Policy and Equity Committee Meeting September 26, 2025

001Good morning everyone and welcome to the uh September installment of the uh policy and equity committee for the Cincinnati Public School Board. Um we're going to start by going around and doing some introductions and maybe we can start with uh Rob on my right and then just go around the room. Uh yes, Rob Wilson, um board technician. Uh also, if you'd like to speak during the speaking of the public, please click the hand icon and we'll invite you in to speak. We'll ask your name and uh district association uh for the end of the meeting. Thank you. >> Ben Lindy, board member. >> Kendra Matt, board member. Stephanie Scott, assistant general counsel. >> Emily Campbell, curriculum and instruction director. >> We can share. >> Do I push it? >> Oh, thank you. Tena Stalworth, transportation

002provider. >> Well, welcome again, everybody. Um we normally have uh Phyllis Davis with us uh who is our uh one of our board administrators. She is not here today, but I know we'll be watching the recording. Um I was going to start Phyllis when you do watch this. Um uh one of the things we I said we would do at the beginning of the year is invite board members to submit topics um at the beginning of the year and then six months through the the year. Uh I'm realizing that we've missed that sixmonth part. Um we we haven't uh in a in in some sense just been doing this rolling. As you can see from today's agenda, we have a number of items from different board members. But Phyllis, I was going to ask if

003you could send an email to the board. Just asking one more time here as we start the fall, do any board members have any other topics they'd like this committee to take up before the calendar year is over? Um, I think it's important, um, from my perspective that any board member who has any issue they'd like to see vetted in policy committee has a way to do that. Uh, and so would like to send out an an all call, uh, at least one last time, uh, as we start the fall. Um, welcome, Mrs. Weinberg. >> Hello. >> Glad you're here. >> Uh, we I we stalled for for a few minutes here, so we're we're just getting started. Um, all all excellent. Um so as just we look at the agenda this morning um we

004try to keep these in the same basic structure which is we um have some time to consider things we didn't finish in the last meeting. We have time to to consider topics submitted by board members and we also have a commitment to making through our standard policy our standing policy review cycle so that at least once every three years uh every policy that our board has um gets reviewed by the committee. we save time at the end for a hearing of the public. Also, um just as we as we look this morning, um I wanted to make sure I understood the new business section on here. Are are these things that have come from board member requests? They're are they part of the standing policy review? >> They are part of the standing standard policy

005review. >> Great. Okay. So, if we're just going to pretend that where it says for new business, instead it says for standing policy. Oh, sorry. Yes, those are all part of the standard policy. Uh, yes. >> Great. Okay. So, we we have a healthy one, two, three, four, five, six things that we want to get through this morning. Um, just as part of this triannual review cycle. Mrs. Weber, >> just a quick question. Um, you may have already said this, but you know how like last time when we had our meeting, we had a couple of things brought up by uh, President Moffett and it says here for the topic submitted by board members is to invite. Was it to invite her to this particular meeting? Is it to invite her to call? I was

006a little confused. >> Yeah, I think I share the confusion. Um I reached out to her this morning just to make sure that I knew what the issues were that she wanted us to talk about. Um haven't heard back yet, but I also heard from um Kendra that she may join in person today. >> Yeah. So, from my understanding, she did communicate that she was going to be present. So, >> I will just make sure to I just wanted to make sure that we didn't have to then put it off to another meeting as well. >> No, I think that's great. And I'm I'm perfectly happy to um you know, if if if we get her later on in the evening, we can certainly come back to those things because I want to make sure

007everything gets uh the air time that it needs. Um any other comments or questions about the agenda this morning? >> Um so I did want to add I um did send an email uh to um Phyllis. Um however wanted to add that we have an opportunity to discuss um purchase of goods and services uh policy um because we do have a member from the community that will also like to speak on that topic. >> What was it? Purchasing >> the purchase of goods and services. >> Okay. >> And so um the conversation can begin here. I do know that this is also an area for Chief Birkhard to be able to um speak um you know very uh candidly too. So if we need to continue the conversation, I'm up for that um as well.

008>> Okay, great. So then let's let's do purchasing at least a a first um first discussion of p purchase of goods and services and we'll do that under that topic submitted by board members section. Uh, I did just get a a text from Kareem that she is planning on attending but a little delayed. So, I think we'll we'll we'll visit those as soon as as soon as we get her. >> Okay, great. Thank you. Um, what I had said to Mrs. Weinberg before you came in was that Phyllis is going to send an email to the board asking again if there are any other requests for the rest of the year. Okay. So, um, we'll get right into item two, uh, continue discussions, new assignments. Um, I think that first one 0160 meetings hearing of

009the public was from me. Um, and the council's office was going to see what they could find about different ways that different school districts might give um, time to different stakeholder groups. >> Yes, thank you. Uh, and I think you asked if we had an intern to help work on this, and I'm pleased. >> You have limited resources. I want to be thoughtful about how much time you have. >> David Joerger uh, knocked it out of the park. He uh provided a memo to us in which he reviewed more than 60 policies from around the state. He reviewed case law and Ohio revised code. Um and I I think we can say that while our board policy with respect to uh the uh time, place, duration kind of limits that are put on hearing of

010the public. Uh it's very typical uh uh with respect to other districts around the state. Some some districts provide longer uh in in terms of time for public speaking. Uh there's no district that he was able to find that had unlimited uh public speaking for any any particular group. Uh so the um collective bargaining agreement provision or sort of tradition that we have of allowing the union to uh speak and and uh to have an unlimited kind of period of time is I think unique also or just not reflected within either collective bargaining agreements or in board policies. Um glad to answer any questions. I'm also glad to share this excellent memo uh that he wrote with you. >> Thank you Dan. Board members. Yes, Mrs. Um, was the intern able to find any information

011for specifically um like elected officials, mayor, etc.? >> Yeah, nothing that specifically calls out any category, parents, elected officials as having a different amount of time than members of the public. Now whether they by tradition or unwritten rule allow that uh very possible but not he he specifically looked at board docs policies from districts around the state. >> Thank you. Um other board member questions or comments? >> Uh yes. So Dan, so I did have an opportunity to go through the uh the policy as it's written currently. So based off the research, are you saying that there is flexibility to be able to in incorporate such language to allow other um um entities or constituents to be able to speak maybe for um an additional period of time at the board meetings, >> right? So

012the uh general rule is that uh districts can put uh limitations or open up opportunities for people to speak. they cannot be content uh discriminating or or uh subject matter discriminating. So that that's that's I think the limitation that the first amendment has on on board's rules for hearings of the public. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Um thanks Dan. I appreciate it. I would I would love to see the memo. >> Yeah. >> Share that with the with the board. That would be excellent. Um, and I I don't know that I have other questions at this point. I think I' I'd welcome the chance to to read the memo um and and think a little bit more. Um uh and unless any other board members have questions or followup or from the administration, we can

013keep going to 7510. Um, I also would like to see the memo and and too, the only thing that I would maybe want to lean into is if if this is something that is of interest to us as a board to make sure that we u maybe have engagement around it to get to get an idea and a sense of um not only what our thoughts are about it, but also what the community's standpoint is around it. Um if we are taking the consideration to maybe incorporate different language to open up uh the chance for other people to um as we talked about parents to be able to have um more time to speak to represent maybe their like a parent organization or a particular school however we um decide to do it. I would

014like to get the feedback from um all of our stakeholders to see how we navigate forward if this is something that we decide to lean into. Thank you. Yep. >> Um so board member map just wanting to make sure so are you requesting or wanting to have the discussion on more time than the three minutes or you just what what is your actual ask? >> So from previous board meetings um I know and correct me if I'm wrong board member Lindy um the thought was around having u maybe more representation >> like a parent group >> like a parent. Yes. And so really trying to get an idea of what that would look like and also maybe wanting to hear some feedback from the community. Um I know some of the um um you know

015maybe parents or community members have spoken at the hearing of the public around this particular issue too. So really trying to gauge what their perspective and thought is um if this again is something that we're considering as a collective. So, and my thought is I would love to see the memo as well. But I'm also thinking in my mind since uh the hearing of the public. It's open to anyone. They could have already came along with their parent group such as the particular let's say a school. They could organize and say, "Okay, we're coming to the board meeting at this time." They still would always get the three minutes. They don't get more. So, they could already take it upon their own initiative anyway. But are you saying that you wanted to ch maybe be

016more formalized? >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Mhm. >> Um because again it may be you may you may find that particular schools are um bringing awareness to certain things but as a collective there may be broader things um that they're seeing and that we could um you know it could help inform our decision making process. >> I look forward to the to the discussion of the group and thank you for bringing that to our attention. I think for me too um there's a question of uh when is unlimited time warranted because I think you're right Mrs. Weinberg that any parent could come to any board meeting and speak. Um but one of the issues that I was originally interested in was um you know we we have traditionally offered unlimited time to the head of CTF.

017>> Uh I'm not particularly interested in cutting off anybody's time. Um but I do think it's an interesting question is are is there anybody else who would also like unlimited time? Um, and I think that gets hard because there there is a clearly elected representative for the teachers. Um, there's not a clearly elected representative for all parents. There are also several other bargaining units where it's not just CFD. I mean, there is Cass, we have the trades, we have ASME, like like there's I'm I'm going to leave somebody out here in a minute, but like just it's just a question of if one group has unlimited time. Um and and again I um I don't know like I uh I I frankly think from my perspective there are bigger fish to fry than this issue.

