sorry. Yep. Good questions. So what comes first? The chicken or the egg? Yeah. This would come first. So, a teacher say at the middle school says,"I would really like to teach a class about, I don't know, automotive care. I feel like we had one of these come." We would bring this to ED services. Ed services would say, "Yay or nay." Let's say they say, "Yep, we agree that this would move forward." This would come to the full board. The full board would agree to it. Once that's done, then we would ask the teacher to fill this form out. Okay. This form would then be uploaded onto our website where everyone could
028see exactly what it is that's being taught in that class. Does that make sense? It it does, but I think that the revision form definitely is very more robust. And if you're trying to convey to people, the general public andor parents, what's what's being discussed in that course, I think the more information that you have, the better. Yep. Totally agree with that. So, I just directed him to number two because originally my thought is, well, they come hand in hand. This is more detailed. So, I'm wondering based on your question if number two, it's going to be a lot bigger space than what that is, but there's going to be all of the different standard, you know, you're going to see a generality where this I think is going to be more specific. Okay. But
029does that get at what your Yeah. question. Yeah. I think because I had a similar question that that's why I just went back information. Um I mean I guess I guess I as a board at the board level I you know when we talk about you know budget impact and stuff like that um I think that's also particularly important thing to have some sort of attachment to these particular um course guides like for instance that that's maybe it's under administrative content, I don't know, where where the board can pull up the um the request form that happens to have all that detailed information and say, "Hey, listen. Um I've heard of this particular concern from a parent in this particular course." and be able to go back to, okay, well, this was what we actually
030approved. Um, because this was the specific content that was asked and that particular concern that was brought up doesn't seem to me mention that. So, um, to me, that's what transparency is. And I apologize. I was having technical difficulties and I am afraid that I missed someone who was trying to get in on Zoom. So, um I would tell you this looks very short right here once I believe it's filled out. I think that's where we're going to get our additional information. I've already met with the instructional coaches at each level to talk about what this form might look like. And in my mind, it's about what we're expecting from our teachers with this form back, like with the level of detail that we want back from that. Um, to me, once this is filled
031out, it's not going to be one page. And especially if that course outline piece that right now represents this much space on the form, that will be the longer piece to it. Um when I looked at the different examples um that I pulled, you can tell that some districts sort of require some additional detail to it. Yes. Than other districts require. And I think it's just us deciding what it is that we want from that. Okay. Um so I do appreciate like this looks much more like detailed and arduous, but I think it just depends on what we're asking. Yeah. and what we're sort of requiring from our teachers on I guess to clarify it a different way. Um these two pieces of information um yes this is more brief. This is probably more public
032facing. Yes. Uh but these two pieces of information are what we what we as a board will utilize to look back and to say yes this particular um subject is being uh uh executed according to what we've approved or not. Um and if we don't have access to that information how how is it transparent otherwise? You know that that's all I'm saying. I I feel like if if we've approved it and and the course has decided to evolve differently from what we've approved, I'd like to have access to this to say, "Hey, wait a minute. This is what we've approved, you know." No. and fair. I believe in the um curriculum course guide it does talk about um you have a choice here where it says all curriculum course guides and revisions of existing course
033guides should be submitted to the board for approval before they're implemented. And that's one of the options that we have. So, not even necessarily needing to have go back to something like this, but basically one of the options we have in the is to say the board has the right to say that we approve of this course guide before it's being taught. Now, we're in a crunch right now because we don't have any of these. And to say we're not going to teach anything until we get all of these approved is going to be the same um challenge that we were in when we were trying to approve the course books. I see. And so there certainly the board if depending on how which boxes we check on this policy has the right to say
034we will approve this course guide before that's being taught. Now we're going to have to talk through what is our process in the interim while we're developing these. Sure. Because we're not going to just not teach for a while. I would not vote in favor of that. I don't think you would either. But I think there are certain areas that we probably would be more interested in taking a look at. I agree. I agree. Um, I guess that that's where that's where we're we're kind of in this spot where we're in now a little bit too where this it has been sort of left um kind of in limbo and you know administrative administrative function previously u more or less and before it's really moved forward for board approval. Um, that's where we're that's where
035we're at. Absolutely. You know, so but I agree that like having to go back to this, we're probably not we're not I mean it's your decision, but we're probably not going to ask the course to be approved, every single course to be approved again by the school board. But certainly depending but certainly depending on how we choose this, we can ask for this course guide to be approved by the school board. Does that make sense, Craig? I don't see why. I mean, I don't think there's ever been an audit of course guide to to any significant extent lately. Say that again. I don't think that there's been an audit of our course guide to an extent by the board. Um, and you know, for me, for me personally, I' I'd like to see the greater
