August 25, 2025, Special Called Meeting (Board Workshop)

001here. >> Carlo Gomez Sanchez present. Daryl Balderama >> here. >> Aelina Prado >> here. >> Jesus Ren >> here. >> Adrien Gera >> here. >> Dr. Kelly Morgia >> here. >> Thank you, Miss Martinez. Can I ask everybody to stand and invite everybody to participate in the pledge of allegiance Texas pledge and the prayer? I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Honor the Texas flag. I pledge allegiance to thee, Texas, one state under God, one and indivisible. Please join me in prayer. Our Father, we thank you for bringing us together today to serve our community and our students. guide our thoughts, our discussions, and our decisions so that everything we do

002keeps the best interest of our students at heart. We ask this in your name. Amen. >> Uh there is no citizens to be heard tonight, so we'll go straight into superintendent report. >> Thank you, Mr. Tina. I know the board uh for the last two days has uh been in LSG training uh very insightful and I know we have our coach Mr. Ben Mackey with us uh to guide us through today's workshop where we'll uh begin to start uh setting some priorities for the district and looking at some goals as the community looks online so they can see us as a board interact and know uh what to expect uh uh from this community and this board as we move forward. So uh look forward to uh today's workshop. >> Thank you. So, at this

003time, I just hand it over to Mr. Ben Mackey. >> All right. Good evening, y'all. >> It's great to be back with you um and to be here today. This board is going to get the opportunity to begin the process of what is arguably the most important job of a board, which is to set the priorities that this system is going to focus on and achieve over the next 5 years. Um this is only the very beginning of a process. This is a process that will start to be the focal point of what we do. If something is our priority, it stands to reason that we should focus on that. And so today is the first step in that process. Um we have three other items that are going to be relatively short items that

004are more housekeeping and then the majority of tonight will be focused on priority setting. So as it relates to the first item, um the implementation plan, you have this at your desk. It is also online as an attachment and up on the screen. um as we begin this journey of lonear governance and again around the framework and if you strip the entire lonear governance framework apart it's essentially set priorities align your systems to achieving those priorities and monitor your progress towards those priorities making adjustments and so this implementation plan based on all of the conversations I was able to have with each of you individually and then just talking and seeing the exit criteria the corrective action plan the work that you've already started to do will lay out a road app of what the

005coming year and two years will look like as we move forward in implementing Lonear governance. And so I'm going to keep your attention focused on the first page and just kind of give an overview here. The second and third pages which are also online are a much more detailed analysis of every little step and a timeline and on track off track and so far we are complete and on track on everything. Um but there's some wiggle room here. While this board is going to put all of these things into place over time, the board might be able to decide if you want to move things up or back depending on the needs in the context of where you're at. So, just for the good of the community so everyone can kind of see what this

006looks like, I'll do a quick voiceover and we'll take any questions. So, over the rest of this quarter, which includes July through September, um we've already done our two-day um workshop around Lonear governance and building a shared language there. um this board will adopt an implementation plan and actually set these priorities and adopt a calendar in which to monitor these priorities. Then at the same time, this board will start to think about how do we start to align our systems to achieving those priorities? Specifically, what should a superintendent evaluation system looks like that aligns to priorities? What should our board operating procedures look like in a way that helps us focus on those priorities? and how do we take uh stock of our own actions as a board and start to do a self assessment

007regularly and reflect on our own leadership as a board and what we can do to continue to improve the focus in South San Antonio ISD. By the time we switch into quarter 4, so October um November, December of this year, it'll start to really look at progress monitoring. You will have set your priorities. Now it's time to follow through and see if we're making progress towards those priorities. There are so many people in the system doing work on that each and every day and it is this board's responsibility to see is that making an impact and what else can we do to support a greater impact in those ways. So most of quarter 4 this year will be around progress monitoring and kind of finishing up the process that we started with regards to superintendent

008evaluation and board operating procedures. As we move into the the spring semester and the second half of this year, this board will start kind of going a little bit deeper and thinking about, okay, all of these policies we have, we have a whole host of policies. It's time to start reviewing policies to determine which ones are helping us achieve our goals, which ones might be distracting us from them, which ones might we need to add or remove, etc. And so, we'll do something called a policy diet to really look at those and really go through those things with fresh eyes because policies don't need to exist indefinitely without being looked at. And it's important to review those on a regular basis. Um, and that's about the time that the budget will start to be prepared.

009And so the board's role, while the board definitely legally adopts the budget, the most important thing that a board can do is make sure that you're adopting a sound budget that aligns to your priorities. And so that process will begin in the first quarter. And then by quarter two, um, you'll be approving your budget, kind of finishing through your first round of those policy reviews and continuing to refine your practices around monitoring progress towards goals. And about that time, we will see what's been completed, what we still need to work on, how the next year needs to unfold, and we'll put together what the plan is for the year following. So that is a brief overview of kind of the direction we're going. Um, I will happily open it up for any questions or comments

010that anyone has. But again, I will invite folks that are watching or paying attention and just this board to look through this. This board will need to adopt the implementation plan to say we commit to doing this work. Um, it will be on a September board item for you. Um, but would love to take any feedback, thoughts, or questions that people might have currently. Um, though of course I'm always available for any board members that want to chat. So, I will open it up for questions. All right, seeing none, we will move on to the meat of today, which is priority setting. Priority setting in a district is arguably again the most important thing that a board can do. This board is the lighthouse that shines the focus on what is the most important things

011that we need to accomplish. And just because something doesn't rise to the level of one of our finite priorities doesn't mean it's not important. It doesn't mean that Dr. Inhosa or the entire team isn't going to focus on it. It's just that we are delegating that to him to make sure that he accomplishes all of these other things that are important in a school district. But we as the board for the benefit of our students and our community are going to focus on these few things and really monitor progress on it. And so that's what this board's role is. um this board specifically, given that this is a board of managers, it's a slightly different um but there's really three big documents that we're going to use to ground our discussion in, but there's a

012lot of wiggle room for this board to determine what what is most important and how do we focus on that. The first is the corrective action plan as identified by TEA as well as the second is the exit criteria, what we're shooting for to be able to return to local control in South San Antonio ISD. Um, everyone has the printouts at your desk in case you want to review to those. You'll probably end up looking through that again during the course of tonight as we work through this. It's also posted online in terms of that. So this kind of gives a foundational element of some areas to really consider and think about um as we think about setting priorities. The third element so well first one is corrective action plan. Second one is exit criteria.

013The third element is a root cause and data analysis. Now your superintendent Dr. Nos and his entire team have spent a lot of the last six months really combing through all of the different categories of data looking at all these elements. And so I'm going to turn it over to him in a moment. is going to give a brief overview of some of the things that they have learned and are looking at in terms of how it relates to goals and how it relates to constraints um as a starting point to consider. Again, ultimately the board owns the adoption of the goals and constraints, but we can't do that in a vacuum. We want to take into account what our team that we have hired here is is seeing on the ground dayto-day. But before

014I go into that, we'll have a quick review. Who could tell me what they remember about goals? What is a goal in terms of Lonear governance and in terms of governance frameworks in Texas? >> Thank you, Adrian. >> Dead silence kills me. >> Student goals are owned by the board. Yes, they are. What else do I know about student outcome goals? >> So goals should go ahead Lena and then Jesus. >> Go ahead, Lena. >> Sorry. I think goals should be smart. So they should be measurable and attainable and have very specific timelines. >> Yes, they should be smart, measurable, attainable. They should have specific timelines so we can actually see if we're making progress or not. Jesus >> need to be three to five, three being required by the state. >> Yeah, there needs

015to be three to five goals. There are three required by the state. That's where we're going to start our discussion, but that'll come in a little bit. The three required goals that every board must adopt in the state of Texas are around third grade reading, third grade math, and college and career military readiness. And why do we recommend no more than five? Who will go ahead, Kelly? >> Just so we can stay focused and continue with our priorities. >> Yeah. Um, once you start having more than five goals, focus gets diluted and we actually don't make as much progress. There's plenty of research that shows the more goals we have, the less likely we are to achieve any of them. Hence why we recommend no more than five. It's not required to have five. You

016are required to have those three. But then this board may choose to adopt additional ones if if thought if if the desire is there. Anything else around goals? All right. Then switching gears, goals are the vision of the community, what we want for our students. Um when we talk about student outcomes though, what are student outcomes? How did we define those? It is what a student uh knows or is able to do. >> Yeah, it's what a student knows or able to do. So, our goals will focus on what students know or can be able to do. That's because those are the things they take with us when they leave South San Antonio ISD. Uh they can't take how they felt here. They can't take all of the other things that are important into that,