018Um but uh it is interesting and important and I think um uh happy I what I'm taking away as a next step Kendra is is and Phyllis I'm just gonna um uh when you do the the the um committee report if you could also you know we actually have our board president with us but it was going to say send on a request for a board matters topic on an agenda um where we could talk about this with the full board in an upcoming meeting. >> Yeah. Um, so >> is that good on 0160? So, we're going to go to 7510. Um, and uh I'm I'm not entirely sure if I remember who had this on here and what the continued discussion was. >> What was >> at the last meeting? Uh the only direction

019was to update the policy to change out uh I think it was um committee of the whole public um partnership committee for policy committee for alcohol waiverss which we've done and that was approved by the board in the last meeting. So we don't nothing further from the administration. >> Cross it off. >> Yep. >> Awesome. Thank you very much. Um we have 7250 commemoration of school facilities. >> Uh lots of discussion about this one at the last meeting. I think the only requested change was indicated here to add students to uh where we get written recommendations from. So, welcome any further feedback from the board. >> Board member comments. >> Um I don't think there's anything additional that needs to be added. I do know that the um current restructure of our schools with our

020middle schools and junior high, I do know that they are looking to be able to move forward with being able to um actually um have their schools named um so looking forward to moving this to the full board so we can proceed with doing that work. >> That's great. And so we we um Dan, we we have this this proposed change around student perspective. >> Um that has not been approved yet. >> That has not that's uh we can move forward with that or >> whatever the committee's pleasure is. >> I I I support Yeah, go ahead. >> I was going to say I support as well. And going back to with the naming of the schools, um are we just in limbo right now? because I I I didn't remember. I thought we had

021names presented to us that we were going to then discuss and then be able to move on or I thought they were presented. I'm not sure >> from my recollection. I don't um I think maybe some of the names were presented by the superintendent. Um but I think that's what brought us to having the discussion and policy in policy, excuse me, around what are the actual um expectations and being able to name a school. And so I think that's how it got here. Um, and so once we've reviewed the policy, I believe the next step was >> So they're waiting on us. Yes. Okay. Perfect, perfect, perfect. >> And I think just um I think this is consistent with everything you just said, Kendra, but I just for the for the for my own clarity,

022it's not the job of the policy committee to vet recommendations and it's not the job of the policy committee to make a recommendation on what the name should be. like that is according to the policy the responsibility of the full board. The only thing we're doing in this committee is we're looking at what are the policy requirements that the full board needs to follow in coming up with a name for a school and we're really not making any changes. The only thing that we are adding is that part of the input for what the recommendations could be include student voice. That's >> right. And I think we also as I'm looking and I see on the screen just making sure that the one, two, and the three are being followed. That is our role as

023the policy. So making sure that LSDMC is able to um uh provide input along with the students that we added. So that's great. So >> yes, >> and I think Dr. Mafa wanted to add something. >> Yes. Uh yeah, >> I just wanted to offer we were at the the administration. Uh well, first of all, I apologize for being late. So, thank you for allowing me to come. Uh, the administration suggested names, but they did not have LSDMC's formed at the time that they suggested those names. So, there was an uh request for more engagement with the community and they were going to form the LSDMC's to also interact with the namings that they had suggested cuz the principles came up with those names but not the community, the schools. So, that's where they were

024um with regard to the naming. They gave us some suggestions, but that was just it principal input, not LSTMC and not students. >> Um, that's helpful. Thank you. But here um and I think the um this is more just a process point. I think this this has come up a couple of times this year, but as I understand it, and I want to check this with the council and check this with my colleagues, that the the role that our committee plays is not enforcing the policies to be followed. What our what the role of the committee is um coming up with recommendations for what the policies should be. Um and that the board finally approves what the policies will be and the board is what hold the administration accountable for following on policies. We've seen

025some examples of when we've done that I think over the last couple of months, but that it's um uh I that's my understanding, but I do want to just make sure I'm on the same page as everybody. >> So, I don't know if I necessarily agree with you. I do think policy um serves a role in terms of ensuring that what is written whether we uh revise it whether we add to it but it is our role to ensure that it is being followed correctly and if there is an issue most of the time it is reported and it comes to policy and then we also bring those issues and bring it to the full board. So I don't know if anyone else feels the same way but that is my understanding of the policy

026committee. Yeah, I would from what I'm receiving I I think I would have to align with what board member uh Weinberg is stating is that I think you know obviously we and policies can come from you know the board and from our you know committee it can come from administration um as the policy is written I do think that it is the expectation for us to if there is a concern for us to make sure that we are interpreting what that policy is and making sure that we are adhering to that policy and yes bring it back to the full board to make sure that there's alignment there as well. Um I I don't I I hear what you're saying in terms of not wanting to uh maybe get in the weeds of things as

027it relates to policy, but I do think that we have a responsibility to uh ensure that what the expectations are that's written in the policy is upheld. I think I'm just confu confused a little bit and and I I think um I think this is worth spending a minute on and at the end of the day um I don't have a big um dog in this fight one way or the other but I I do remember this coming up in the context of the LSDMC's and the principal hiring and I think there was there was some some sending of issues to this committee and I remember a conversation we had about how what we're what we're not going to do is um conduct some kind of inquiry or investigation into whether or not a policy

028was followed in a particular principal hiring situation. What we would do is check to see whether or not the policy has the stuff in it that we think is important. And then if if there's a concern that the administration's not following policy, um that's an employment issue. uh and we can even use executive session to talk about the issue with the superintendent, but that it's it's really um uh the province of the full board to hold the administration accountable for following the policies that the board as a whole has passed. Um so I I have some confusion about how we set that up. Um could I just invite council for a second to offer some any historical perspective or any idea? Yeah, I mean I I I think it's right that the committee does not

029have any judicial or executive authority to enforce policy in specific matters. However, the bylaws provide that in addition to working on revising current addition policies, rescending policies. It also says receive suggestions or concerns from students, parents, employees, and taxpayers concerning the effectiveness of current policy or the need for new policy. So, >> okay. So I I I don't think that pro, you know, calls for necessarily individual circumstances being adjudged by this committee, but if the policy itself is not working, that that I think is uh grounds for the committee to act. So I think sorry I think that's what we're saying what we're saying is not necessarily where we're saying okay this wasn't followed this wasn't but if we're seeing that there's concern then we it it is I think our responsibility right to make

030sure that we're evaluating and assessing what's written in the policy and maybe we we've done it several times maybe there needs to be revision of the policy maybe we need to um uh you know formalize a a different policy so that we can ensure that um things are being done in a judicial and fair manner. >> I think that makes great sense. Yeah. >> Did you have something? >> I do. I just wanted to um offer two veins of thought. The work of the board should be done in the committees and and to me when I referred this to policy, it was to ensure that it was actually um that that the policy was written correctly and that you know, hey, based off of what we've all seen that it had been followed. I pause

031on taking time to discuss some clarification of policy in the full board meeting. We're trying to get the board meetings down and to a reasonable hour. I'm not going to even say the hour that I want because it never happens. But um I just think that clarification and any changes that need to be made need to need need to be worked out here and then discussed and shared and flushed out with the full board rather than have the full board take time during a full business meeting to flush out those things that I think you all can hear from the full board meeting and then interpret or ask for cl for further clarification and then bring back to us revisions that are necessary. So, I just would want to um offer that my reasoning in

032putting this back was because I had read the bylaws that said that it needed to be flushed out here in committee. I've offered to the public that expressed concerns of our policies not being followed to come to policy, but I think that this is where that needed to be um for for clarification and any revisions and then suggestions back to the full board for timely process. >> Thank you. Um, any other comments, questions? >> So, what I'm taking away, and please tell me if I'm not saying this correctly, is that um, our shared understanding and what's in the bylaws charges this committee with evaluating the effectiveness of policies and making recommendations for changes if the committee feels that the policy could be more effective. Good example, adding students. Um what is not in scope for

033this committee is uh adjudicating a particular fact set for whether or not the administration followed a policy in a particular circumstance. Um and I think that those distinctions seem to hold together pretty well for me. I appreciate it. Um welcome any other comments particularly if I'm wrong. Um otherwise we can keep moving. >> Okay, we'll keep moving. So, >> one second. Um, >> just kidding. >> Um, I think it is also equally important, I don't know how we we navigate this, but I do think that it's equally important that the administration is adhering to the policies that are in place. Um when you think about the superintendent or the superintendent standards, there's a particular standard that is evaluating the superintendent on governance and adherence to policy. And so I think to your point of making

034sure that things are flushed out, um those are conversations in executive session to say this is you know an area of concern and how do we work through it to make sure that it's reflected in the procedures um which the administration is accountable for. Yeah, no, no disagreement for me whatsoever. >> And I would agree with that. Thank you so much for bringing that up because we do um evaluate her in terms of that particular um standard and section. So, thank you. >> And I'll say look too like I'm I'm open to a more expansive view of this committee. Like I this was before any of you were on the board, but in my my first my first year on the policy committee, uh I I I had asked Lauren, the audit executive, um to