036detail on those courses. I mean, especially if we're are you asking for uh an accelerated approach with that or are you asking for putting it in place and as we metriculate through that coursework that that level of detail comes? I can I think that's what Yeah, I could work trying to get at like Sure. Right. Like not that these don't come to you, right? Right. But but I'm wondering what we're hearing right now is you want to see all them now and it's like to get that level of detail for all of our courses. Sure. That's going to it's that takes years to metriculate through all of the coursework. I think we could I'm with you. I think I think we could probably try to break it down into a manageable um chunk, you I
037mean, most of your your staff is going to be filling this stuff out, you know, and it's just a matter of filling in the blanks really because they should have an idea of of what what material they're currently using and um what uh what it's roughly going what is costing the district. Um how it's being evaluated. Yeah. And I think that the the last couple that we did are certainly going to be easier, right? But but um Jenny, do you think it would be comfortable for you to have some discussion with our admin team and some of the leading buildings to say, "Hey, let's put a schedule for this together because you're right, we can't do it all in one year." But no, and that's we have to develop an expedited process because I agree
038seven years is probably like we don't we don't need to wait that long either to get that level of information on each of the courses. No, I totally agree and that's where I started this is that I'm excited to communicate. Here's the other thing that I want to share is that we can revise this however we want. Like I don't want you to feel like this has greater detail. I truly in fact feel like in some ways this should have greater detail than the course proposal form. Um, and so we can revise this however you feel and the committee feels like we need to revise it to get the information that we want. What I'd prefer not to do is ask teachers to have to do both of them. I'd prefer to be able to
039say, "Hey, this is our course guide form. Um, do this one versus having to go back and do both of them." So, if there's something on here that we want to put on here, um, and I feel a little bit like Vanna White just like throwing pieces of paper around. Um, we can certainly add it here. I don't want you to feel like this is the more like robust and we have to settle for the less robust. We can certainly add anything here that is here, right? But can I make a suggestion? Go for it. This is ultimately going to come back to ed services, right? I would feel like these forms will ultimately come back. The policies in my mind will go. So my suggestion or thought would be can we take this and
040morph it into this and then from there yeah we can then strike you know add services maybe have the conversation yeah don't need that there. So at least then we can see what it looks like because yeah this does have more detail and some of these could be a mere check box as they're going through where it would only take like Craig said a couple minutes but we have teachers that are you know a month away from the end of the school year finishing up things and they have summer break and whatever. So the timeline I respect as well, but if we can make it a little bit easier for the current courses, which kind of gets at what you're at, but still gives the information. Is it online? Is it blended? Is it there's
041ones there that that can make them very easily morph and some of these are already on here. Yeah, it's funny because when I look at this, other than like the financial impact, I actually think that this is going to give us more details, but I can certainly see the easy to pluck off of here and stick on here. Yeah. And maybe that I mean, you're right. Maybe that's probably the best way to in Yeah, for now. And uh the uh the financial impact piece is is a pretty pretty important at the moment, you know, because because it's like it's informing us of of um you know, where some of the costs are. And you know, some of these particular courses may may be um extra courses that that we have to call out of the
042U course book for budgetary reasons. Um, so anyway, no, that's a good point and I hadn't thought about the cost basis on the on the course guide previously, but it makes sense to think about that and I think would help with our budgeting process too. Uh I want to go back to point that Garrett made earlier is that um if you have uh four teachers teaching the same course, you know, grade level, whatever, it's going to be taught four different ways inside the classroom. Yeah. And so you don't want robots, you know, you want everybody to have their individual. So, I know when we did some of this um for freshman English, um the department had had a list of books that, you know, were all being used but not in every classroom. And so,
043if a parent were to come and say, "You're teaching this." Well, maybe not, you know, and and so forth. And and so we've got to give a little wiggle room for teachers, you know, to put their own stamp on it. You know what I mean? So, yeah. Yeah. And and another thing, these might never see the light of day if there's a complaint. I mean, who's going through these? You know what I mean? The teacher should be. Well, because it's the standards as we move to addressing the standards. Yes. Because what you said, Yeah. but if the standards are going to be taught, they might have a different viewpoint coming into them. But yeah, teachers should be looking at at the standards all the time, making, hey, am I teaching this? Am I doing this
044whatever? So, I'm hoping that it's more than just a side period. Yeah, I'm hoping. Yeah. Yeah. It's tricky because uh and this is this is where this this conversation is critical, super important is because state standards change and if you have them well applying on this particular draft then you can go and say okay uh when when that happens or state standards change and this course is no longer in compliance with state standards or vertically aligned for whatever the case may be then we can pull them out and say this is where we need to hammers. discussions. Well, but how would a veteran teacher find out? Through department meetings, I assume, or through the state standards change. Yeah. Well, I mean, I'm not going looking for they they like when the math ones changed 2011