017but they can take what they know and are able to do based on their time here. So, with that, then we switch gears to constraints. And these constraints are they protect the values of the community. Um superintendent achieve these goals but not at the expense of these values that we hold dear. And again these will also be grounded in the exit criteria corrective action plan and the superintendent's recommendation. And so what else do we remember about constraints because we're also going to touch on that in this presentation. >> Uh there's two types of constraints. Superintendent constraints and board constraints. >> Yes. Superintendent constraints are constraints we place on the superintendent achieve these things but not at the expense of these other things. And there are also board constraints. Constraints we place upon ourselves to make

018sure that we are effectively focused in there. Today we will focus on superintendent constraints and in quarter four we will bring back board constraints. What else do we remember about constraints? >> One to five. Yes. Um same Ray about prioritization. Anything else about constraints? >> Uh they're in regard to specific operation operations or set of operations. Um and they can't be too restrictive. >> Yes, they are about things either specific things or general things that are not allowed. They are not allowed that because those might distract or keep our focus away from what we're trying to do. But they can't be restrictive as to tell the superintendent what to do. We've told the superintendent what to achieve with our goals and now we're telling him what not to do, but he still needs a choice

019to get there. And every time I mention the superintendent, I am implicitly referring to him and the entire team. All right, then. That was great, y'all. 10 out of 10. Uh, so with that, let's get into it. You have the exit criteria and corrective action plan that we'll refer to. With that, I will pass it over to Dr. the host and the team to kind of share some of their data analysis and root cause and then we will get into the activity. >> Okay. If we could bring out uh a PowerPoint presentation. Okay. So, as we said priorities, uh we looked at uh all types of data. I know we have Mr. Roachche here and and Dr. Gutierrez. Um we've looked at STAR data, map data. We actually all our students were map testing today

020uh in uh ELA and uh it'll be uh ongoing uh throughout the week. Eduhoria data eduporia is a platform where we keep uh all our data where uh we're able to manipulate manipulated in order to present it in a particular way. We have our taper report which is the report card that comes out yearly by the state. We have PEMS data, Skyward which is our district platform, attendance data, interim assessment data, district surveys, monthly financial statements which is presented to the board on a monthly basis to see how we're doing uh financially audit statements, cash flow analysis, walkthrough data, teacher evaluations, cluster evaluations, those are our PLC's and teacher attendance. So, uh there's a plethora of data that we look uh looked upon in order to u make some recommendations and priorities uh to to

021the board. And if Dr. Gutierz or Andy want to add anything at any time, please let me know. Or if anybody has any questions. Um one of the things that um as we set priorities, you know, we have to have a ba baseline of where we're at, and I know you've seen this slide before. This is reading uh in particular third grade because that is one of the areas by House Bill 3 that we're going to be setting a priority. And you look the the the number to really pay attention to is the middle number. Uh for example, it says 60 3210. The middle number is meats and that's the number that we're going to be uh setting a goal on. Okay. Uh where our goal is to get it to 60 uh%. Now 60%

022uh I want you is is an index score. So I want you to think if I added all three numbers um they should if if we get to 180 and I divide by three that's 60. That's an A. That's how the state calculates an A. So u this if you make a 100 a 50 and a 20 right then of course it be under. So you add them you add them add them up and you divide by three. If you hit a 60 that's a A. I believe if you get uh like a 45 that might be a B somewhere in there. Okay. So, we we're our goal is to be an A district. So, but bottom line where you look at where we're at, we're at the bottom tier of most districts in um

023Bear County. So, um we're recommending some high lever student outcome measures. Uh uh first of all, these three are related to House Bill 3. So we want to increase the percentage of third grade students who achieve meets or higher on star reading from 32% which you saw on that chart right is how what we scored last year to 60% by 2030. Okay so in five years uh we want to get that number up to 60%. And uh how are we going to measure that? We're going to look at unit assessments, springs uh benchmarks, and exit tickets to formatively uh check how students are doing. An exit ticket normally is done during class where a student is asked a particular question to make sure that they uh understood the lesson. In third grade math, we want

024to increase the percentage of third grade students who achieve meets or higher and math from 30% uh in June of 2025, which were uh that was a result to 60% in uh 2030. And again, utilizing the uh same progress measures. Okay, there are others, but for uh I I just listed those three. Those are probably three of the most uh used uh that we use to to determine uh to set our goals. And then CC uh CCMR this is uh uh to determine if students are uh college career and military or citizenship ready. And um we want to uh we want to make sure that 90% of our students will graduate with uh qualifying scores for community college, college, military or industry certification by 2030. This past year, it's a lagging indicator. We were at

02561%. An 88 is actually an A by uh state standards. Uh but we went ahead and went a little bit over uh by 2030. We feel that's a very attainable number and again we get that information from tea. Uh we can look at skyward and uh we use the uh counselor's tracking report to see how kids are progressing and uh what areas uh they have mastered the CCMR to get that uh particular point. Um then when we looked at uh district priorities there was five and again these are just recommendations the board can uh uh change or or you know ask questions. One of them is that we want to build a fund balance and improve financial stability. I know we've done um some work toward that. Uh we feel that this year uh we

026should have a balanced budget even though we there is a shortage of students. we feel we can still get there. Of course, we want to improve student outcomes reflected in accountability measures. And again, that's why we're here, right? We want to be sure that students get the best uh education possible. Three, we want to invest in teacher capacity. That to us, that's the heart of uh increasing student outcomes. You got to put good teachers in front of students. The teachers that we have is who we have. So we got to do our part uh in order to grow teachers. So we do that through PLC's uh through walking into uh classrooms uh to make sure that our teachers are growing. Number four is maintain and invest in aging facilities. Uh right now you know budgets

027are tight but we still want to make sure that we are investing in our facilities to make sure that they're conducive to the learning environment. I know we've made some uh accommodations in some uh classes. For example, at MADLA, we added some whiteboards uh and uh did some work in some of our classes because we felt that the classrooms at MALA were not conducive uh to to learning. So, we made some changes. And the last one is we want to rebuild stakeholder trust and support. That that's important, you know, uh, you know, to make sure that, uh, we have a community who trusts us, that they know that this board and this administration is going to do the best for kids to make sure that, uh, students get the best education possible. Um, here, and

028I'm not going to go through the whole list. U, the division of academics, um, did uh, uh, put this together as an example of, uh, you know, some of the priorities as far as academics. We want, you know, making sure that everything is aligned um academically. We want to build capacity as mentioned. We want a curriculum that's rigorous uh to make sure that students are challenged. Um we want there to be quality instruction on a daily basis. And then we want to assess our kids at a level or or higher than what students are going to see on the STAR test. So again those are the priorities of the division of academics to make sure that students get the uh uh uh the best uh education. I don't know Dr. Gutierz is is there anything

029you want to are you good? Okay. Um and then um recommended high leverage uh strategies and um values to protect. Again as we talked about constraints um uh have four to recommend to the board. First of all, we do want to value a rigorous curriculum. So, the superintendent shall not permit the use of instructional materials and curriculums that are not aligned with grade level expectations and best practices. So, we want to make sure that teachers are challenging our kids with a curriculum that the board has approved and they're not bringing any outside resources. um we can uh uh monitor that with walkthroughs, observation data and making sure that student tax tasks are on level or grade level. The next is uh teacher capacity. Uh the superintendent shall not permit for ineffective clusters which are PLC's

030to take place during the school day. Again, uh we want to make sure that teachers are growing on a weekly basis as we do expect them to to meet uh uh either after school or during the conference. They get to choose and uh we check uh this through signin sheets, the uh the agendas for clusters and of course walkthroughs as we go in and uh uh sit through these clusters to make sure that teachers are growing. We want quality principles. Okay. uh in order to have an effective school you have to have good leaders. So the superintendent shall not allow low performing schools to be led by low performing principles. Okay. How do we know this? Uh through how do we measure this? Through uh principal evaluations, excuse me, star results and again walkthrough data

031as we go in and uh we're evaluating classrooms to make sure that there's quality instruction going on. And then the last one is quality teachers. The superintendent shall not allow campuses to have inequitable access to experienced and effective staff. So how do we measure this? Again, teacher evaluations, staff vacancy report, and TIA data. We want to make sure that hey, we have the uh um that all our teachers have the ability to uh achieve TIA status, which tells us that uh we have quality teaching. uh across the district. So these were the four that uh uh we felt um were in alignment and and again this is something as a recommendation that the board uh can consider and uh at this time I'll take any questions if anybody has any regarded to the presentation. >>

032Yeah, thank you Dr. Nosa. So we will open up for questions. I will ask that the questions stay as clarifying questions. So not looking yet for feedback on what we think is important or not. We will get to that momentarily. I promise. But just to make sure that everyone has their questions answered about what we mean by these things and why we chose those etc. So we'd love to open it up for questions. >> If we could get the presentation back up so that we could see that please. >> Thank you. >> Any particular slide or no? >> Um this this slide for me please. >> Sure. I had a question um in regards to the um potential um outcome goals that you had mentioned >> um in particular the third grade reading and math.