035do an audit of four different policies to check to see whether or not the administration was following certain requirements this policy committee had. And I think I I I I we have a lot of policies and we do not have a systematic way of checking to see whether they are be like we deal with issues as they come up reactively but we do not have a systematic approach whether all policies are being followed. I think it would be great for us to have one. Um we have not done that in in four or five years. Um, but I think that if if that's something that um uh if that is something that the board as a whole, I think wants this committee or some group to take on, I certainly would support that. It's just

036we we have we we have for the last four years or so not done as much of that. Um but I would be happy maybe we can um talk about this at a future meeting or at the end of today if we have more time because I I I would have a lot of energy for that. It's just different from what we have done. >> Um, okay. Uh, so 7250 commemoration of school facilities. We just did is we just did this. Yes. >> I I do have one question. This is something I guess for Dan about so we have these uh three criteria right around the uh recommendations for a school. Um how how do we weight that right? So if we for instance had recommendations from all of these sectors or subgroups. How do

037we make how how do we as a board take that into the final consideration to say what the actual name would be? >> Yeah. I mean, I'm going to start where I started when we talked about this last week. This is not necessarily a policy that I think the board has always checked off each one of these requirements before it has renamed a school. So, I mean, it it was updated. Gosh, it it's it's more recently than '09. So, I would say may maybe it was 2020. I know board member um Bates was uh this was a policy that she helped to revise, but I I don't know that those three have always been checked off. >> Do my colleagues have any thoughts around this? Because I can see this creating >> issues or problems.

038Yeah. >> Yeah. >> I have a lot of thoughts, but I'll go last. ask like do you want to go Miss Mber? Um I don't well I'll just say that yeah it can cause some issues and you bring up a good point of how is it weighted how is it decided because obviously when it is brought to us um the board as a full board with the names let's say we're given five names then it's up to us to then decide between those five names but then should we ask well what happened with name one how was that determined or do we even ask those questions but we do want to ensure that everything is being followed so you bring up a good point board member map >> look like I I think this is

039part of the um this is going to be hard I think no matter how you do it right I I think if people have a strong feelings about their school or you're bringing two schools together and so part of why I wasn't sharing a ton is I just I don't think there's a version of this that makes it like fully easy and so I'm I'm um with with with that as a caveat though like I think one of the things that is really helpful in policy is fixed timelines you know so like we put in our evaluation policy, you know, it has to be done by the first meeting in October. If there were something in here that were a forcing mechanism, like a school will have a name from the board within blank period

040of time from blank initiating event. It would be a forcing mechanism. I think that would be helpful. I I I get a little nervous about uh requests for naming school facilities shall include all three. I feel really strongly that all three of those groups need to be invited to submit requests and that if they do submit requests that the board considers them, but if there aren't particular public private partnerships or like a particular school's LSDMC is quite happy with a range of things. That seems f like I can imagine ways to make this better. I just think that even if we do all these things, it will still be challenging in some contexts, which is why I'm I'm I'm perfectly happy to support a range of different options. >> Yeah. So I I tend to

041I I agree with you that making it too restrictive could could potentially lead to other ramifications, but I also want to offer that if the district is about engagement. Then we need to hold those things firm and true in our policies because those are the only things that the board really controls our policies. Like we don't we don't control the how it gets done. We control the expectation that it gets done and that set setting that framework. So to make them optional to me is giving the power away is is allowing one of them or three of or two of them to become not as important and significant. If the board says the LSTMC's are significant and the community is significant, but then they're not they're the ones that are chosen to not be engaged,

042let's say, for whatever the reason, then the community could look at that and say that we don't deem that as significant by making it an option. So, I just think that we need to we need to I I don't think it's difficult to do three and to make it mandatory to do three. I think that what we need to do is set that level of expectation that that's what it is. And if they we find that maybe hey that's not feasible or that's it's problematic we can always come back and adjust it and pivot. But to not set that level of expectation in the beginning I think tells the community that some of those things are optional and perhaps they shouldn't be. So that's just my personal opinion. >> I I would suggest then just

043we have a healthy number of things we also want to talk about this morning. Um and I I think um I hear some strong support for what's currently on here. So I say we keep it. um let's recommend that to the board with this change for students and then I think it's just going to be incumbent on the board to make sure that this moves forward at some reasonable clip. Um uh does that sound like an an acceptable approach to everybody? >> Okay. So then this will put this through um for the next board meeting. Um do people feel strongly about whether this go through the consent agenda or whether this be listed separately? I I don't have a strong preference. >> I don't have a preference. I don't have a preference either. Um the

044only thing that I will consider um the only reason why I would say maybe separated out is because I know Vice President Bolton was one that um had discussion around it. Although it's not like major change. So um I I don't have a I don't have a preference. >> Yeah. I think if we've spent this long if we spent this long talking about it as a group, clearly there's stuff to talk about. So let's let's list that separately. >> Okay. >> Um okay. So we are now on to item three or section three on our uh agenda this morning. It says topics submitted by board members. Um and the first item here comes from uh Dr. Moffett. >> Sorry, you caught me right when I put something in my dangle mouth. So, um, this was

045actually from April and we had this discussion around House Bill 8 and transgender students and general counsel Hoy offered, um, like we we we kind of had the discussion from the community wanting us to to sh up a policy around transgender students and and where we were. So, I can't really remember if we made some changes, Dan, what we did. I'm going back to the email, but this particular one, I don't remember. Yep. >> What we decided on. >> So, House Bill 8, which when uh was passed uh early last uh early in 2025, required the district to put in place a parents bill of rights policy no later than July 1. Uh it's included in the materials and listed in code 2263. It is almost verbatim what we are required by that parents bill

046of rights statute to put into place. We had three or four conversations about it in this committee uh where uh you know there are many parts of of the parents bill of rights that are already applicable and true within CPS. No no no change to policy. There is some change with respect to the requirement to inform a parent of any material change including a request by a student to identify as a gender that does not align with the student's biological sex. That's the provision that got the most attention. We did training with our school social workers, psychologists, counselors, principles, assistant principles on that provision and what it means. Um, welcome your questions here, but we we don't there's no further action required by the board at this time. >> I think there was just some

047emails back and forth. I put um woman Lindy on them because parents had asked about how would this impact our district and I think you all had to do some adjusting for your meetings. So we never formally discussed it but this was what that was from just those that email conversation and having to do that by the deadline and what no one's emailed about it since then. So >> no that's great. I think um I really appreciate the work of the council's office over the last several months to kind of figure all of this out. Um and there's a a mix of things uh in the state legislation. Um but just so that I'm on the same page, any other comments or works or questions or followup on this that would be helpful. We're good.

048Okay. Um moving right along. Next one. Uh policy 5421 grading was for me. Um I have for some time been wondering um worry is too strong. Um but wondering how often it to what extent is it the case that a parent of a student at CPS gets a report card that comes home. report card shows students as getting A's and B's, which could reasonably lead a parent to infer, my kid's doing great, when in fact the student is actually struggling in reading and math and is is actually reading and doing math significantly below grade level. Now, that might be true, it might not be true. Um, and so one of the things I wanted to do was understand more about is this true? If it's true, where is it true? And this was what was

049behind a data request that I sent to the superintendent gosh back in like April maybe of of the spring. And um I really appreciate the superintendent and also uh Jeremy um and also Amanda. Um we we moved my request after the spring standardized testing because the team that would do the data request was very busy. Um uh Amanda put some great things together. Um the board's been copied on all this. Um got a the request back from uh Jeremy uh a month or two ago, but was really quite quite helpful. Um and so I I have some um data that I'd like to share with the committee this morning. It's it's posted on board doc, so it's public for anybody who wants to see it. Um and I think let me share it around, but

050it you can you're welcome to bring it up. Um, Rob on on the board docs. I think it's posted, but this would be one, two, three, four, five going this way and then the rest going this way. And this is what you created? Yeah, this is just a a a series of scatter plots based on the data that the administration sent. I'll talk through it in a second, but I wanted to see if um there we go. Okay. So, um again, I just want to say my thanks to the superintendent, to Amanda Vargo, and to Jeremy Galahghue for for thinking through this with me. Um was very very very very helpful. But what you've got here are two are three different schools, all anonymized. Uh, and these are all each dot is a different uh

051fifth grader at three different schools. And the xaxis, the horizontal one, it says math grade. And this is all explained in the notes, but but think of it like a GPA. Like if you got an A in math, you got a four. You got a B in math, you got a three. You got a C in math, you got a two. There are some half scores in there. That's because maybe you got an A first quarter and a B second quarter. So that would give you a 3.5. That's why you might see some dots that are in the middle like that. And then the Y ais, the vertical axis, um that's showing the percentile of the same student on I Ready. Um, so the 50 line is really important because as I understand it, and

052Emily Campbell's here, so she'll tell me if I'm messing all this up. Um, but like I think the 50 is basically the student is on grade level. Um, and so, um, this was so interesting for me to see because the three schools are so different. Um, if we start all the way on the right at school C, um, here the kids who are getting A's and B's are at or above grade level in fifth grade math. It's why I put a big green circle around it because I think that could lead a parent and I let me preface this too with like grading is really complicated. You give grades for lots of different reasons. You give grades to reward like hard work and effort and completion and growth, not just like how kids are doing.