045and 2019. Yes. Not only did the state standards, but teachers are part of the bigger network and that got pushed out to everybody. So, we knew they came they came through our curriculum coordinator, they came through our department chairs, they came we've got it from five different directions. Okay. So, but but what I what I'm trying to avoid and and I think we're talking the same language um is that uh what you don't want is one hand not talking to the other because if if we need to make a change, you know, departmentwise, right, according to state standards, that conversation needs to be had instead of a teacher assuming that this is the direction we're going to continue to go, you know, because if the state standard changes, that that means that the the common
046assessments like the forward exam are also uh expecting they're they're going to assess us on those types of things and therefore um you know because it seems to be a thing that happens often in in other school districts where if if we're not te you know teaching along along the standards then you know that's that's a problem. Agreed. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. Are there pieces when we take a look at these does that process make sense and like how those three relate together and like what direction you guys are wanting to head? Yes. Yes. Okay. Um let me offer my thoughts on that really quick. I do have some of the revisions that I'm making here that I have in my notes but I'm writing them down. It is easier to get them off of the
047page itself. Okay. Um but uh my thoughts which you guys may have already talked about I'm just reiterating them in case they weren't was to essentially align the language in 16 and uh uh administrative guidance uh the language specifically from the third party curriculum review process uh which is you know kind of being discussed in the same way and see that and I have it on my notes there for you later. Uh, one of the changes that I thought would be uh, preferential based on what I've heard uh, from out in the community would be instead of the uh, district administrator superintendent having the chair of ed services be the person who um, makes those selections that then go to the board for approval uh, as far as the members of the review committee. Does
048that make sense? So, let me just let me make sure I'm on the same page. So when we first started, I said my goal was to bring the policies forth to the policy review and the administrative guidelines I put in just as support for our conversation because I know sometimes when we're in these meetings I'm like there's an administrative guideline for that and I know we're going to talk about the administrative guidelines. So, we hadn't talked about the administrative guideline for 2210 yet. Though, I did see the correlation to the working committee in uh the will policy was it 16 model policy 16? Yes. Yep. I did see that. Um I saw a correlation between those two as well. And if you'd like to just look at those policies first and kind of get the
049policy out of the way and then go to that, that's totally fine. I was just kind of thinking about the grouping. Yeah. But I was I I did sort of the same thing and I started marking up my administrative guideline for 2210 as well. Um and so we can start having that conversation too because I do see some differences between 2210A and um administrative or model policy 16. Um and I did also have the ED services chair kind of marked down as one of the committee members if we move forward with that. So, I don't know if I had that person in the same spot that you did as well. Um, but do we want to work through the policies first and then maybe go back and look at administrative guidelines? Did you have any
050comments on the policy changes or not? Yeah, so specifically for 2210 um and again it depends on kind of how you want to parse these bits out. But I did think that the second paragraph of model policy 16 um bringing the second paragraph and list on 2210 into alignment with that. Say that again. Uh so the second paragraph of 2210 starting with for policy. Yes. And the second paragraph of model policy 16 which starts with the same phrase. Uh bringing those two into alignment with one another. So adding the information from model policy 16 the content in the list format that you find in 2210. Okay. So I actually thought that that part of model model policy 16 more closely aligned and we haven't gotten there yet um with policy 2510 of the adoption of
051tech. Um, and the reason I say that, yes, is because when I think about um, thirdparty curriculum, I think more along the lines of textbooks and I think Niola is talking about textbooks as like the principal source of instructional material. So when I think about curriculum, I think about like overall the what it is that we are teaching versus like the sort of I'll use the word canned but I don't really believe this versus the textbook or the purchased materials that we're using. So in some ways I felt like model policy 16 with that part more closely aligned to this adoption of textbooks. So, I almost would want to pull I wouldn't want to put that definition in 2210, though I do see it aligning more with 2510. Sure. Does that make sense? I do
052hear what you're saying. I I think in in some ways I agree with you. But the reason that I was thinking 2210 would be a better fit is because this second paragraph specifically says it may include textbooks, but it also includes workbooks, teacher guides, etc., etc., etc. So it lists off multiple forms. And the way that I look at policies when you're dealing with a policy set like this is you kind of have like a Russian nesting bell effect. And it seems like 2510 is kind of nested within 2210. It's they're they're related and 2510 is a uh kind of a branch off of that larger discussion about curriculum development. So, if we're using our Russian doll analogy, I see 2210 as sort of like the largest and then 20 510 is like one of
053the smaller ones. Exactly. Yeah. In there. If we were to add that, I would add it as like and versus it being a standalone. Yeah. And the reason I feel that way is because I feel like when we talk about curriculum, I I think it is like much broader than just like the purchased curriculum or purchased textbook, I should say. I shouldn't use that word interchangeably, even though I know we use it interchangeably a lot. Yeah. It's not just the hard the hard information that you purchase that's on paper or in a PDF. It's the entire concept of the course itself is curriculum. Yeah, sure. That makes sense to me. Yeah. So, okay. because I read it the same way you initially read it. Um because when it when it talks about workbooks, teacher guides,