033Um on that far right column you had suggested certain goal progress measures and I was just curious about um which grade levels like is it just third grade reading? Are we also looking at like second grade like the building up the pipeline to get to third grade reading or like if you can kind of share a little bit more about um those potential progress measures? >> So what I did I just took the ones that were required by house bill 3. If the board wants to add any we can definitely have that discussion but for this uh purpose I just took the three that were required and I'm willing to you know entertain or if if there's other additional ones that the board wants to work Dr. Gutierrez, >> we can add second grade as

034a progress measure to make sure that we are on point to meeting that third grade goal. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Is more of a clarifying. Um staying on here earlier you mentioned um the reading third grade was 60 3210. If you add them all three divid them by three that gives you the the level. So did >> sorry through TA scoring rubric right in order to achieve an A on domain one uh you have to have an index score of 60. So the way uh you have approaches meets and masters. So when you add those three numbers up uh whatever number you come up with if it's uh higher than 60 the index score then it's an A. If it's lower than 60 then it becomes a B maybe below 45 now you're a

035C. So let me just give you examples. So if I made a 100 a 50 and a 30. All right. So 100% approaches 50% meets and 30 30% uh uh masters. So that's 100 plus 50 is 150 plus 30 that's 180. Once I divide them by three that gives me 60. So I would get an A for that index in domain one. >> Got it. So with that being said, the third grade reading then is that 34 >> 30 30 uh 32 >> 32. Yeah. Okay. So then the question then is is that goal going to reach an A rating >> In 2030. Yeah. But is that an A or would that be a B? >> Yes. 60. and clarifying it should be 60% uh index score. Okay, thank you for I see what you're

036saying. Yes. >> Yeah. I just want to make sure it's that goal. >> It should be 60 Well, it does say to achieve meets or higher at 60%. So, theoretically that if you got 60% on meets or higher, you're going to more than likely get the A. Yeah. >> Thank you. >> Yeah, Darla. >> I have a question. I think it was on the next slide. Um, it had to do with building teacher capacity. Okay. Invest in teacher capacity. Can we go forward one more? One more. Sorry. There we go. Okay. So, we're investing in teacher capacity. Um, ineffective clusters, the PLC's. I see there's walkthroughs and cluster signin sheets, but we also have agenda sheets. What are these? Who are they designed by? And what are they aligned to? >> Sure. So what we

037want to make sure is that uh number one that people are there all right uh that there's agendas uh and that agenda is going to have information that's going to help them grow. So let me just give you an example. It might have something like u questioning techniques right or it might have differentiation of instruction might be the the the goal for that particular uh cluster or it might be a certaintique. how do we teach this particular teique? Right? So, it all depends. We're going to look at data and based on that data that's going to drive the agenda in order to help grow teachers and better understand. So, a lot of times you bring in student work and uh teachers the best way you learn is they collaborate with each other. So, for example,

038if Ry uh had a test and his kids made a 80 and here's Daryl and maybe his kids made a a 50 and I'm just the average. Well, let's start talking. What did Ray do in order to get that type of results, right? So, we get to share that uh amongst the uh um uh grade levels or that subject area in order to grow teachers. And then our master teachers who are the experts uh they're able to also share some strategies during that learning time. Uh so imagine it is like um a weekly learning session where sometimes people go to the service center. Uh it costs a lot of money. here they're getting it weekly from a a professional who's on site going into their class and uh based on the data that they receive

039that drives the agenda in order to grow the capacity. >> So real time coaching and feedback. >> Absolutely. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thank you for that question. And just one note to kind of illuminate where we're going with this is the superintendent has put up potential progress measures. There's obviously not a lot of detail to that yet because before we can actually truly identify what those progress measures are, the this board has to decide what winning looks like and that's the goal or the constraint. And once we get to a clearer point on like yes, that is the goal, then what the team is going to do is take that back and say, "All right, now we can start putting some of these progress measures to them and define them a little bit more

040specifically to this." And then the board will get to see the actual goal with what those progress measures would be more specifically in about a month or so once we're kind of get clear on the goal. But first, we got to figure out what winning looks like before we can know what stats to look at to see if we're on track. >> Other questions clarifying around any of these elements >> on the um >> wait, we got Jesus first >> on the qualifi quality teachers. Um, I'm rereading that one over and over. The Can you give an example of inequitable access to experience to just more nuance to uh how we're measuring that and and what some of those inequitable access >> sure could be. >> So, we want to make sure that there's a

041quality teacher in front of every student. So again, as we bring in teachers, our job is to grow those teachers and accelerate their progress as quickly as possible. So we're going to do that uh through evaluations uh through you know making sure that they are certified teachers and uh in front that's why you have staff vacancy report and then you have the TIA data that shows as more teachers become eligible that tells us that we're doing our job as far as building capacity uh within uh our teachers because it's all based on student growth. So if students are growing uh that means we we you know teachers are growing and uh we have quality teachers in front of students. What we don't want is uh very similar as you guys know when it came in

042we had uh uncertified teachers we had 10 teachers I think we had like 50 or 60 uh in front of kids and uh we want to make sure that we have good quality teachers in front of students and that those teachers are again um we're building capacity uh in in their in their craft so that they become those experts and uh what we call a quality teacher. Yeah, question. >> Okay, question. >> Um, again, just thank you and the team for putting this together because I think it helps kind of guide and inform um our lens. Um, and so like my question is um it's kind of connected to the district policy analysis that you all suggested which I feel are pretty on track with what we've been talking about. So like building the fund

043balance, incur improving student outcomes and investing in teacher capacity, like all those align and I think my question is around like the rebuilding stakeholder trust and support and I know that that's like an iterative process and how the communities engaged. Um, but when it comes to like the the values here, um, just would love to hear like I know y'all had a lot of data to look through and you you took a lot of time in the spring to get kind of like the listening tour and like a lot of those surveys and so I'm just curious like how um the data and insights from the community at large was shared to inform these values cuz like what I'm trying to piece together is like that these um the potential like things that we have

044to protect like and when we're building out constraints is like how are we connecting those dots? So, just would love to hear like like how that process was or if that's maybe something that we as a board should dig into deeper as we go into like the crafting process. >> Sure. Now, one of the things when we talk about stakeholder support that we've done um is that we've uh number one, we've uh sent out surveys to our community to gather that feedback. I know that we've shared that with the board. Uh we had uh community uh meetings. I know there was several of them. I'm not sure how many more than five definitely and then as uh you know us as admin I mean we are out there um I said I try to make

045just about every function uh and I try to connect with uh community members I've even been to church here uh at several of the churches right to connect with community members so it's about u being present uh and you know being out there being visible and as you are visible that hey you're meeting parents and you know asking them how their children are doing is there anything that we can do different you know so some of this is uh you know somewhat qualitative right as you're just getting their perspective but uh just having those conversations so those kinds of things I think is the the things that you normally do as you build relationships to build trust with somebody >> thank you all right any last clarifying questions here before we move on to the

046Jesus. >> Um, you you had mentioned it in the review portion when you went over something, but are we going to have the former goals and former constraints and things handy to to reference and see maybe that didn't work so well? And >> so, we don't have them handy. You're more than welcome to look at them, but I think part of this, especially given that this board is a little different as a board of managers, is you also already kind of have some goals even though they are not yet this board's goals. And so you get to look at these in terms of the exit criteria and the corrective action plan. You can definitely look at those other ones for sure. We don't have them in front of us, but obviously all learning is good

047learning as we put that together. >> Right. >> All right. Now, we're going to get into the work. Who owns the goals and the constraints? The board. Thank you. U the board does. And so, thank you Dr. Nosa. You all have done a lot of work to try to pull these out. It's a great starting point. It's definitely something we definitely want to consider, but ultimately this board has to determine what makes the most sense putting together this recommendation with the corrective action plan and the exit criteria as we do this work. So, we're going to split this up into three parts. We're first going to start with the required goals, third grade reading, third grade math, and CCMR. And Dr. Nos, if you could just leave it on the slide with those three goals

048that you have them written. We are going to start and really workshop these and try to figure out where the board wants to go with these three goals. Once we get to a good point there, we will then switch into um any other additional goals if we want to add any and then we will follow that up with the constraints is kind of how we'll work through this process. Before we do that, uh Dr. Nelson, I just want one quick clarification for my own benefit here is the way that this goal is currently written. It is a percentage of students in third grade at meets. So that's a meets number. Did I hear you recommending that you would your recommendation would actually be to do that as a domain one index of 60 as opposed

049to a meats number? Is that accurate? Okay. So does so that's one and this is the exact purpose of this is to have this conversation. So instead of just looking at the meats rates, it sounds like the recommendation from the superintendent is not just the meats rates but instead look at this index score. How many kids are at approaches? How many kids are at meetats? How many kids are at masters divided by three. So we're not looking at just one element of that. We're looking at all three elements of that and aligning it to an A. So that's just one note that's slightly different than what it says up there. The way we will do this is I'm first going to give you all two to three minutes to just individually reflect on these three

050goals and think about if they if you would make any recommendations or have any questions as you think about this work. Should it be just meats? Should it be the domain one index? Should it be a different measure of this? We do have to do something in third grade reading, third grade math and CCMR, but there is not specifics on it must be done this way. So, I'm going to give you two minutes to reflect and jot your questions or thoughts down and then we will move into partners where board members will work with partners to talk about what you're thinking and then we will come back together shortly. So, take two minutes. I'm going to time you um reflect on this, see if there's any adjustments that you would make as we go forward.