053I'm I'm what I'm not saying here is we should change the way we do grading. What I'm the thing I'm testing for is how often could a parent draw the inference from a report card that everything is fine when everything is not fine. Um and at school C, I'm not worried about that because the the A's and B's track to kids being at or above grade level. The the uh lower grades track to kids being below grade level. Um, and so there I think a parent would read a report card and take away a message that makes a ton of sense. Um, if you look at B though, like I'm I I would be much more worried about what a parent would infer from that report card because look at all those kids who are

054getting A's and are below grade level. Um, I'm not saying they should get lower grades. Like maybe they came into that school super far behind and the teacher has moved them a ton and they're just still below grade level. But like it sure seems like there ought to be a way for us to share with the parent that like your your kid absolutely earned an A because here's what your kid did this semester and I want you to know how much further we still have to go. Um like I'm I'm wondering is there a way to kind of get at both of these things. And then you look at school school A um uh and it's just a mix, you know, like you've got kids getting A's who are way above grade level, but then

055you've got a ton of kids who are getting B's and are significantly below grade level. Um and so I just like what the message that I got from this is we just have a mix of things happening in our schools. And as a parent, like visibility into how my kids are doing is really important to me. Uh I don't want to speak for everybody. Um, but you know, I've been wondering about this for a long time and I didn't want to jump to any conclusions until we had some real data to look at, but the data to me at least says at least in some cases um uh I' I'd like to see if we can do better in terms of what we communicate to parents and report cards. Um, but that that's just my

056perspective. Yeah, Mrs. Weber. >> Yeah. So, just to add in a little bit, you know, from um obviously being in the classroom, the report card is not the only thing that is shared out with parents. Um I do know that for example if the child comes back and they are below their particular level uh for their diagnostic they are usually put on a rimp. So the parent is contacted um they have a 6 week or 9 week process in which they have to the teacher has to sign off of the different interventions that she's doing he that he or she is doing. So the parent is usually contacted through that form. they're contacted also through the um parent teacher uh conferences if the parent is able to attend or if the parent is being emailed.

057So the report card is not the only thing that is being shared out and I do under um I do appreciate you sharing these data points and um showing showcasing you know if a student is getting good good grades then you know why are they not testing appropriately. There could be other reasons as to why the student is testing the way that they are. But I do think that it is the responsibility of our teachers within the district and that is to be held accountable by the principles in terms of what are they communicating the transparency and um etc. are they doing all of the things that they're supposed to be doing to make sure that parents are aware. >> Thank you. Um Kendra, any thoughts? >> I do have uh several thoughts. um really

058just trying to formulate them all. Um because one of the things that um like we talk about the holistic approach, we do recognize that there are several factors as each one of you have already stated that goes into um showing the progress of our students. Um and so yes, we want to consider uh or continue um encouraging those things. But I do think to your point, I I do align with you that we need to be able to have that concrete way of making sure that not only our students know um and our parents know that this is where they really are, right? Um I do know with the I Ready, as you were talking about the ramp, I do know with the I Ready um they do that diagnostic, right, to help um students

059recognize what level they are at. But I think those conversations need to be um elevated because just being in the schools, being a parent, we do have our students say, "Oh, I'm making A's and B's or my parent the parents are saying I'm making A's and B's or but then it is a shock when they see that I already well if I'm making A's and B's, why is it saying that I'm on a second grade level?" And so those are hard and if they're in fifth grade, those are hard conversations that we do need to have. Um, and I do think it's really important that we really drill into um talking about our grading uh system um and how that also aligns with where we are when we're seeing our achievement. We talked heavily at

060our meeting on um on Monday about the state report card and what does that mean in terms of being on grade level or above grade level. So, I think in some ways it can be to your point misleading um not only to the students, to the parents, but also as as a board on how we're monitoring our progress. So, I don't know what the fix is or what the solution. So, I'm glad Miss uh Campbell is here so maybe she can help support us in that conversation. But um and and also to board member Weinberg's point um yes there the RIP is in place. I don't necessarily know that there's always um strong interventions to support our students to actually get where they need to be. um or where there's collaborative um you know relationship

061amongst the t the teacher and the the parents and the students to make sure that those goals or those objectives are being met. um maybe in some instances but I don't and I would be transparent to let you know that having said in some conversations there's misalignment right you can have a parent say okay well what what am I supposed to do what strategies can I do to make sure that I'm supporting my child and it's like well read more what is that okay we're reading at home right um so I do think that there needs to be maybe a stronger framework or or uh maybe more clarity in the policy to honor all of those things, but definitely where we're talking about um that alignment with what the act what where the student actually

062is in terms of proficiency or being above proficiency or where they are on grade level. >> And I would just add that I'm not saying that it's not there at all. I'm saying that these things are in place and of course there needs to be stronger attention to it. Um, I just don't want viewers or listeners or parents or even staff members out there thinking that we don't have any process that is followed because we do. But we do have responsible. Teachers need to be responsible. If you're doing the intervention, you're supposed to do the intervention. You're supposed to communicate with the parent. And yes, as the parents role, the parent should be involved as as well. I don't know the the answer. or how do we get the parents on board? But maybe it's

063a process of even just simply trying to break it down to explain to them the different stages and the different steps of what they're doing and what's in place for their child and to explain like you said with the report card. So there's a lot of different things at play. I think also one thing that just came to mind and I don't know again this is for Miss um Miss Campbell um as we're talking about uh academic performance the expectation would be are all of our teachers providing on grade level work right um I speak heavily about recognizing where the student is and and and that's okay. But how do we for our students that are maybe struggling, how do we provide not only remediation, but we provide the acceleration so that it's not the

064misalignment with what the actual grade is on the report card is versus where they are on their standardized test. And so, um, I think that would be a area that I would want us to lean into about are we providing our students on grade level work. I think that helps with those instructional rounds um as we talk about different interventions and strategies that are in place. Um so that's just one thing that I want to call out and just related to alignment. We have um adopted reading intervention programs um in the spring. Thank you to the board. Um, and so now all of our schools have the same interventions aligned to the science of reading kindergarten through 12th grade. Um, and so we have uh just uh finished up a PD series where we refreshed

065like you can't intervene your way out of a tier one. This is how you differentiate. This is how you scaffold when you have a child who is significantly um below grade level but needs to access the content. And then in the in the second PD we did okay. And then how do you in addition to that intervene and enrich um based on student needs. So we do have more alignment now with the um reading intervention programs aligned to the rims that uh board member Weineberg spoke of. >> I do have a quick question. >> You have one. >> I do have a quick question. Based off of the data points as you look over the years, let's say we have teacher A. Teacher A, you have seen her data for the past three, four years.

066Her kids continuously are failing. What happens in that case? Is a teacher then provided help to assist on, well, why are your students constantly showing that they're getting A's and B's, but they're failing all of the diagnostics? What is in place for that? Because someone asked me that question, and I didn't have an answer for them. I said, "You know what? That actually makes a good point because if this teacher is then deemed a great good teacher, but yet not giving that data points to show what happens in that case because then that means we're just having a teacher here who's not being productive. >> Those great questions. >> Have you all ever looked at the data of of the of the staff?" And and not to, you know, point them out, etc. without like

067calling out names of teachers. We've looked for patterns and trends in the past. Um, and I know principals have had conversations with teachers. There's there's various trends >> um on either end of the spectrum. I am um I'm not sure of what the systematic process is and we need to look into >> Yeah, I would be curious about that because I think I wonder if that then that would help our scores of third grade, fourth, fifth, etc. So, >> yeah. Let's do Dr. Moffet and then um Ker if you want to share also you have expertise here we can >> so I was actually thank you for giving me I was actually going to ask the same question but since because this data on school B when you said school B is is kind of

068makes you pause it made me pause too when there's a student with a math grade of a one but is over 50%. That data just looks a little interesting to me. But since you already have school A, school B, school C with regard to the cohort, I'm very interested to see a particular cohort of students over trend data because if you have a kindergartener and you have a first grade, second grade, third grade, let's say just K through five, you should be able to see that fifth grade who that fifth grade student teacher was back in third grade. if they're performing low, then they they they should have trended low over years and over time. And so, while I mean, we have the data. We we we have the data. We can look and see.