054so on, those are still all of the the purchased or brought in parts to the standards and or uh the the the um identified uh overall reaching norms of the class, right? And that's where I thought that language uh aligned to which was more of the everything that goes along with what we're bringing in. And am I wrong in how that read or so the way I look at the way that I'm interpreting this is third party curriculum is when we have to go outside of our hallowed walls to to to bring in something to bring something in. Right. And that's why I thought it fit with what Jenny was saying is when you're bringing any kind of materials in, right, whether they're teacher guides or workbooks or textbooks or whatever else, right? Uh you're
055that part is uh going to go through this review process, right? And that's that's where I thought it fit. But but I'm also looking at it from a standpoint of um is it also is it also the desire of the board to have purview over the u other parts of the curriculum development and review process that are within the walls of our district. Oh, I think we're I do I mean I know we're going rambling, but right if we go back to like what what do we want for a process, right? Start with where Jenny started. Like what do we want from a process? Like I I can see like this wording that has outline a process, right? The the question that I need to understand from you is what what do you want to
056see from that process? Because the the thing that and and will that I was questioning, do we really want to do it that way is it seemed like there was this third party standing committee, right? uh and I think having a standing committee may be detrimental to really the outcomes we want to get for each individual curricula uh that we that we want because whether it's music or math or whatever one committee can't bring the breath of knowledge and professionalism or or overview that we would want to see. You're going to want to have flexibility. At least in my opinion, the board's going to want to have flexibility to name different people to different committees each time a new curriculum comes up and not have a standing committee. I just don't think that uh I
057think that's limiting to have one standing committee, right? and not a committee that depending on whatever the material it is, we're looking to uh identify people in the community or professionals or whatever to best address that suited need for uh that curriculum area. I don't know what your thoughts are, but that's where I got hung up on on wills. It seemed like there was supposed to be this um one standing committee. So I and I might be missing it because there's a lot of words in here, but uh when I'm looking at wills and then I'm looking at AG2210 and I know this isn't policy, but they go together. The only place where I'm immediately finding standing the the phrase standing committee is in 22 AG2210 because I agree with you. I think it would
058be fair if so because we're not necessarily going to be adopting 30 different curriculums at once. it would be reasonable to say um you know if we're adopting a music curriculum let's we can go through that process where the chair of ed services kind of goes like okay we're we're picking out the this group of people and the chair of services will work with you on on that process um and it would be obviously a different set of people for music theory or or music in general it would be a different set of people for science curriculum or uh literature English language arts etc etc um but I think maybe if you were doing curriculum um review like more for the curriculum that currently exists. Having a standing committee, which like they point out in
059policy 16 can have members leave or you know be replaced from time to time. Um you just always have to have those slots full. You would you you would have that more as a standing committee for for review of what presently exists. Does everybody agree with Sam in the idea that the the concept of a committee uh membership can change over time? My question is um do we want to leave the membership open um or do you want to get prescriptive with like each time we have one of these we're going to have exactly this many number of people? it's going to have this many number of teachers or do you want to leave that membership open to address the the needs of the board and um curriculum review process at that time? I'm just
060asking overarching philosophy things. No, it's a good question. So So what what do what do you guys want to do with that piece? My my tendency is to have it in in policy and be specific because um because then then it then it it holds us to a particular set of standards and set of expectations that we can we can work within and okay so broad but defined or specific and defined. I think you could always have more than, right? You could have more than. So, for instance, if we're looking at AG22 NA, it's got the composition list, right? Um, it's got a blank next to teachers. So, it could be any number of teachers. I filled in one from the school related to the curriculum. If it's a math curriculum, bring in a math
061a the relevant math teacher. Or if it's a science curriculum, bring in the relevant science teacher. either the one who is proposing it or a teacher who would be teaching it. Um, but you know, if you had a situation where it was something that would require more than one teacher, I think that you could certainly you could put language in saying uh containing at minimum this number, but you could have more than that number if they if they so wished. Um it even kind of implies that on at C3 on page one it says one principal in parenthesis all principles are invited to participate. Um you know that could be taken as you can ask any principal or multiple principles can participate if they wish. Can I ask this because I've been reflecting a lot