051And if you don't have adjustments, that's fine, too. All right, as we finish those two minutes, Dr. So, was there anything you wanted to add? >> I I just wanted to add a little bit about the thinking behind this. Um, as we started to extrapolate the di the data and looked at every campus, even though this is just I mean we're just focused on third grade, what we found that on domain one that every campus at South ISD was either a D or an F. Even though the rating subc campuses made B's right on domain one, every single campus was a D or an F, which tells us that uh we're not uh performing at pretty much on grade level. What's happening is based on where the kids are, they're they're they're growing, right? Fortunately,

052the way the accountability system works uh it it does benefit us uh where you can take the higher of the two domains but folk that if we do well on this particular domain normally you're going to do well on uh the the other domains as well because everything is tied back to the first domain. So I just wanted to stress that that's why uh my mind started shifting when I started talking about an index score. if we get the A in the in index one. Normally, you're going to make an A uh on on the others. So, I just wanted to throw that out. Thank you. >> All right. With that, I'm going to have you go with your partners. We'll do Adrian and Kelly, Carla, Ray, um Dr. Nosa, you and Daryl, and Jesus,

053and Arina. Um feel free to talk with your partner about what you're thinking, what adjustments you would make, if this covers what you would expect that this district focuses on for third grade reading, math, and CCMR. So, enjoy visiting with your partner. You don't. Oh, yeah. Go ahead. >> Only for these three goals, right? >> Only for these three required and then we'll move into additional ones. Yep. So let's We're gathering All right. So, just to address a couple things, the conversation here is really around third grade reading, third grade math, and CCMR because those are state required by House Bill 3 for all districts across Texas. I heard a lot of good questions about well what about these other things that are on the exit criteria or other areas. We will talk about that

054next. This is really just to determine if the language we have here around third grade reading, third grade math and CCMR represents how we as a board and based on all of our knowledge feel is the direction of the most importance there. So, I'm going to open this up and just see if anyone has did any groups raise your hand if you had conversation about potential adjustments you might consider to any of these three areas and why. >> Lena, >> more of a question. So, I know in the first one in third grade reading it was mentioned making a change um to align into the first domain. >> Is that understood correctly? Okay. So if that's the case, um my recommendation would be to do the the second one, third grade math to align it

055the same way. >> Okay. So I hear this. Dr. Anos, do you have any thoughts on this? >> No, I I'm in agreement, you know, because again, for reading and math, it's going to be basically the same thing. If you're scoring a A uh in in neither one in domain one, then more than likely you're gonna get the A. So, and that's what we want to achieve for, right? we want to achieve for the highest for uh for our community. So, um, you know, we and I think the beauty of this, you know, when you think about third grade math, five years from now, think about where the third graders are. Uh, they're how old are they right now? Maybe four, right? So, in five. So, we really got to build like to Kelly's point,

056second grade, first grade, kindergarten, you know, those grade levels really strengthen as we're gaining this data. So these kids go through the system in five years, hey, they're going to be ready to score at at that level. >> Okay. >> Yeah. Go ahead, Jesus. And then Ray >> for for clarification, domain one is approaches. >> Approaches meets and masters. So on the score how if you go back to the scores. >> Okay. >> The uh when you're saying domain one in this context you what what you were describing was it being focusing on the approaches type but that's not the right definition of domain right? >> No approaches you see that first number >> the like uh 60 that's approaches >> 32 is meets and then 10 is masters >> correct? So when you add

057them all when all when you add all three together uh and you divide by three you know if you get 60 by TA center that is an A. Now based on your economically disadvantaged students I mean that number they give you a few points but I I really think 60 needs to be our our our focal point. So in this case it's 102 and when you divide that by three it's 34. >> So that's why we have D's and Fs. >> That's why every campus is a D or an F right now in domain one. What we looked at it uh that Dr. Guterres you can correct me. >> Yes. >> That is correct. Every campus is a D or F in domain one and we shared that with our administrators during admin academy. >>

058So for help what's there's you're referring to domain one. There's a domain two >> and it refers to your improvement plans or something other than just the score. Correct. >> Domain two is academic growth and it has two parts. It has progress and relative performance. >> Thank you. And that that also contributes to the rating we would get as an A or a B. >> Yes. I mean uh that's why you see some of our campuses uh let's say and I'm just going to use Armstrong, right? uh they went from an F to B because they showed growth. But if you looked at domain one, they were still a a D. So in in actuality, I'm just going to give you this example. Let's say uh Northeast, right? At they're scoring at 81, South Sand

059scoring at 60, right? But theoretically, Northeast could have scored a C, right? and uh one of the campuses with lower domain one uh scores could have scored a B just because they had more growth, but they didn't actually have better results on student achievement. >> And if I may, I think one thing that there's we didn't get to talk about this in the Lonear Governance workshop, but there's a couple different types of there's really three different types of goals that a board have could have. A board could have a goal on achievement. We want our kids to be at a certain level. No matter where they come in at, we want we we see it as our responsibility to get kids up to this level where they're performing on grade level or whatnot. A second

060type of goal could be a growth goal. We don't forget where the certain level is. We just want to make sure kids grow a certain amount. And then a third one is a gap closure goal. We want to close gaps between demographic groups of students to get there. And so what I'm hearing in this conversation is, you know, while we might have shown growth at particular campuses, when we actually look at our campuses across the board, we're not performing where we need to be in terms of what we want kids to be able to know and do where they're at. Hence the recommendation for this achievement goal. Now, that's a question for the board. Like you've heard Dr. Nosa's recommendations on this and why we need to focus on getting our kids to that level.

061But I think to your question is the question around domain one versus a meets it just stands to reason if a board sets a goal about students at meets where is the attention and focus in that area and that's an open question. What's that? >> Meets. >> Yeah. Moving kids to the meets level. If you focus on domain one it's not just one element of that. It's moving kids to approaches and moving kids to meets and moving kids to masters and dividing by three. Not to say one of those is right. Those are different contexts and whatnot. But that's kind of the discussion here on how you all want to focus. >> If I might add just some context. Um, as a former educator and teacher educator, this makes my soul happy to hear about

062like that domain domain one index. Um, because there was always um there was often um just extra attention on getting the meats and focusing on your quote unquote bubble kids. And even if there were some that were, you know, at very high performing at higher levels or at lower levels, um that the attention and resources and teacher capacity wasn't directed towards them. And so teacher efficacy kind of like took a burden on that because it's like even though teachers believe in our kids, um the sheer time spent at said PLC's on like whatever agenda items that we have there on the clusters, um could just be focused on meats. And so I appreciate that amendment or suggested amendment, but just kind of like pull back the curtain a little bit more and think about like

063the practicality of it. Like I think that is going to help us reach um the fullness of like getting our districts to that. Um so I just appreciate that and and wanted to share that insight. >> Thank you. Okay. So we had the recommendation to say we like the domain one index score. We would recommend that it actually gets applied to the math as well. So, I've captured this in some notes and I'll put my notes here up in a second so everyone can see them. Um, any other changes, amendments, questions that came up when discussing any of these three with your partners? >> Uh, question. So, for CCMR goal, if we go into that one, um, so the goal is to increase by 29% in five years in the the way of measurement. Um,

064and I'm going by memory, but I think it was it was the um counselor tracking report, which I believe is pretty manual, right? Trying to get information from different areas, the skywear report and tier report. um in training with when we went to tabs on that training, they did mention there is a new tool that is in place that allows the ISDs to see um like the military enrollment and some other forms um that are more automatic so you're not having to do so much work. >> It's a CCMR tracker and it automatically has formulas in there that tell you if the students have received a point or not. Should that be a valid one to also add as a measure tool or is it valid? >> Real quick, I would like to hit Great

065conversation, but I'm hit pause because we're getting into the the inputs and then the outputs, which we will get to. Got it. >> But first, we got to figure out what winning looks like. And so, I'm going to keep us on. Is that what winning looks like for CCMR? And then we will get to all of those things later on. But thank you. >> Thank you. So any other questions, comments or feedback around are we good with this definition of winning the percentage of students earning the qualifying scores for CCMR as per >> Yeah, I actually think they're really great um as they are. Um I feel like I mean I I think we all discussed the other day that even if we hit these goal because I feel like we're going to hit them