069I just don't think that there's ever been a request for that. And I don't know if there is a plan to remediate that, but there should be. This is not to blame teachers, but it certainly is to identify and lift up where there needs to be some um some some course correction or some some assistance. But I think that the board should absolutely look at this because I am very curious around trending data. If we have a student who has been with us prek K through 10th grade and they've been in our system, we know exactly what their scores have been over time and we should be able to see if they were in the second grade and they were below level, they were in the third grade, they were below level, the fourth grade,

070if they can't read at the 10th grade level, that should have been identified. And so we need to put some things in place. And again, I think that's definitely an administrative concern accountability. But um since you have already taken out school A, school B, school C, my data mind is like hm interesting to see what schools those are. Interesting to see are they magnet schools? What are they? Um I'm also interested to see the grade levels and the consistency over trend data for those schools. So since it's already there, I think maybe we can figure that out too. But >> he created that. So, >> oh, well, you have the you have the information about it. They they didn't make it anonymous. You did. >> And they anonymized the student level data. I don't know

071who the kids are. It's all fura compliant. All this is like publicly it's like a it's a public document, you know. So, like I'm happy to share. And actually, I hope I hope the board was included on the response that we got. You may have it already. I hope. But if not, I will. But it just generated more questions to the point. >> Um I think I called Karen Kendra before and I apologize, but Karen, did you did you want to >> I'm flattered actually. Um I appreciate your comments about this that the idea is not to blame teachers but just sort of it's a very complicated problem >> and I'm aware just coming at it from a slightly different angle and I know this is about grading and not about promotion and retention >>

072but I recently became aware of a situation >> where a teacher recommended that a student be not promoted because the student was chronically absent >> and I don't mean missing 18 days but missing like 80 days. >> Yeah. >> And being in the student was promoted to the third grade even though the student was testing at the kindergarten and first grade level. >> That's it. >> And so I mean that is also and I can only assume that that is because the parent insisted that the student be promoted. >> Um and so it is a problem. I think that and I think it's a it's a good problem to look at, but >> recognizing that there's a difference between tracking a student who's been in CPS over time, who's been present is very different from

073students who come in, come out, were chronically absent where they were, were very below grade level when they came, continue to be chronically absent. And I think we're probably talking about, you know, a lot of students. So, it's a complicated problem. I don't think it's there are easy solutions. Um, yes. >> But when you share about the student who's chronically absent or just in and out, that would be good to know as well because they're still then counted towards our information and our data. And if we know, oh wow, we have these 10 students who for the past 3 years have been in and out of our school every 50 days. That's good to know because then we know, oh, this is one maybe one of those reasons why. >> Absolutely. I mean, I think

074really zeroing in on um the absence data is crucial. Um and that's not something, you know, teachers have a lot of control over. >> Well, I will I just want to clarify if I could what I mean by not tracking teachers. If a teacher said in the third grade, hey, you know, they missed 80 days, that should be documented somewhere because that trend is probably going to continue in the fourth grade. But the fourth grade teacher now knows and they're not internalizing that this is a problem with my teaching. This is a this is a problem systemically that this student missed 80 days. And then maybe we could remediate that on our end and on an administrative level to say, hey, social worker needs to be, you know, so I I wasn't saying it it's

075not to blame teachers, but it's kind of to track the kid for sure in their patterns so that we could put things in place to help the next teacher and the next teacher and the next teacher. I heard you say this is not to blame teachers and and I think that's a wonderful thing to call out because >> do teachers are teachers able to track what they're seeing in their year for the next teacher like in I don't know if it's focused I don't I don't know where it would be >> I think so. Yeah. >> Okay. >> Yeah. >> This is such a rich conversation and there's so many important different threads. Chronic absenteeism what's the curriculum plan to get kids what they need. I think the reason I wanted to bring this to

076policy committee was um you know again I've been wondering about this for quite some time. I didn't want to jump to any conclusions until we had data. I I also think just to what the data shows is is actually that this is not a problem everywhere. It's only a problem in one of these three schools. You know, like I I don't know how they generalize to all CPS schools, but like if the problem is like to what extent could a parent draw an inference from a report card that isn't full isn't the full picture of how the kid is doing, it's not a problem everywhere. Um but at least in some cases, um to me that seems like a real risk. >> So one one idea I have um and I I I'm going to

077share this with you all. I'm not I don't think we're at a point to recommend anything uh even even if people like this idea, but we could keep talking about it. I'm I didn't know Emily was going to be here. I'm so glad she's here. But what if there was a policy that said when the report card goes home in addition to the letter grade, which doesn't change like grade kids the same way on the report card would also go what grade level the student is on according math and in reading according to the most recent I Ready. And the only thing that's doing is making sure families know the story that's in these graphs. It's not saying um we we clearly have this data already, you know, and it's not going to be a

078this it part of the reason the data quest took so long is we actually don't have the data everywhere. Like the one of the reasons we're looking at fifth grade is because fifth grade was an easy place to look at this. But you know, just because it can't be perfect doesn't mean we shouldn't do something that's good from my perspective. you know, and if if we have a way to help parents see this and I know like as a CPS parent, I know that we get the I Ready results sent home. I will say, however, that like that can be a fairly intimidating looking document because it's got a lot of graphs and a lot of numbers and a lot of words like Lexile or percentile. And I'm thinking about something that is really straightforward

079like your student is in the fifth grade. Your student's letter grade for the first semester is B. Your student's reading level is blank. Your student's math level is blank. I think every family deserves to know that information in a really easy to understand way. And I think we should communicate it on the place that most families are most likely to look, which is the report card. Um, and so I I I welcome feedback. I don't know that I'm right, but this seems like an opportunity to do good in the world when there are at least some contexts where uh it might make a difference. >> Yeah, >> I like it. Um I do. It's very transparent and it is allowing the parent to see the report card and to see the comment. I do know

080report cards allow for comments from the teachers which some teachers provide, some teachers don't, but I do like >> copy and paste. >> Yeah, copy and paste. But um I do think it would be something very simple to just like you're saying this is their grade level. This is excuse me this is their reading level or math level and these are their grades and also they can even provide what they're doing even if it's a quick sentence of I am we are providing intervention please stay updated etc. But I do think that that would be something good to do. I don't know if it can be done on the report card. I don't know what kind of system you know if that allows for that to kind of come out. The only thing is um

081yes I I think having something that's a little bit more um again concrete and align across the spectrum would be helpful and I I think it supports what we have already in our policy stating that we have a reliable system right to reflect our um our students grades and accomplishments. So >> I think like if if there is further interest in this, what I was going to recommend as a next step is and again I'm so glad Emily's here like I I don't I have no idea how easy or hard it would be to do this, you know, but like I I I think I'm very interested in learning more about how easy or hard is it to do this, you know, and I'm not sure whether that's a question for your team, if it's

082a question for Jeremy's team, if it's a question for both of you, but you know, maybe at a future future policy committee meeting to have some kind of um you know just dialogue with you all around if we were to have a policy that said on the report card there's got to be the math level there's got to be the reading level how would you do that how hard is it what recommendations do you have do you see any downsides are there other ways of getting at the same value that might be an easier way to do it what do you think >> I definitely think um it will be a collaborative like group of looking into tech technical um aspects of it, but also then how it resonates with families. So, if I get

083an A and then I get and my child is in fifth grade and it says the first grade math level, like how do we narrate that so that they see it as um a way to get support for their child and be aware and not like have fear and anxiety about how my child is performing too. So, I think there's just a lot that we can look into just to see how we can best or better communicate um progress and achievement. >> The thing go >> I'm I'm sorry. I I think you raised a really good point. Um right, what how who's all a part of that conversation and how do you communicate the information out? Um, and one thing that just came to mind in terms of, you know, maybe this is an opportunity

084for the conversation to be like with the high school, um, you know, teams and teachers because I do know that on their report card, uh, or their transcript, there's the expectation for any EOC that they have taken, it's reflecting what that score was, right? Um and and so I think it yields an opportunity for conversation with those students and with those parents um as well as those teachers, but they're actually seeing the information there in addition to the credits that they've earned and what grades they received in the class. >> Thank you. Um I I will just I really like the way you framed that, Emily, about um putting it in the context of of of what support could be available for the student. Um, the thing I feel pretty strongly about is that we

085not shield parents from that information because it's already true. >> Um, and I think that if if it's if it's what I didn't hear you say is, oh, we can't share that because I heard you say when we share it, we should make sure we also, you know, and I ju I just think that's I really agree with what you're saying. Um and um yeah. So, so then I think um who who were the people we would need in a policy committee meeting to have it's probably a question for the superintendent like and and maybe if if uh um Cynthia maybe you could relay that to her or or or Dan or somebody just just that um I think we would I what I would recommend subject to my colleagues um approval would be at

086the October policy committee meeting we have a discussion. It doesn't it doesn't even need to be like a formal it could be a presentation if you want it to be, but just who are the right people to have in the room >> to talk about how you would do this well if the policy committee wanted to recommend that we do it at all. Um but I think that would be a great next step. >> Is that any any objections? Does that sound like the right You're already here. >> Uh, okay. Thanks everybody for 5421. Um, the next one we have is Dr. Moffett on 9142. So, I brought this uh to you all because of the robust conversation that we shared at the um board meeting over time around the principal selection process for the

087two schools that were in question with Row and Taft and the also enormous community concern that we had um from for those uh interims and uh the selection process. So I don't know if it was very clearly stated that the interim was not to the board shared that the interim selection was not supposed to be involved in the principal selection process. And so that was something that we we shared verbally but I don't know if we actually put that in writing. So, I wanted to have you all look at that particular LSDMC policy under principal selection and strengthen that with the verbiage that the board shared collectively around um ensuring that there is community voice and that there is not interim intervention in the principal selection process. So it just says the LSDMC shall participate

088in the principal selection process as provided by 1520 employment of administrators and make recommendations of a school principal candidate to the superintendent. So I will share just on the LSDMC policy which >> 9142 on the back under principal selection that was one thing that we we ended up having to reiterate at the board meeting on the floor. But I think that it needs to have a little bit more strength because um and and say that it's on the back page um because that right now it's just very very um ambiguous. So having been a chair of LSDMC under two principal selection process processes um when I went through this we had an opportunity to meet with the superintendent who gave us direction on her interpretation of this but it was very clear that we you