062about this this committee a lot and I very much get the sense that this is something that the board is going to feel strongly about and so I'm thinking about how does this logistically work. I agree with what you were saying, Craig, about, and I think Sam, you were saying it too, that like when we're looking for a science curriculum, we're going to want the people who know science the best looking at that those sets of materials. Obviously, the board is going to approve or not approve at the end of the day. Um, the way that 16 is written, it's like they'll collect, you know, three. When I look at uh this AG, and I know we're not going to be talking specifically about them, but I printed them off for everyone, so I suppose
063it's my own fault. They talk about uh this and I referred to it as the curriculum review committee. I named it this section in my mind. They talked about B3, establish working committees in the selected area. So I sort of see an overarching uh curriculum review committee. Um, my preference would be that we would work through that administratively and through ed services, but I hear that the board is saying that they feel strongly about having this. I but I see this curriculum review committee being a group of people that we can talk about what the composition is. That would establish working committees. So, when we're talking about a literacy review committee, they'd be the one who's establishing that K12 literacy review committee. But when I turn on to the end of page one and the
064uh start of page two, it makes me start thinking about these course guides again where I started filling in the blanks where it says the curriculum review committee may establish curriculum working committees, define their purpose and select their members. Each committee will serve as long as deemed necessary and may be reactivated as needed. So I think about like our K12 math committee for instance, right? Then on the top of page two, um this totally changes the topic, but upon approval of the principal and the director of curriculum and instruction, I filled in the blanks and the curriculum review committee, all new or revised programs, courses of study and or course guides will be forwarded to the ed services committee and then to the board for final approval. So that this com this committee this working
065committee would be the group of people who would be reviewing these in these again with my magic vana of white papers before they would go to ed services to kind of give a first brush of yeah we think these are going to be okay. They would go to ed services and then they could go to the school board for final approval. That way we're not getting backlogged in services simply reviewing these for the next year because we're behind. We're creating this committee yet that has been outlined in 16. Gotcha. We're creating working committees that are doing the work of the specific curriculum areas, subject areas, and we're creating a way in which we can make maybe potentially communicate that up to that committee. Yeah. Then that committee is communed up to ED services, which is
066communicating it up to the full board. So, I sort of envisioned I don't know when we're going to do it or when we're going to be able to pull teachers to do it. Like, I haven't figured that part out yet. Um but that way if it's important we'll do it right that way we're including that so that this committee isn't necessarily the one saying here here are the things you can look at but this committee is instead more focused probably in the first rendition on these pieces to kind of expedite that and then board I mean we can include board members obviously on that and then I had district administrator of schools and then I said or designate and I assumed that would be me curriculum director chairperson I thought maybe ed services chair one
067principal all principles are invited to participate they love coming to meetings so I'm sure they'll be flocking to come and then we can talk about teachers I know we had tal I'm talking a lot Craig I'm sorry you'll shut up pretty soon I know we had talked about the leadership team, you know, we can we can tweak what this membership is. If you're talking about a larger group that then is going to subdivide into groups that are specialized in science, math, etc., etc., that makes more sense to me. Then what I would even argue, Sam, and I feel that you had your hand up, is that I would say this group establishes a working committee for that stuff. not an enormous group that is this curriculum, not 40 people on the curriculum review team. I'm
068saying 10 tops and then they're establishing those curriculum works. I'm not sorry. I I see where you're going with it and I I think you're on the right track. I I I do. So, um I feel like and and I I think that's probably to some of the concerns that you had too um was that um yes, the working we need to have the working group be able to pull that stuff together. I I look at this third part in this um this other committee that would be established as more of a steering committee. you know that was help that's that's what she was talking about right yeah I think I think that's what we're talking about and that you know to that to to find where that where the work is really and and
069to try to guide that process if you know including a parental involvement you know I mean at that rate why don't we just have the ed services team do it here's the problem yeah make it to there has been so limited bandwidth at at services level that we've never had it crushed on it. Yeah, we just we just never get to that level detail. I had the same thought. I think we all agree like um we we're getting through some of this curriculum review and to your point um sometimes a half hour or an hour at Earned Services, even if it's monthly for six months, having that discussion um isn't enough even for the curriculum adoption that we're looking to spend half a million dollars on, right? And so trying to uh be able to
070garner the time and away from other large decisions that head services making I think would be a good thing because you will be able to get into it a little bit not a little deeper much deeper I think and um you'll be able to have more uh direct interaction with that working committee from a steering committee level um than has been afforded in services meetings. Sure. No, that makes total sense. Yeah, I I completely get what you're saying. Um it's it's a matter of time, which I absolutely understand. Um Okay. Yeah, fair enough. So then are we looking to we'd be we'd be looking to approve of model policy 16. as far as the um establishment of a curriculum review committee which would be reflected in its administration which would be reflected in that guideline.