066faster. Um so I feel like this is a good round number to start with and then we see where we're at. But honestly, I feel like later on we could also add on and keep going uh further. So that's all I want to say. >> Thank you. Any other thoughts, questions on here? >> Question on like word smithing. Sure. >> Can we um share again um what the actual wording would be? Um because it wouldn't be achieve or higher, but we're talking about the domain like >> I love it. Can we real quick um if we can switch to the other document where I am working we'll try to make sure that you can see it. You might need to help zoom in. Um so I have taken what was written on the slides and

067based on the conversation made some adjustments and I've tracked the changes here. If you can reload it should upload. Is it not going? Why is it not sync? >> Oh, that's interesting. Um, I will figure out what is going on there while I send you off to your next break. But what I've written here based on that feedback and again, this doesn't have to be finalized yet. What's going to happen is the board's going to hear it. Dr. Nelson and the team are going to word smmith it a little bit more and then bring it back and then the board will get to decide and make adjustments. But the way that I've written it here as based on what I heard was instead of increase the percentage of third grade students who achieve meets or

068higher on star reading from X to Y, I've changed it to increase the domain one index score for third grade students on star reading from 32 to 60 based on that feedback. But again, this will not be finalized language. It will be up to this point. All right. So, it feels like overall the board feels decent about these three areas as three big ones. I would love to before we shift um Adrianne, if I can put you on the spot, I would love to hear what you and Kelly Kelly's conversation was around specifically how you saw these these three goals if at all matching to some of the goals in the exit criteria. Yeah, I think the first good connection was that as we go to that indexing, it directly relates to the exit criteria

069and you know in relative to u let's say the exit criteria saying that our state state accountability system has at an A or a B. What I started to lose track of with it says all schools on the campus will be rated an A or a B. And so then as I look at the particulars of third grade and reading and math and CCMR hypothetically, what about, you know, Neil Armstrong down the road? What's their rating and how do they go from where they're currently at to something better if needed? And I was worried that it was missing and I didn't know how we were going to influence that with anything that we were talking about. And so I think I'm not proposing yet that we add, but I'd really like to know how these

070other schools, all schools, you know, apart from what I see as third grade and maybe CCMR, get to an exit criteria, including by 2027, which is an A or a B. >> So two elements there before. Yeah. And the reason I asked him to share that is because the exit criteria that you were referring to specifically says exit criteria goal number one by August 2027 South San ISD will ensure that district that the district and all campuses are rated A or B in the state accountability system. Now it is very possible for a board to choose to set a goal around accountability. It is also possible to say if we hit those goals we will achieve that. So it doesn't have to be exactly onetoone but it is a conversation depending how clear you want

071to be. But then what you raised in the second question is, you know, do we need another goal as it relates to say something that's not here, middle school or something else. And that's going to be an open question for this board that we are going to move into next, which is why I put you on the spot to to bring that up. And the board has multiple options. Number one, you can choose not to adopt another goal. What would be the benefit of not adopting another goal? >> Stay more focused. stay more focused on moving these things because those are going to be tough lifts to do but very possible. Um, and does it mean if we choose not to adopt another goal, does it mean that Dr. Anal is going to say forget

072those middle schools? >> No, it's not going to happen. And so frequently it's a hard thing though because we feel like we need to put everything in there because we need to measure it. And really the board's power comes from not measuring everything, but measuring the most important things right now to move the needle and entrust the superintendent and team with getting the results in the rest of the spaces. And that's a fine choice if this board chooses to. A board might also say, but you know what? It is necessary for any number of reasons that we think that we need to monitor middle school. Maybe at a campus accountability level, maybe at a reading level, maybe somewhere else. That's going to be the board discussion. In which case, there's a trade-off. you put less

073focus on achieving these goals at this rate, but you get this additional insight into it and you create a little bit more focus on somewhere else. That's a trade-off. I can't answer that. Only this board can answer that. So, that's what we're about to do right now. I am going to actually let you work with your same partner this time and talk about if you would see the need and if there is anything else either in this exit criteria. So, I'll point you back to exit criteria if you want to look at it. um the exit criterion action plan based on what Dr. Dr. Nosa shared and anything else on your mind if you feel like there is need for an additional goal and what you and your partner need to do is agree if

074there is if you guys don't agree then we're not going to raise it up but if you both agree that there is need for an additional one to two goals then we're going to raise it back up to the group you don't need to write the goal you don't need to tell me from what to what you need to be able to say eighth grade science on star or specifically SAT ACT readiness or whatnot you need to tell me like specifically kind of what you're looking at but otherwise is you don't need to write all the specifics but the first thing you got to do is you and your partner need to talk through that and decide if you agree on anything additional based on the exit criteria the presentation and anything else. So have

075Oh yes question before we go >> before we go. So the district placement goals and for the exit criteria those are goals are going to be set no matter what whether we set some other separate goals these are something that we're going to measure and already going to be in place. >> Yes. So it's the difference is in who is setting the goals for whom. TEA has set these goals for South San Antonio ISD. They're saying that's the case. Now this board has its own responsibility to set the goals that this board is going to monitor. Now yes, you do not want misalignment. You don't want to just pick things that are opposite. You want your goals to latter to this, but there is no requirement that they be exactly what this is. And these

076are not as specific as some of the ones that we are putting together here about baselines, end dates, etc. So essentially, you do want your goals to latter to that, but they don't have to be one for one. But yes, this is what TEA is monitoring South San Antonio on. So you would hope that your focus areas do align to some of these things in that way. Was that responsive to your question? >> Yes. >> All right. Enjoy visiting with your partner. All right, let's finish up your conversations. >> Raise your hand if you need more time. Pretty good spot. >> All right, another minute. >> Yeah, keep carry on for another minute. All right. Now, reminder, there is no requirement to add another goal if you do not choose to do so. And the

077other rule is that you must have agreed with your partner that this is something that we would like to elevate to this. So, I will take notes. Would any group like to go first? You can either say we didn't have one or we think this one should be considered. Jesus, we we'll go first. >> Um, one of the concerns that that these don't meet would be the closing the gaps um metric for evaluation and specifically the bilingual students. in a in a presentation that was given to us at the beginning. Um the fifth grade science performed very very bad and we all know that in sixth grade they they only take the test in English. So we came up with something variable wise but something more for y'all to chew on and and potentially consider.

078So closing the gaps in bilingual science sixth grade star test from X and if my memory serves me correct it was like 20% approaches zero meets and zero masters. So that means they're all they're everybody's flunking that from June of 2025 to June of 2030. >> All right. Um before we move on, we're going to keep on going and see if any other groups had anything that I will just add here and then we're going to come back to you Dr. Nosa if you and Dr. Gutierrez if you want to add any context about why you might recommend one more than the other or what not. We'll come back to you on that in a second. Um but we'll come to you next for if you all had something additional that you both agreed on

079or not. One of the things that and again we talked about literacy at the high school and I think that the biggest reason is that it holds the biggest weight because when you're talking about ninth and tth graders that is um over a thousand students right so you're talking about 25 to 30% of your population is going to drive the overall accountability. So you're as good as your high school goals. So we felt that uh talking to Mr. Balama that uh we probably want to set a goal if we do add one uh based on high school literacy since it has such it's a big such a big chunk and a big part of the overall accountability system. I don't know Dr. Gutier you want to add to that. I would agree with that based

080on our English one and English two scores currently. So we were at 49% approaches, 31% meets and four% masters at English one and English 2 is 51% approaches 35 meets and 2% masters. >> But that that is about 20% of the overall u accountability. >> Great. All right. Thank you all. Yes. No. Did we have something we both agreed on or we >> No, actually I I really like this because I mean when you think about 2020 is what like you know 5 years ago, right? So those kids are getting ready to go into high school right now. So there's probably a big gap with those kids. So I I I think that makes a lot of sense. So a great idea. Yo. >> Okay. But no no additional one outside of >> she has

081a question. >> Let me just ask a question. And I think it's a no, but I just want a little bit of clarification before I said no very confidently. Um, so um, one of our exit criteria goals is to be in compliance of all state and federal special education laws and regulations. Um, my question was, is this um, something to do um, is this something we should take into consideration? Do we need to take their scores into consideration? um is this something that is calculated in CCMR overall or are these uh laws and regulations that we need to be um aligned with not necessarily having to do with that that it'll be something that sort of takes care of itself if we take care of CCMR >> or was it like rules paperwork >> etc.