089know we didn't have to have that level of specificity but I think clearly we do now. Um um the only thing that I will add, I do recognize that it is not um clearly spelled out. I don't know if it will help to um add maybe adhering to the uh principal selection proce like framework or procedures that we recently just worked on. um where it spells those things out >> in the framework. Um okay, because one of the things that I recognized while working um to provide feedback for the framework to the superintendent and administration was that the the recommendations that were made, they're all in policy. Um they're in the LSDMC policy. They're also in the principal selection um uh policy or employment uh process, but there is not anything that's bringing all of

090that information together to see it in one space. And so that's what creates the challenge of maybe fully being knowledgeable about what is what is expected, what's not expected. And so um all of the recommendations that were provided to the administration came directly out of policy. So, I think maybe being able to see it all in one space um could help assist with that and maybe it could just be language to say um adhere to uh the principal selection framework. I I don't know. I entertain or welcome you all thoughts about that. >> I'm very open. Do any other board members have any ideas or reactions? >> Will you say one more time, Kendra? So um we worked on a principal selection framework and so all of the things within the framework is speaking directly

091to uh what is written in policy. The challenge that occurred with um the principal selection process was we have so many policies or different policies where it's talking about what needs to happen but they're in different spaces. So you may find it in the LSDMC policy, you may find it in the uh principal selection policy and those things are not speaking together. So there needed to be one document that highlighted all of those expectations. And from my thoughts, that's what I was hoping that the principal selection framework process would entail where this is the expectation of the policy and these are the procedures that the administration is putting in place. And so if we if it is your recommendation to specifically have the language in the policy, we can or we can do I know

092um uh with special education, there's the policy, but then there's also the procedures as to what is expected that's incorporated in that um in that policy that people must refer to. >> Does that make sense? It makes sense and I think that if we're including that principal selection framework, I think that that should be stated within, you know, the particular principal selection section here. >> Right. So that's what I'm that's what I'm stating and recommending. >> I think I have two questions. Um one is you know Dan and Stephanie like is is that clear, reasonable, actionable or or or not? Um and then my other question was going to be to Dr. Mafet. Does that address the issue that you were raising? >> Um, we can go in either order >> again. >> Um, so

093I have I do have to look at the framework again because I didn't uh spend as much time intimately with it. But I will say this, this came because the community made the accusation that the pol the board policy was not being followed. And so the community is pulling our policy and telling us where they are they're needing further clarification. I think to attach it to additional uh references is helpful. But when I look at 1520, which is all that speaks around the principal selection, policy 1520 doesn't outline specifically around the principal selection, but it does talk about how a the superintendent can hire a staff member. Again, that doesn't answer what I'm specifically speaking of with regard to in this particular instance, the interim principal was not to be involved in the principal selection

094process, which actually did did happen on the second time as well. But there's nothing in the policy that states that. We said that as a board collectively that we did not want when and when when we were going to do the polic the procedure again we wanted to ensure and I believe it was voted on by all of us that their interim was not to be involved because of partiality impartiality. So I'm asking specifically for that to be included, but for the community's edification when they came to us and and it wasn't just one or two, it was several community members from both particular principal selection processes. When they came, they shared that there is ambiguity around the particular principal selections. Um, and they wanted more teeth for that. We don't have that. So that's

095why I referred it to the the committee. Can >> can you say more about what it means for the interim to be involved? I'm just not totally sure I understand. >> So, I'll speak from experience. Um, the policy states very clearly that your chair of your LSDMC should not be the principal. It should be a community member or um a parent. And often times in practice versus theory, because of low numbers, often times what happens is that the principal directs the LSDMC um just because of ease. It's not it's not necessarily a negative thing. If a person is serving as an interim principal, then they are directing the LSDMC inclusive of the their hiring process as well. And so there there should be clear separation between the the principal and the community member or the

096parent who leads the LSDMC. in the principal selection process that was brought to our attention, those particular interims were candidates for their their particular schools. So they were there was a possibility of a conflict of interest if they were to do what the normal process is, which was help lead their LSDMC. So we specifically asked that as the process was done again, don't have those interims be involved and included. they needed to be excluded because they were candidates. And so, and that meant every piece of it. That meant from interview times, it meant everything. It was not to be directed or they were not to be included. And um heard from people on the LSDMC and in the community that that was still happening. And when they went to the policy, there was nothing there

097stating that that should not happen because they were referencing the policy and the following of the policy and the that the board's policy was not followed. >> She just did. >> So I was asking like, hey, let me take this to policy and have policy put some things in place so that they can see a that our request, our voice was the interim not be included because it wasn't stated and b that the policy is actually indeed being followed. >> This is Thank you. This is just me trying to make sure I'm following. So, so it it's is it version A or B? Version A, at no point should an interim have any interactions with an LSDMC while they are on interim on any topics? Option A. Option B, even if an interim might be

098involved with an LSDMC on issues not relating to principal selection, the interim principal should not be involved with the LSDMC on any matters relating to the selection of an ex principal. I think it's B. I just want to check it's not a Okay, >> correct. It should It's It's only with if they are a candidate. >> I will be I'll be transparent. This is not something I have tracked super closely. It is not something I have a very strong opinion about. It's not something I remember voting on. It's also possible that we did and I don't remember. Um so I just like I certainly do not have a problem with option B. >> Um I want to check does anybody Mrs. Weinberg or or Kendra? >> So uh yes, we're speaking to be and I

099agree with that. Um just to reference what was written in the uh framework, it says in accordance with policy 311.1 internal candidates are encouraged to apply. However, in alignment with conflict of interest policy 11:30, if an assistant principal applies or you can add the interim principal applies, they must step down from their LSDMCC prior to the initial meeting with administration. If other APS at the school are not applying, they may serve as nonCFT representatives on the LSDMC. So what I would >> that be just during the time of the principal selection and then gain their Okay. >> Yes. So what I would recommend is if you all would maybe go back to the framework and um just review that to see what language is in there because again I like I said it's several policies

100that are speaking at one time but you have the conflict of interest policy here you have the principal selection policy here you have the LSDMC so it doesn't capture the full picture or uh connect it completely so going back to that framework to you know identify if there's anything that needs to be strengthened and then if there's language that we can use to just attach that framework into the policy. >> Yeah, I was going to say can't we just attach the framework? I think it sounds the verbage is great. >> That's what she said. >> Just attach it. >> So, but what I am finding is that we don't need to attach it yet until all the board members have gone in and looked at the framework. I did look at the framework. >> I

101thought we did discuss it. We went over it. Okay. Right. >> Am I right, Kendra? That what the framework is doing, I think this is what you said, is it's not adding new content. It's just pulling into one place content that lives in different parts of our policies. Is that right? Absolutely. Okay. So, I mean, one one hopefully uh I think this is what people were just suggesting, but what if we added um a sentence or two to this principal selection line that um would address the need to provide the committee with a um synthesis of the different relevant policies that should impact the principal selection process. basically saying in the policy that people who are serving in the SLMC should receive the thing that you are describing and then in addition to that we

102include a note could be same sentence could be in a second sentence that is clear about an interim not playing a role with the LSDMC in the part of their work that has to do with selecting the next principle. Seems like if we add those two sentences it would address the things that people are talking about. I think so. >> Yeah. >> Any any objections? >> Nope. >> Dan, Stephanie, is that okay? >> Yay. >> All right, moving on. Um, >> the the policy those policies that are impacting the principal selection process. >> Yeah, there are so uh board president Moffett mentioned 1520 which relates to the employment of all administrators. It tracks almost verbatim Ohio revised code 3319.0 2. It's not unique to CPS. 9142 is the LSDMC policy that is in front of

103you here and that describes the composition role and responsibility of the LSDMC that is unique to CPS as is 3111.1 which is our principal selection process which is I think where almost the most of the principal selection implementation framework came from 311.1 in addition policy 1130 relates to avoidance of conflicts of interest and again is applicable. That's also not unique to CPS. That's generally applicable to all employees, public employees in the state. So, I got the two bullets that chair Lindy asked us to add. We certainly can do that. >> And where would you put them in the LSDMC principal selection policy or because they they need to be referenced someplace? I I understood that in 9142 on the last page on principal selection, you're asking us to add that during a principal selection process,

104an LSDMC should receive copies of these policies as well as the principal selection framework and point two that an interim principal should have no role in selection of a a principal. Mhm. >> I would just add I think historically the e even an outgoing principal has not participated in that process by tradition. I'm not sure that that's written anywhere. Is that is it the interest of the board to enshrine that rule rule as well? In other words, if a principal is retiring, I I I believe it's our practice that that principal even a retiring principal or outgoing principal has not had a role in the principal selection process. board have a preference on that? >> I I I have a preference to let future boards and administrators make those decisions. >> So for now, say

105interim principles. >> I just like I think like we were choosing a new treasurer, right? There were moments when Jen was really helpful in that process and there were moments where she wasn't involved, you know, like and I just think that to give future people room to move, let's stay out of their way. >> Got it. and and quite honestly that hasn't come up as a concern from the community but this came up as a concern for the community that I think we need to address. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, um I think we're now still within section three and we added here at the top of our meeting um uh at least a first pass at this purchase of goods and services. Kendra, if you wanted to bring that up. >> Uh

106yes. So, I had the opportunity to uh speak with a community member um who was present today, Miss Tena Stalworth, about concerns related to our uh policy for purchasing of goods and services. And so, we recognize that in this policy, there are several different tiers that would make uh someone pretty much like a candidate to um be able to be a vendor within our district. And so one of the areas that um was noted in um the conversation that she um shared with me or the time that we were able to have discussion around this and and it started at the joint um neighborhood uh committee meeting with uh city council and it was around just the lack of equity for our um minorityowned and womenowned um uh vendors specifically pertaining to transportation because there

107are significant ificant um major corporations that obviously will outbid um those smaller businesses. And so um whether it was related to um insurance or um the year of their their transportation um or the maintenance that they're able to provide. And so um wanting to just you know have discussion around this and I know that Miss Stalworth will be able to speak more candidly to um this concern. Um but it was something that was um of interest given the fact that we do have this policy and we want to make sure that we are able to um have local vendors as well as uh minority owned and women um vendors within our district to support our students. >> Thank you. So is it is it um your thought that we could hear from the community member?