071So the guideline will be brought into alignment with some of the language in here. Yes. And say that again. I I want to say I want to repeat that so we're on the same page and I want to make sure I'm in the right spot as it relates to policy because I know that some of our policy we're we're saying we're kicking the administrative guidelines kind of down the road. I don't know what that looked but no that was all about the peanut butter M&M. Okay. Delicious. I don't know. There's Yeah, we'll move on. Okay. So what I would do and I don't mind working on this if you guys want to look at it this policy is take the this and reflect kind of our conversation from this into this and the way that
07216 and 22 can you tell me what this and this are oh my isn't good enough for us is that a policy number this is administrative guideline 22 because originally this was the curriculum was Are you saying it looks like you can't find you can't follow this not the this and this and because we jumped away from we went away from this to administrative these are so far down bring it back to this and that and that's one thing coordinate these next time for sure bring AG210 to reflect the merger of model policy 16 and policy 2210. Correct. I will bring policy 2210, 2220, 2230. I will reflect a model model policy 16 in AG2210. These two go together. And you're going to merge those. Well, I will try to reflect our conversation into that.
073I mean, you can't merge. Agree. Agree. I just want to make sure. Yeah, but I will try to reflect our conversation about what I'm referring to as our curriculum review committee. If someone has a different name for it, CRC, we'll have to make sure we acronize or make it an acronym because it's education. Sorry. Um, the jokes this afternoon. All right. Uh, yeah, that was great. Okay. Yeah. So, so you're you're saying take those those development policies, bring them into alignment with 16 and then reflect that with the AG. So, I will hope to do that. Yes. In a way that reflects the way you guys are thinking about it as well, but that is why it comes to first read. So, you can make some changes you want. Sure. Are there any changes to
0742210, 2220 or 2230 that you think are going to be important? I definitely want to look at 2230 because we that we've not made any adjustments to that at all. I'm going to assume that we're going to say so Denny what I would prefer is to ask ask this question because you can get into words smithing uh you know spirals uh with a committee this big outside of what you saw uh in the curriculum development process outlined by Miss Boris and uh amended with the use of wills uh policy guidance. There any other um things that you really want us to consider as we look at the other wording in other areas to say here's the idea Jared that um I don't think we're doing or that I think we need to focus more on.
075Um and how can we work towards that goal and we can put some verbiage in there for first read, right? get it a little bit closer and then 15 different documents before anything else that one piece that I had 2510 the title is adoption of textbooks we know it's bigger than textbooks we use curricular materials or district curriculum so that would be and you know just we're talking more than textbooks adoption of third party curriculum is what I had it rewritten to I don't even want third party in just leave it as district curriculum or curricular material because then we're talking everything. How about curricular materials? Okay. I mean that incorporates it incorporates all materials. So I'm going to be careful about that. We haven't really talked about those yet, but I want to delineate
076between 2510 and 2521. They talk specifically about adoption of textbooks and then they define adoption of textbooks as the principal source of instructional material. So if we change it to something else then I think we need to change in here what it says. And then they talk about instructional materials and equipment and then they define instructional materials is defined as supplemental books, readings and activities online resources and media distributed and instructional equipment is apparatuses and tools. So I just want to be careful about changing the title because it defines them right within the policy. So, if we're going to change the policy, then or the title, then we better change it within the policy. I appreciate that and I hear what you're saying. Here's my question. When you adopt some online curriculum, for sure. It's
077not a textbook, per se. Does it fall under one, the other? So that's just where I sit because when we talk about before, if you use the the Russian doll analogy, this is the bigger one and this one should be inside it, right? What's this and that? Sorry. Realize how annoying that 25 10 and 25. You know, if we're 2510 and 25 somehow it's but they're not necessarily it's not like it's 2510 and 25 10.1, you know. I know. So that's where I'm just I'm wondering I'm not saying we have to. I just want to make sure that we're encompassing what we need to encompass. So I'm okay if we don't change it based on what you said, but we just have to make sure that when I read this adoption of textbooks, are we
078talking adoption of curriculum? Are we just talking about a hardcore textbook? Well, we're going away from the hardcore textbooks. And so that's why I understand why you're saying that. And 16 has a broader definition for that purpose. Yeah, sorry. Model policy 16. Okay. I Jenny, do you think you have an idea of where where this is going to make the changes that or else the changes that I do understand that. Yeah, I can I can figure out how to word sniff that. I do I understand your point. The idea of writing your name in the front of the textbook is long gone because that is gone. But I understand like trying to define the primary source of instructional material. But I'll come up with a better word for it and I'll take a look at