082We we were out of compliance uh is what TA found. Uh I mean it performance is one thing but compliance is the other like transition arts you know when you should have the AR. So we could make that a goal but TA is going to be the one that's really going to uh be hyper monitoring that because we do have to send uh information to that. Uh, so they're going to be I mean they're going to be uh we're on that like I said but if the board wants to do that I'm not saying no but I just want you to know that TEA is also u you know taking care as far as the monitor and compliance as far as okay how we do ours and things like that. So then we do not

083I think my concern was was there a performance concern? Is that something we also need to add or you know look into it a little bit deeper. But if it's not a performance concern overall then um I feel like if it's something that should take care of itself if we include it in the overall CCMR budget. >> And I would note that while we haven't gotten to it yet, the board also will have constraints. So maybe it rises to a point if it's less about because these are about what students know and can be able to do. And so if the the criteria here is more referencing processes as opposed to student knowing can be able to do that might belong more in the processes we're not going to neglect in the process. So all

084right so nothing from here addition anything that you all agreed on that you would want to consider addition to? >> Um just it kind of connects to what was mentioned before. Um, so with our multilingual students and with our uh special education um students like there's uh there was kind of like a a hesitation of like oh um because I remember when we were at this board maybe we're getting the data there were significant gaps um for those populations and again to pull back the curtain a little bit more like you can reach that domain one index score um and have those special populations not be adequately serviced And so it was like a a hesitant like do we need another goal? And so I think this is where um Dr. Gutierrez had mentioned um

085well we still have to track our student group targets. So like they're not going to be um like not shown a light on like their progress and like keeping look at that. And and then you Mr. Mackey had said like, well, maybe we could possibly write a constraint um on like um superintendent and team will not neglect XYZ student populations. And so I think that could also be um beneficial in this when we're thinking about this because you know again I'm going back to like what what we focus on our goals and like how we channel in all of that energy, resources, capacity um and like are we in alignment? Um, and I think that's kind of like that that weighing of the options of like what we add as additional because then attention and

086focus will be moving there and as it if it's aligned then are there other ways that we can kind of bake it within our system or structure that we can catch those things and still monitor them but not get too far off the the path. So I think that was like one of the things but I'll let my colleague share a little bit more. Yeah, this is more of a follow and a comment and make sure I get correction if I'm wrong. Uh earlier I had brought up the idea that all our campuses will be an A or a B by August of 27. I was worried about a particular middle school that may be an F. And if I didn't see an exact direct connection to what we were doing to improve that, you

087know, not to direct it, but to say, hey, how do we make sure we support it as a board with voting funding prioritization? And I think the answer that came out in our good discussion is that the reasons for it being lower than an A or B, this campus at the middle school level is not due to the scores we were referencing. It's due to other things that are going to be addressed through improved curriculum, improved staff, etc. that it's already a part of the plan and the funding. If that's the affirmation and confirmation we're talking about, then I'm not worried about us as a board making sure that we're putting out funding or approaches or policies that help. And I'll pause there. >> Let me So let me zone us back in. Did we

088agree on do we want to put an additional goal up for recommendation? >> I'm following the car approach which is >> I'm following the Carlo approach which I'm making sure I understand that before I say no, we do not want to recommend. So I'm looking for confirmation that hey, we feel like we have other plans and processes in place to go from a lower score to a higher score and so we don't need to add a goal. I'm going to answer this question from a broad perspective because I guarantee you your staff has put attention and resources into all of the different schools. I think that's less a question of you know if we don't set a goal here will they dep prioritize it. They're putting this into place. This is more of a question

089about do we need to elevate it to the level of regular monitoring at this board and that's a board question not necessarily a is there other strategies. So I think that that is a question that you might have to grapple with and decide if you feel like it is worth putting into that area because I heard Carlo's question slightly different which is was it about outcomes or was it about processes and in that case it was about processes. >> Got it. >> So do we agree? Do we have anything else we would like to add or put up for discussion? >> No. >> All right. All right. So now I'm going to put you back with a slightly um different configuration. We're going to do four and four. You've got two options that raise rose

090to the top here. Um a closing the gaps between bilingual students and all sixth grade star science and literacy at the high school specifically targeted in to English one and English two. You really have an option on saying we're good. We don't need either of those. Maybe we want one of those and maybe we want both of them. The consideration that I'm going to ask you to have this conversation with is if you choose to add one or two, what you're really answering is not, do I want one or two more. The question that you're answering is, am I willing to give up focus on those three other things for that goal? Maybe yes, maybe no. There's that there's truly not a right answer there, but that is the framing that I want you to

091think about. So, we're going to do in groups of four, and when we come back here in a second, we'll have each group share out about where where you all landed as a group of four, whether to not add either, to add one, or add two, and why. So, go ahead and talk in a group of four and come to your group consensus split down the middle here. One clarification that was mentioned by Dr. Gutierrez is that there is not a sixth grade science. It is an eighth grade star science. It's fifth grade and eighth grade. So it would be eighth grade remember 0 one or two and why 0 one or two. Take about two more minutes. All right, we're going to bring it back together. >> And Daniel, can we switch again, please?

092>> All right. So again, the options here are we had two proposed that came out that got some agreeance between at least two people. One around closing the gaps for bilingual students and eighth grade star science and another one about diving in specifically to literacy at the high school looking at English one and English two. The options on the board were leave add neither of them focus on the three that we have add one of them and take some focus away from the other three and add both of them or take a little bit more focus away from the other three. So which group would like to go first and kind of summarize your discussion and your recommendation >> Kelly um we had a very rich discussion over here which was only enhanced by Dr.

093Dr. Gutierrez. So, thank you so much for providing your insights. Um, but uh I think we unanimously agreed that literate the high school is a must. Um, and some of the rationale behind that was just um thinking about the impact of COVID on this population in particular and like where they were um in terms of like those formative years and building um some key skills when we think of arts. Um, and this could just be uh a little bit d diving in deeper and again it I um don't think it takes away from the alignment and like we came across like that agreement um through more information from Dr. Gutierrez and again like it's just like necessary to focus on um this population in particular because it is the springboard to society and we owe

094it to our kids. Um, additionally like it's if they don't pass those tests, those key tests, it kind of can bottleneck them um and not uh have them graduate, right? And so like it has future implications for the system at large and like we will not get out of um the state that we are in now. Um, additionally for the closing the gaps uh with uh multilingual students uh or bilingual students, um we got some other information because we again we were all presented this information on like wow like why was this so alarming? Um but we had found out that uh the bilingual model wasn't being adhered to and adhered to and additionally science was not being taught period. um it was just like the focus on the other ones and so it is

095now that has now changed right like there's a different uh structure in place and so uh we felt that um adding not a particular goal but rather a constraint um or specific goal progress measures that um provide like a highlighter insight that's directly tied to like our other goals um could still be beneficial here but again we're open to discussion but those were that was our discussion um here but anybody feel free to add if I missed anything >> anyone else from this group >> your is your recommendation to add the literacy at the high school one >> okay couple things I just want to note here is the board definitely owns the goals they own the constraints so it might maybe something doesn't rise to a goal it could be a constraint for sure

096um who owns co goal progress measures superintendent so it is not a board's role to be able to recommend goal progress measures because only he knows what's going to we can look at in the middle of the year to try to figure out in each of these. And so what I see often times is we try to like try to fit everything in and focus is important on like focusing on what we decide to focus on. Um but what I also heard in this is you know again just because we don't set a goal on something here does not mean it's not happening. And this board will continue to monitor this and be able to reassess these as we go forward. And as eventually we meet one of them we can make adjustments. We can

097add other goals in the future. we can remove goals in the future. And so that's always an ongoing thing. I just think it's the biggest thing that comes up is just because we don't set a goal does not mean it's not important. It just means it's not one of our top three or top four priorities at this moment in time. So, thank you for that. All right, we've got one. What do we hear from this group? Who's going to share? I think she heard our conversation over there. But um the closing the gaps inspiration behind that was not exactly what what that um states right you don't want to leave that group of students who did not perform well behind and and when we peel the onion back on that it was probably because of

098curric the multiple curriculums that were being used handwriting and the translation and the second goal that was presented with with English lit the literacy that will remedy the first goal once they get there. And and if we put a metric on the eighth grade, which is the next time they do science, well, the closing the gaps isn't isn't beneficial for science. And the um by the time they're in eighth grade, they've got two more years to catch up. So then it it's better to focus on on English when they get into high school. Thank you for sharing and thank you for illustrating like some of the nuance here is it's the surface level is saying well we're we're low here let's set a goal about it but actually what I hear in this conversation is

099when we peel it back there's a lot of things and this wasn't necessarily that we're doing everything we can and it's not there we need to try to do different things it's like we've identified some key gaps on science that we've addressed we feel confident that's going to move us forward so therefore we can put our focus elsewhere and then we can revisit this down the line if it doesn't work we can have a different conversation so thank you for Sounds like this board is generally in agreeance with striking the closing the gap school based on the reasons spoken about and then adding the literacy at the high school level looking at English one and English two star. Um is anyone not is that not summarizing anyone's thoughts correctly? Dr. Noso, do you want to

100add anything here? >> No. Uh we just have some uh I'd like to meet with Dr. Gutier kind of marinate and look at some more data to put a number to it u instead of just coming up with that number this evening. So >> of course >> uh but I do just want to uh comment again when we talk about closing the gaps um you know when you talk about an index score of 60 uh you have to look at all subgroups if we're going to hit that particular number. It's almost impossible uh to hit a SI index score 60 if our special ed kids aren't performing, if our bilingual students are not performing, especially when you look at our demographic. So, uh I know that was a conversation we had here is that uh