108>> Absolutely. >> Great. Thank you for coming. Mhm. >> Thank you for having me. >> Um, so really quick, I wrote a bunch of notes, >> but something that came across me this morning. I currently already service uh privately St. Bonafice and North Side Prep. Um, the name of my company is Nage Transportation and I have been around since 2019, but of course since CO happened. Hopefully we don't have it happen again. due to the government shutdown and at the time I was not eligible for the PPP loans. So I had to pivot and the pivot was into school transportation. I currently hold um a class B CDLs that I was trained back in 2010 from first student. Um I have gone since to drive for public transit with Metro and also Tank of Northern

109Kentucky. something that came across me this morning and a conversation that I had with um board member uh Miss Matt. I was in a coffee shop this morning after I dropped out that St. Bonafice. And the conversation between me and that parent was I gave her a business card and I told her I heard previously that she had a conversation with her son who I found out is 12 years old and he is riding the number 19 metro from Hamilton Avenue down to the school of creative and performing arts. What happened with him is that he got off at the wrong stop. So that um meeting that was at city hall before school started speaks to the questions that came up when Metro was asked about kids like him. What was going to happen when

110he got when those kids got off at the wrong stop. So hearing that conversation, I didn't have time that day when the m when the mom was speaking to the child to intervene, but I gave her a business card today and I told her if she had any more transportation issues to reach out because those are the type of kids that I service. Um, I work with brokers though to get those contracts. So when we speak about opportunities, what I seen and a couple of my colleagues were that issues like insurance became a problem for a smaller business like myself to access those contracts. The insurance amounts that were deemed on the policy for us to have. It becomes an issue for a newly starting transportation company like myself to be able to access those

111contracts. But then there are still families in need. So from that time to now hearing those same conversations happening that these kids are not getting to school. Um I know when I was a metro bus driver they had what is called the extra routes. I service some of those routes. They don't have them anymore. So I spoke to the parent to let her know you know kind of ease up on the driver a little bit cuz she was like the driver didn't make sure that my son got off at the right stop. And being one of those drivers, I know that you don't have the proper time to accommodate those students when they get on the route because you still have to look at traffic. You have to make sure you're navigating the fair box

112correctly. So, you probably could had it in the best interest to make sure that that student got off at the right stop, but you have to multitask and you're you're driving public transit. So, you might be dealing with 40, 50, 60 people at a time. You know what I mean? So, I feel like then with your school buses, that's where those seating charts are important because then you have more time. That is that is a part of your job to make sure that you know where those kids are sitting. They get off at the designated stops. You know what I mean? So, you don't have that on Metro for those type of kids. So what could have became a traumatic opportunity for that child which I feel like it was too early for him to

113have to experience that to get to school but he thought he you know wanted to ride the metro. He was excited about the idea at 12 but he's like it was scary. He was there with his mom and he was like that was scary. It's grown men on there cussing. Grown men on there using drugs. the route is too long. You know what I mean? And all of this is taking place before he even gets to school. So, I felt like of everything else I needed to say, that was something that I wanted to touch on. And also um I know Stefan Brier, he was fighting for that fairday stop and I know he spoke to uh Miss President uh Moffett about that. But now I found out since those kids are actually on that

114bus, they are now experiencing bullying issues already. And so that's another issue as a bus driver, a previous bus driver that I can speak to that monitoring on those buses is important. And the protocol in which the bus driver gets a monitor is very it's it's like for us we're like we need a we we just put in a request. We go into the bus company and say I need a monitor for this route. You know what I mean? I got I have to focus on driving the bus safely to get the kids to school. But it's not that easy. So when I heard that the thought came to mind like I wonder if that bus driver has already which is for Peterin said something about that route for that Rohill route to school because

115there there is no way that now I have a bus route which where I didn't and from my understanding that was the kids' first day of school and I think we're like what two months in now we have bullying issues. So for me as a transportation provider of a smaller company, I'm like what is being done on the board level to see that parents in need is getting access to companies like myself >> so that that doesn't keep happening. >> Thank you very much. Um Kendra attorney. So yes, so I in speaking with um Miss Stalworth, I let her know, you know, obviously there's several um things that has been brought to our attention around transportation um but wanting to make sure that we are operating within our scope as a board. Um, you know,

116as she talked about, how do we make sure that we're providing support and services to all of our students and looking at our policy to ensure that there is um access to not only um those major um companies, but also those smaller businesses such as Miss Stalworth and others to um provide those necessary services. So obviously we recognize that every student doesn't have the same need, but maybe there are um individuals that need that smaller um size uh transportation method to support um our district. And so again, wanting to just highlight some of the concerns that she spoke about in terms of being a smaller vendor and how to maybe access um being part of the district and making sure that it's an equitable process. And so again, this was just to bring um the

117conversation to the policy committee to maybe ask questions of our uh general counsel's office uh or even um Chief Birkhard over operations because I know that um in a previous meeting, Chief Birkhard went through that very rigorous and tiered process of how we select our vendors and what that RFP process um entails. um which seemed to be very very much um uh a process that was um very fair. But again, we don't necessarily always know the inner workings of things. And so because this is an issue that she um presented to me, I just wanted to make sure that I presented it and shared it with you all and if there's any area that maybe we need to look into to maybe strengthen um to have room to do that. >> Thank you, >> Mrs.

118Weber. >> Thank you again. you've been bringing some great things uh to us. Um a couple years ago, I know uh board member Moffett also brought up uh the same issue and I think it is something that we just need to make sure that we're constantly always reviewing and getting feedback and updates on. So, I'm open to hearing um Dan if you have any updated information or just a little bit of an explanation on the process and how can we help small businesses, small minority owned businesses as well. >> And Dan and um would certainly walk your thoughts. It makes me wonder also if we should invite uh uh Chris into a future session. Um I think earlier in this very meeting we were talking about what is and is not in scope of this

119particular committee and I think what I took away as in scope is looking at the effectiveness of policies. So we could say it's been a minute since you shared the policy that we approved around our approach to purchasing services. um could we get an update on what's working well, what's not working well about it and that could create a forum also to ask about some of these follow-up things with the person who's responsible for that body of work in the administration. Um but also Dan if you have anything >> I would welcome the uh participation teammates on uh both in purchasing and transportation. I I mean I I don't have any particular insights on um >> on um you know where where we are uh with transportation vendors except to say except to say that

120uh we are always looking I think for um new avenues. Uh we we have uh used some new transportation vendors in the last 5 years that I think uh because we've had to be creative. Um, so I I I I mean I think that's uh any any new new entries into the market are are welcomed there. And then in terms of the larger question about purchasing and ensuring that we're um available to local minority womenowned businesses. Yeah. Be >> appropriate to get a >> status report from Trina 11s and our purchasing department and Chris Burkart. >> That's great. I think what what we're not going to do is make a decision on one individual vendor or another vendor. what we what we are going to do for sure is check to make sure the policies

121that we have are effective and so I think that to invite the administration and any anybody who'd like to come um uh I think would be a welcome next step for um and we can do that at our very next meeting >> and I think the understanding I think for everyone was that's not the case in any way um but again to just make sure that um one we are we talk about engagement and I know that several of us are very passionate about making sure that we are engaging all of our community members and that they have a room and a platform to be able to, you know, address any concern that they have. And so this is a way to honor that in the respective spaces that we, you know, whether it's a

122policy meeting or a budget and finance meeting or the actual board meeting. Um, so wanting to make sure that we honor that. Um, and then secondly, yes, to make sure that this was just about beginning the conversation. There's no action uh expected today. Um and yes, as I stated and shared with um with uh Miss Stalworth as well, would love for her to have an opportunity to connect with our chief of operations, which is Mr. Burkhard as well as general counsel and the rest of the uh you know policy to just again initiate the discussion. >> And has she sent an email? >> I do not know. Have you sent an email? Uh well, I think the only communication was sent to me. >> Okay. Yeah. Can you share that? >> Absolutely. >> So, um,

123thank you. We are going to end at 11:45. Um, which is in which is in 15 minutes. >> Um, and so what I was going to say is, um, we will have I do want to save a minute for Rob. Do we have anybody hearing of the public? >> Okay. Um, but we'll get we'll get we'll get Karen for sure. Um but I do we have these 1 2 3 4 five six items that are in this um uh standard policy review cycle. I would like to try to do as many of them as we can do well in the next 10 minutes or so. Dan, are any of these cleanup kind of quicker things that we could knock off or do these really require some substantive discussion? >> Uh the first one I don't

124uh is critical to try to get through. It's an annual requirement that the board um review and and acknowledge the special ed model policies. So, I'd like to get that one through uh for the next board meeting. The others are just a part of our regular uh review. So, we can take as many as or as few as you'd like. >> Let's talk about special education for a minute. Like like uh has anything changed in the state's recommendations that we're we would be passing through? >> It there was a new version issued in April of 2025. It is very technical u procedural changes. nothing substantive in terms of but it does require that uh the board acknowledge the special ed policies once a year. Chrissy needs to upload something to the state. So >> Okay.