07916 and see if that can help inform that. Excellent. any other larger or uh other philosophical things that we need to try to capture so that Jenny can put together a first read for us to ch No, I think that's pretty much it on my end. And then if you guys have any drop offs you want to give her, you know, suggestions that you're you've been looking at, that's that's fine. get her steering. If we're going to go out of having some sort of a steering committee, then we may have to have some sort of a guideline that that spells out what the view of that group would be. I think that's 16 there. Okay. Right. 16 in that. Yes. And it describes some of those on right. Yeah. Thank you. Do we have some
080wording of uh in any of our policies that um when teachers generate their own material, you know, somewhere else and any oversight on that? So 2521 starts talking a little bit more like 2510 is more like we were talking about the principal source. 2521 talks more about like supplemental pieces in that second paragraph. Yes. And so when we get to the administrative guidelines for that, that will be an interesting conversation because there is some more latitude about how does that work when teachers want to supplement um the like whatever the principal source is and the process by which they would do that. Um, and so this 2521 is just the main policy about that, the administrative guidelines for 2521. And I did not give you copies of it, though I did um I did put
081it in there talks more about what is the process when a teacher wants to supplement. And one of our speakers at will on Friday um had an interesting way to address it when they were talking about moving away from things like teachers pay teachers and just an overview of the curriculum. And that speaker, you know, basically um talked about language that would um conform to uh what did they say Sam? conform to the aims and goals of the stated curriculum and the um essentially your your strategic plan, right? So, so like that that teachers are free to do that because that's in the the art of the profession, but if they steer away from that, that's where uh there's accountability, right? So, so basically making sure that there's accountability and making sure they're moving away
082from, you know, uh things like teachers pay teachers and so on unless it conforms to the aims and goal of the curriculum and or the strategic plan in general. And I think that that's where but making sure that language isn't in your policy so that they are free to do some of that stuff. uh you know but if it veers you have something in the policy that says hey you you took it upon yourself to veer this was not approved and the policy says you won't veer right and I think that's kind of how they were stating that right and I think that that's where the the right to review instructional materials and then the um like making requests if there's like a challenge to some instructional materials, I think, also played a role in
083that as well. Yeah. So, I know we didn't directly discuss it tonight, but I was going to say we should just put that on there as uh as a policy to be adopted in its entirety unless we have a we have um one that was already 9130. You can grab a copy of that. I made that for everyone. So I feel like and I didn't examine it super closely compared to 20 but this was already approved through the Nola and I'm assuming that those are pretty close. I think these were that's why I think like what flavor they t they don't taste like peanut butter. I don't jelly. It's just Oh what I like is that you keep eating Peanut butter and jelly. I'm just trying to figure that out. Peanut butter. I suppose if
084you think that the flavor of jelly probably tast mean to I did not mean to veer us from the conversation. These are odd. Thank you for eating them. Now I figured out what was the policy bill? I think 9130 9130. Here's a copy. Okay, thank you. Yeah, I think it was under first clean. So I assume it's been through now. Well, I was looking for that quick comment back on Dan's statement and that is I I've said this a lot of times and I'm going to keep saying it. I'm loving this because it all comes back to standards. And as we start having more and more conversation around these are the standards. It, you know, we're all going to start talking more of the same language and we're going to find that we're getting there
085maybe in slightly different ways. Right now, I feel like we're getting there in a lot of different ways. That's going to narrow that that focus a little bit because it's all gonna be based on, well, that's not a standard or, you know, you haven't met this, you have this many to do. You've only talked, you know, there's going to be a lot of different conversations than what I think has been happening in the past. I think that gets to your point. Is my hope anywhere or my thought? I'm through. Sorry, did I I tried to talk fast so that way you could just jump right in. There any other um discussion points that um Miss Bor should be cognizant of when trying to finalize a first draft uh to for us to react to from