101you know all subgroups uh and all kids we we have to look at each and every one of them to get them uh to that particular uh level. So, uh when you're talking about a 60, you're talking about every student. So uh that was one of the you know things of conversation that we want to make sure that every student is successful especially not only in the third grade district-wide but specifically uh since this is the um goal that we are uh being presented with. Thank you. Um so now the board it seems like we've got a pretty good working starting point here. Question to the board is do we want to spend time word smithing what this goal could look like now even if we don't have numbers or do we want to delegate

102that to the superintendent his team to bring back some draft language for us to consider. >> I see a lot of fingers pointing that way. >> All right. So then we are good on the goals at this time. Thank you all for engaging in that work. We're halfway there. Um we're now going to shift to the constraints and we're gonna do this. Oh yeah, >> if I could just hit on the the goals as I >> understand the 60 um index, you you add up all three and then you divide it. If you were to add up all three on reading and divide it, it would be 34% and then just just that we mark a note that we have to update those because I think those are just for mates, right? That's >> just

103so for your record moving forward when we have accurate goals. >> Yes. Yes. Yes. So what I'm hearing you say is The 32% was a meats rate and not the index. >> Not the index. Yeah. So I think when you add all three it was 102 divided by three should be 34. >> So the math might be off >> and then math is can also be off. I don't remember what all three added together was. >> Yeah. >> But just for record sake. >> All right. I've added I've crossed those out and added update to domain one. Thank you for catching that. >> All right. Now as we shift to the constraints, if I will ask you Daniel if you can go back to the PowerPoint slide. Um constraints ideally they protect a value or

104a strategy that we believe is necessary to move towards the outcomes that we're trying to see without taking away choice from the superintendent. And superintendent we can go to the very last slide that you have. Um so we have four very clear clear suggestions based on this from the team uh and they hit on values of the first one. So the four values aimed to be protected here are rigorous curriculum, teacher capacity, quality principles and quality teachers. The four very meaningful ones. If you go back a slide, we see some other ones that are might maybe may be contained in that maybe different value around alignment, value around um instruction, etc. If you go back one more, we have other ones here. We have building a fund balance and improve financial stability. If someone would

105indulge me, what value might that protect? If we were to write a constraint around that one, what what value might that protect? Let's do this. Talk to your partners. Come up with a value that might protect. >> Team of two. Team of two. Thank you. Building fund balance to improve financial stability. We don't do it just for the sake of doing it. Number one, >> the action of building fund balance and improving financial stability could protect which value? All right, I hear people getting quiet, which means hopefully we came to an answer. Who wants to share a value that that might protect if Go ahead, Ray. >> Transparency. So, we might have a value of transparency and therefore we need to make sure that we have financial stability and we can show that. Yep. That

106definitely could be the case. What's another one it might protect? >> I mean, even community trust, right? >> Community trust. It could be community trust. If the community trust has been broken on any number of reasons around finances, this might be a way to help protect that value. Yep. What else? Anything else? >> Well, physically >> Go ahead over here. >> Physically responsible. We're responsible. >> Responsibility and >> sustainability. So, four different values could protect, but that could be a strategy to protect those. So, if we can go back to the last slide that you have where your recommendations are, we're going to start this conversation around values. And again constraints you can have from one to five. You have some listed here, four listed here. You also again have you know exit criteria and

107corrective action plan. I'm going to give you two minutes to reflect silently. And if you were to put together one, two, three, four, or five values that you would want to protect, you can pick any of those. Based on what you have heard tonight from Dr. in a hosa's presentation from the exit criteria. What would be those one to five values that you individually would say based on everything I've heard this is where I would expect us to spend our time. So I'll leave this slide up just because this is a good starting point for us. Give you a few minutes uh two to three minutes depending on how people are writing and if you just finish up if you look at me when you're done. One to five values that you individually say based

108on everything I've heard this is really what we need to focus on and protect. And thank you Dr. Jose. You're already done with your homework cuz you put them up there. Sorry. individually. One to five values. raise your hand if you need a little more time. All right, thank you for engaging in that. And these will change and that's okay as we move forward. What we are going to do now is we're going to go back into partners. You should have a list of one to five. I'm going to put you with a new partner. We're gonna do uh Adrien, Dr. Nosa, Kelly, Daryl, Carla, Jesus, and Ray, and Lena. Um, we got four white posters around the room. What you're going to do, you have from 1 to five. You and your partner must

109discuss, debate, put those together. And you know, you're four. Everyone knows you're four. That's the four you're working with. Um, you and your partner must agree on no more than four together. So, you might have five and five. You got to come together and come agree on four. And that's going to require conversation about what do you mean by this? How do you like this is what I mean? Does it make sense? Is there a better way to summarize that? And you are going to write those four values and no more than one to two words on each of those post-it notes. So, everyone know their partner. Any questions on what we're doing? Yes, Kelly. >> Um, so when you say value, you're talking about the far left corner only, >> correct? And if say

110for example quality is like period whether that be at the principal level or the teacher level we're not being asked to extrapolate that yet or could those potentially be as like a combined value as we see it and then adding an additional value. >> Can you give me an example? So for example, quality principles and teachers, right? And so can we put that in the same line >> um with a semicolon and adding the potential progress measures up teacher evaluations up there or does do we have to then extrapolate that data? >> So you can't do semicolons, one to two words. Now what I actually hear you asking though is instead of having quality teachers as a focus area and quality principles as a focus area, could I do quality staff? Yes. >> So, you

111can, but there is a trade-off. >> Yes. >> What is the trade-off with being more vague, >> not as specific, not as targeted? >> And what does that mean for Dr. Nosen's team's focus? >> And so, if you mean teachers and teachers are the focus and we believe that there's a huge lever there, >> it is beneficial to say teachers. Again, doesn't mean all the other staff is not important. It just means that is the lever we're focused on. Mhm. >> So this is this is a uh this is where I see the lists of commas. Everyone wants to protect everything with commas. But in that we focus on nothing. And so I would really challenge us to be as specific and as targeted as possible. The narrower you are, the faster you will see

112more meaningful results. >> Thank you for that push. >> Thank you. All right. You know your partner, you got a whiteboard. Happy happy partnering. And please keep the exit criteria, the CAP, and the superintendent's root cause analysis in mind. All right. If you're still working, feel free to continue working. But for everyone that is done, and if you're still working, I'm asking you to do this. I need you to go through each of your 2, three, four, five values that you have and make note of where you see it reflected in either the superintendent's root cause analysis, the cap, or the exit criteria. And if something is not in one of those three, we're going to kind of put a dotted line through it for now. Doesn't mean it's gone forever, but we need to

113we need to like differentiate what's in the exit criteria and the cap and the superintendent's recommendations. So, make sure you see alignment in all of those. And you can write it next to it in small letters cap exit criteria or root cause All right, go ahead and finish up. >> You're going to stay with your sheet. All right, go ahead and pause. Can I have your attention, please? Have your attention, please. >> All right, if you can look at me, please pause on your board real quick. Um, some good discussion. We have a lot of different things up here, which is not uncommon. This is definitely far messier than goals. So, here's what's going to happen next. If you have one on there that is not related to either the superintendent's root cause analysis, the

114exit criteria, or the rest of the document, which is the corrective action plan, you're going to put that to the side for now and then we can discuss it at the end. But now, what we're going to do is we're going to take you have up to five. We're going to put two of these groups together. So we're going to do this group with that group and this group with this group. You're going to come together. You're going to talk about your values and you are going to come and combine into one set of three values. One set of three values together because then that's going to be six and then we still got to even narrow it down from there. So, one set of three values and when you're done with that, you will

115let me know that you've got your three values and then I will give you your next directions. Yes, I got a question. >> Putting aside the one that is not >> Yeah, I would put that aside and then you can have a conversation and see if it aligns with something else. What you find usually is they tend to align somewhere. >> Joe, >> you can use one of your same two papers. That's okay. And then Daniel, >> Daniel, can we switch back to the and go to scroll down to page two of it? All right. All right. So, I've taken what has been put together by two different groups here together. Each group got down with some nudging to three. Um, group number one over here uh kept the superintendent's recommendation on rigorous curriculum, quality

116educators and and added one on fiduciary responsibility. So, the first two are as were written previously. The fiduciary responsibility one adds a superintendent should not deviate from financial policies and procedures. And then our group over here had a lot of conversation. Um came to essentially three and correct me if I've captured them wrong. First one is transparency. Superintendent should not make major budget decisions without communicating them with full transparency. But I think we actually changed that to communicating them to the community. Second one was around support. So the superintendent shall not allow staff to go without constructive feedback and support. And that one I think was born out of a discussion around the PLC's and how do we make sure staff have support to be effective with rigorous curriculum or whatnot. And then quality teacher