125>> But I just want to make sure like if if we say we green light this we're not we're not greenlighting any substantive changes. >> Not at all. >> Great. Uh is there maybe one example of the kind like a flavor just so that I can in good faith tell my colleagues that we're recommending something that is >> procedural only? >> Yes. Um, they are so technical though that I will send you a note so that when you're when you're presenting it to the board. Yes, >> that's great. Like I I I want to be I don't want to belabor anything. I just want to make sure I'm doing things with with uh that all of us are doing with integrity. >> There's nothing um that's going to change the way we serve our students

126with disabilities. Has to do with the due process um procedural requirements for uh hear the hearing requirements if there's a dispute between families. And again, I'm it's very technical. >> We're still going to offer hearings. >> Well, of course. Yeah. Required to >> um go ahead. >> Okay. I know we This was presented to us a while back, right? What What am I missing? I thought we >> once a year. So, last year was 2024. The only thing that's been updated is the 2025. Okay. >> And it's something uh we have to update upload by November 30. So, just want to make sure that that >> And I was going to say I know that I had lots of questions last time we were presented and um I know that I was able to get

127a lot of my questions answered and so you're just saying basically in red that it's just changing from 2024 to updating to 2025. >> That's right. >> Yeah. >> Um >> can I ask the question? Um and I don't know if this isn't in the policy or the procedures aspect of it. um I would have to go back and look through it again. Um but as far as how our students um with disabilities, how they are being um I guess supported in the the their classrooms based off of their needs or the type of units that they are expected to be in. So whether it's a a student that um is diagnosed with autism, can some of our students, I guess depending on where they are on the spectrum, is it the expectation for them

128to be in a special education classroom or in the general education classroom or is there a a balance? >> The long-standing requirement of the IDEIDA is that a student must be educated in the least restrictive environment available. So if that means that the student can be educated in a general education setting, they must be educated in a general education setting. If the if the least restrictive environment is a separate classroom within a school, then that is where the child must be educated and and in some cases we have students who have such complex needs that they need to be ident they need to be educated in like a separate facility and and but that would then be their least restrictive environment. that hasn't changed for 40 years. >> Okay. Okay. Just wanted to inquire about

129that. >> There there is uh just to get back there are um the four changes in the April 2025 version of the model policies are on the first they're they're identified on the first page of the document that's attached and uploaded with board uh board docs. They include there's a change in the confidentiality provisions regarding the destruction of education records. There's one sentence removed, one sentence added to replace. The others are related to procedural safeguards. They are very technical changes. Um, but they're all listed there if uh uh on the first two pages of the specialled model policies that were uploaded uh on board docs. >> So, you're saying that if we read the materials that are posted on the website, we would know the answer to the question. >> Honestly, no. What I'm saying

130is our outside council tried to explain these four changes to me and they were very very technical such that >> I glossed over. >> I was just trying to take responsibility for not doing all the homework. >> It's a 70page document and four sentences have been revised in excellent >> and and this is state law. >> It's required that we re Yes. that we have these acknowledged once a year. >> Great. >> Um so is there so we'll put these through we'll put these through I think in the consent agenda. Um and then if um there are questions, we'll be able to refer back to this document that has the answers in them. Thank you. >> Um with our remaining uh 11 minutes, um let's do our hearing of the public now maybe and then

131Dan to the extent we have time to hit the others. >> Sure, >> we can do that. Um that's great. So we have one speaker today, right? Any others? Great. Thanks. >> Thank you. I want to make sure I understand what's under consideration with respect to um the I guess the parliamentary authority and the hearing of the public. I think I understood you board member Lindy to say that you're not interested in cutting off anybody's time. Um but there is a question about people getting unlimited time. I don't know if Julie Sers has addressed the board about this before. Um but at page four of our collective bargaining agreement at section 130 it says the federation president or design shall have a seat and the right to speak at all public meetings of the board

132of education and its subcommittees. Her time has never been limited. In the past the president of CTF has sat at the table with the board and spoken freely throughout the meeting. Uh and so I just if there is any consideration um of limiting you know let me just say I don't know what the other collective bargaining agreements of the other unions provide but this has been negotiated by CTF for decades and if um and I and there we would um zealously advocate for this right and I I just want to make sure that everybody understands that and really that I understand what the board is um considering here. >> I'm not at the moment advocating cutting off anybody's time. Just so I'm clear, does the contract say she gets unlimited time? >> It does not

133use the word unlimited. I think there's a very obvious um inference that it is unlimited since she has the right to sit with the board at the meeting and speak. There is no limit. Um it neither says limited or unlimited but in the past it it has always been unlimited and you know she is she or any future president of CTF is speaking on behalf of 3500 teachers to and that's a very significant role in the district um and I think has never spoken for a long time for that matter but you know It doesn't say unlimited, but I think the inference is that she does have unlimited rights, which she uses, I think, um, judiciously and has never spoken for a great length of time. Um, and so, yeah, we would absolutely um, object

134to any limitation on the president of CTF's time to speak to the board. >> Thank you. Uh, I'm I'm not advocating myself to cut off anybody's time. Um, any other board members feel differently? >> No, I don't think it was the advocation of cutting time. I think you were asking the question of who else could get time as well. I thought that's what our discussion was on. >> That was my recollection as well, though I have to say like it's not obvious to me how you do that, you know? So, like, and the reason I made the comment earlier is I think there are other bigger fish to fry. Um, but but um that's my perspective. Did you have anything? I just have a question and and th this comment th the you're not the

135only voice that has emailed the board around CTF president speaking. Um I so we've never I think you asked it publicly but I don't think that that that question has just been singularly siloed to board member Lindy asking that. There have been tons of other speakers that have come up and said well why does CFT get to speak so long? So, and I think length of time is relative to whomever is judging that. But I I'm very interested to see what the what the actual wording is in the what the contract language is because um I've spoken to a couple of other past board members because I'm very curious and um >> it's been interpreted differently than what's being presented. So, can you direct me to the page that it says it on the bargaining

136unit? Yeah, you know, I have a copy of our new redlinined agreement and our our new agreement is at the printers. So, in the in the redlinined agreement, it's on page four. It's probably on page four of the the old agreement. It's at section 130 um 2 B. >> Okay. Thank you. >> I don't think there >> and this is probably addressed in your memo. I don't know. But I just wanted to make sure that the board is aware of this language and it's very important to CFT and so I appreciate the clarification very much. >> Thank you. And we all have copies of the bargaining unit. All the board members do. So I'm going to go look at it and just double check. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Um Dan, is there

137any uh of these items? Um I would feel better as chair if we did at least one. Um can can we knock out something here that would be helpful for the good of the order? >> Sure. Uh uh 5113.02 is the first. It refer it relates to the no child left behind law. It uh which was in 2001. Since 2012 the state the state has had a flexibility waiver from those provisions. It's our recommendation that this policy can be rescended. At this point, it basically only says that we will follow the law and the reauthorization of the Every Child Succeeds Act, which we do. Um, so I think it's an unnecessary policy and recommend resending it. >> Maybe we're not getting through these every 3 years if it's been since 2012 that we haven't had

138uh >> Yeah, I No, no objections here. Like, we're not going to stop having an accountability system. Absolutely. We're just going to follow the current one as opposed to the one that lapsed a decade ago. >> Yes. >> Yeah. >> Great. Any concerns? Anything else we can do? >> Uh I can do one more uh at least for your consideration. Uh the next policy relates is 5114. It's currently titled foreign students but relates really to foreign exchange student programs. You know we have and I recommend changing the title because we have all kinds of responsibility to our immigrant and refugee students that we've talked about at length. Yeah, this relate this policy relates to foreign exchange students that are a part of a a program um district approved and and actually uh federally approved programs

139for foreign exchange programs. I I I think there's some cleanup to just clarify that this policy we're talking exchange students. >> Yeah. Any any other any concerns? >> Great. >> Let's do that. >> Following that out, >> move forward. >> It's a great good uh force for good here. Um and we'll pick up 5120 and 5130 when we meet in October. Absent objection from anyone else. >> No, that's fine. >> Work with council. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you everybody. Um we'll see you next month. Have a nice weekend. >> Thank you.