086all these resource documents and other things. Uh not not for me. Not at this point. And I saw the email that you sent me from um Tammy. I want to make sure to reflect those in there. Um, just very briefly, the two that we had already looked at, 2210 and 2220, some of them were struck out already, and those were ones that I was just trying to reflect um, like 2220 in particular. I was trying to reflect essentially the um, course adoption form that we had already gone through with Ed services. So, that's why some of those things were were marked off already. Um and then obviously some of those pieces will get removed as we work through that too. And then the um the AGS will work through I'll have a draft of the
087AG2210 but the other AGs will be learning the rest of the administrative guidelines. Sure. Yeah, that makes sense to me. Um and then I will try to update also the um course guide for the policy meeting to um indicate some of the pieces from the course proposal form too. I will apologize because I will not be at the next policy meeting. But hopefully you'll be able to answer all the questions. You'll be done in half the time. Do you have a uh you guys have paper clips? Yeah, I do. I can use one in my office. here. Well, I was just say that's just that's the stack of I highlighted all of the things all of the notes that I made. Okay. If that's easier to go through than my like bullet point style lists
088that I made. This is actually perfect. Yeah. I would I would prefer to get that from someone else too. So, I figured Yeah. Yeah. That's I made and in the future I'll just print out. Yeah. They're not. All right. Any other questions or comments? No. Um Oh, sorry. model model 20 and um 9130 are not is it not the right one? They're not quite the same. So public public requests and suggestions or complaints. Yeah, that's not quite the same thing. I mean, is there another policy that fits in closer with 20 or do we not really have a comparative policy? Um, I can check that. Yeah, I could look I can I can kind of look around as well. Okay. When when we have um our inperson day on the 28th, why don't you and
089I take a look at that one and what and the stream of consciousness that we have here fits with that. Yeah, definitely. That sounds good. I I want to say I don't think this was the these aren't the same policy, the public requests, suggestions or complaints. I think we're versus the right to review instructional materials and related documents. I think we're looking at different policy. There's another will policy that fits closer with 9130 that they had there um last Friday. Um but yeah, I mean that's kind that's kind of its own separate discussion away from the curriculum adoption process. Right. So I was looking at guidelines for matters regarding classroom instructional materials within 9130. But then it says also the right to inspect instructional materials. See policy 5780. Maybe I pulled the wrong one. 5780.
090Bet it's 5780. Let's go look at that one super quick. But I see what you're saying that this one does connect as well. Student parent rights um because this one while you're looking for it Jenny on page three of 9130. It talks about a review committee made up of seven members including and that's what you referred to earlier. So that's where yes it does have valid points to our conversation today but maybe not a direct correlation to that. Parents have the right to inspect any instructional materials used as part of the educational curriculum for their student. Instructional materials means instructional content regardless of format that is provided to the student including printed or representational materials, audiovisisual materials and materials available in electronic or digital format such as materials accessible through the internet. Instructional material does
091not include academic tests or academic assessments. Is that more what what Tony is trying to get after? All right. What are you looking for? There's been a couple of different model policies that um will put forth in the working of the tri in the alignment process that I didn't bring forward because they were almost like identical and I was just checking to see. Well, honestly, that's that's what I've seen going through uh like those policies. They're they're very similar to what we're seeing uh from Neiola. Very similar. There's there may be a nuance here or there, but like I I don't see them grossly out of alignment, but we can take a look at Sam. You and I can take a look at 20, right? And or any other one that we feel like didn't
092get I'll I'll try to I'll try to rrestle up a reasonable amount and not overload you. But uh yeah, but I mean like we um and well and honestly Craig and I were very like we went to that policy book uh from Will a number of times to to look at like alignment and take verbage out of there. And so most of our our policy work that we've done has already pulled over much of or as much as we thought we needed to the will pieces um for alignment. And so you know we we also um you know took a look at a couple of different other school districts. Uh every once in a while they had something like I know there was one of the pieces that we had. um as far as went
093to WSB for a couple of things, but um WSB is basically had the stuff and more generic than I because it was more specific and Will certainly has even more specifics in certain parts. But anyway, I digress and we can, you know, keep knocking that out of park. Yeah. What are we going to do with those four schools that we chose? Just use those as examples of what we looking for. Come up with ourselves. Oh yes. I don't think we need to do anything else. I just put those on there. Give the board a sense of like what's possible. Uh I motion to adjourn. I don't know who's leading them. So I know I just started. Stan, you're the only other actual board member who's like listed. So, you have to second my motion. Oh,
094I got more things I'd like to talk about. Oh, okay. Well, go ahead. No, no, I second it. All right, we'll return then.