117superintendent shall not allow a high turnover of effective teachers. So specifically effective teachers. So I will pause and let each group ask clarifying questions to the other group. Um and I will also invite Dr. Gutierrez and Mr. Rocha to also ask questions if something is unclear and might fall in some of the lanes as well. But feel free to ask clarifying questions. Does anyone have any questions about what these mean? Go ahead. So, um I got one on the transparency. The superintendent shall not make major budget decisions without communicating them to the community. I know we post on the board agendas. So, just clarifying how that would look like. Yeah, I think my question on that one too is like what what what do we decide as a major budget decision? How how do we

118make that decision? That's my question. >> Anyone from that group want to chime in? >> Okay. So the value we were trying to protect was um trust and we wanted transparency to be there and then there was um one example that Jesus brought up I don't know if you want to talk about it Jesus because I felt that that's a practice that we've seen that we don't get um the full story about and I don't mean like why decisions are being made. We don't need like a reason or anything and we don't need to get um behind them. But when these are communicated, if we could just be very fully transparent and exact um about why about what's happening. So >> yeah, I I don't think that constraint written as is really justified. I think

119we need more time, but I know we'll be here all night if we try to find out the root cause. And when I was going through each of these, I was thinking about of a spec specific instance of a bad actor, right? All the type of constraints and working backwards. And I I don't think I would have settled on that. But but instances that we've seen in the past with mistrust in financial spending and and that you're seeing across the across the city with with school districts, how do we um properly incorporate constraints that will allow and and you know the examples I were given was a little bit more extreme of maybe it's a it's a budgetary number per student and that'll that'll equate to a certain ratio to the campus, right? like if

120we open another campus, will that throw our student ratio off over? Um, I don't know. I can't really defend the way that's written too well. But I'm talking about the root and what we're trying to to avoid. I also want to add as a listener and contributor in that group um I think there's some underlying current around like what Carlo was saying of like the core of trust um and how it is communicated in a way so like your your question Dr. I think is hitting it, but it's like it's in order to pull the curtain back to the community and say like I don't this is how it's aligned to our vision or this is that and so like whether or not it's posted in our board meeting minutes, it's not as ex like

121it's something around accessibility um where there's like clarity in the connection, right? So it's like how is this all connected? not to like negate that you all are the experts, but it's like how is that communicated to our community in a way that builds trust and transparency, if that makes sense. So, I think that's kind of at the core, but again, like we were wrecking our brains on how to like make that happen, but I think that's something that was like the undercurrent of that statement. And also, if I could add to that, just helping the community digest um those numbers um and helping them or crafting it in a way that helps them to understand those numbers because of some of the mistrust that has happened in the past. I think if we are

122just putting a major budget decision and a number on on an agenda or a board that folks don't really understand and that's what's leading to some of that mistrust or our value of trust is helping to ensure that however it is presented it is in a way that folks will understand um which again will help to build back some of that trust. So, I think it's just really providing a little bit um additional information. Um I forget the word that we used um in communicating that to the community. I just wanted to throw that out there. Another thing I I'll say is and I feel like this might be missing and I'm going through the training with goals like and identify right a metric that would be I think this constraints kind of and I

123know it's not part of it but I feel like it's missing that that would really help Dr. Inhosa to say oh that's how specific I need to be whenever I'm communicating or >> yeah and I will say and then we'll open up to you Dr. A couple just general thoughts. Number one, it's the board's responsibility to be clear and it's his responsibility to decide what are those metrics that align to it. Um the second thing is I think what's been teased out here is they're really two. So while both of these kind of talk about finances, there are two different things. One's about getting this policies and procedures in place and adhering to them. One is about then communicating those. And so I would ask this board like considering all of this are do one

124of those have to happen first and is there a priority on one first and then the other in which case you might want to focus on whichever one needs to happen first and then move into the other one later on as opposed to if they're both happening at the same time etc. So I will open that to the question to be considered but first I want to see if Dr. No has any thoughts. Yeah, I I I'm still a little unclear. Um like I just want to know what that looks like. Okay. Because yet and again, maybe I'm missing it. Just kind of Okay. Like when we say try and I'm for that. I'm not I'm not disagreeing. I just like what would it look like? >> So this is a very rough draft first

125of all. Um so I think um so for an example let's say um a budget you've come to a budget decision but you are not letting us know that you've only accounted for maybe 90% and that's all you want to do because you'd rather allocate something somewhere else. We would like to know that and we would like that expressed. And that can be as simple as this year we're only spending on, you know, one new air conditioning unit. Um, and then not telling us that next year we're going to need another and then next year after that when we could have just bought them in bulk as a whole and you're just trying to make more room for something else. And it can be when you let us know at the board meeting that's that

126can be expressed or it could be something if it's major like hey we're reopening some schools that we closed then we need to have some public information meetings. If it's a huge decision it would have to be you know a huge communication. But if it's something like that, just to make it very clear so that we understand what's going in, but more importantly that it's on the record that this got said and we understood what you've decided and that um with this constraint in place, we are trusting that there is full transparency and that we don't have to be, you know, double-checking and nitpicking. Wait a minute, what did they mean? What if he meant this? What do I have to go back here and take a look myself when we should trust what was

127presented to us because of the way you presented it to us? >> Okay. >> Um, so what I heard is two things in there is number one is actually we're not asking the superintendent to go communicate this with the community which I would point out to the fact is that the superintendent's role is to be we didn't talk about this a ton in the lonear governance coaching but a concept that'll come up a lot more. Um the board is the owners. They're focused on the taxpayers, the community, everyone that is sees as a stakeholder of South San Antonio. Superintendent responsible for the customers that show up every day, students and the teachers and the parents and making sure that they have what they need to be successful. And so one thing that as we move

128into this work, it's really if the board wants community communication, that is the board's responsibility. If it's to communicate to our students and our parents, that is definitely the superintendent's responsibility to make sure they have the information they need. So, what I'm hearing in your response here is it sounds like down the line, especially as we do this, like we want to be just be clear as a board that we understand how these financial decisions are being made so that we can take that back and share is what I hear in that. Is that accurate? >> Yes. Basically, we just want to be fully confident that what we've understood is what is exactly happening. We don't want to say, "Oh, well, we didn't know he meant that a year later or two or five or

129say we we didn't understand that part." But we just want, you know, full transparency in for the spirit of transparency in financial matters. >> Questions? >> I have a question. Yes. >> Um, so this is my mind trying to wrap around this, but the more that I'm hearing that being teased out more, it's making me wonder, is that more so a board operating like policy as opposed to a constraint? Cuz from what I'm hearing, it's sounds like it's not quite living there. And again I heard your question and the fiduciary responsibility is like of the utmost importance because we can't if we don't have what we need then we can't communicate period like so I I do see that there and so this is also like something that is important but can that live somewhere

130else in our process? >> It definitely can. I mean that this is where the board can choose and again this should be focus on the system and a key need that we see is not happening currently that we really want to focus on and make sure we have a strategy or something that we protect rather than a broad sense. So like some of these like specifically the rigorous curriculum is about a very specific class of actions about not allowing curriculum that is off grade level whereas shall not make major decisions without communicating is much more broad and doesn't get to the depth of it but to the points here about making sure the board has what it needs to make thoughtful decisions and communicate it is necessary but I think there is opportunity to add

131that into board operating procedures about how how do I get my questions answered? How do I make sure these questions are communicated? That is absolutely something that can be just decided in procedure as opposed to having a constraint about them particularly. >> Yeah. And I'll I'll um I'll piggy back off of Carla because we were both trying to wrap our heads around these and I don't think we settled on the right words, but both being from the community and and and experiencing these things. It's uh and and piggybacking off of the example she threw when we we came into our role, there was certain things that we didn't realize or or um the during the finding process and some of the things that are in front of us. Um, I think the details lie in

132figuring out that threshold of and whether it's a number over this amount or or um or if this is something that falls in the operating agreement. I don't think we have enough on that line item to really I mean we're picking it apart. You know what I mean? >> Yeah. my my thinking on it like just as we're kind of like talking about it, it just feels like it would be easy to go down a rabbit hole and start to kind of like micromanage and I wouldn't want to go there. Um, so I think for me it just like makes more sense for it to be some kind of like policy. Uh because then like yeah like we're going to have to figure out yeah what what is that number that Dr. Hino Hosa has

133to come with us or it just adds a layer that I I think can eventually become a problem later on down the road. You know, just to add, you know, through my experience and and I hear you guys and that's why I don't know you remember right off the bat that the superintendent had authority I believe up to 50,000 and I said let's lower that to 25 just for that very reasons because I know what you mean. my previous district it was 10,000 right because I want to be sure that the board is voting on any big decisions as opposed to me and I think that's what I'm hearing now uh making those decisions without it being done in in the context of a board meeting so we did lower the threshold from 50 to

13425 so anything over 25 actually has to come to this board you know so I mean that that was one way of uh addressing that particular issue. I I just wanted to bring that >> and just to add cl a clarifying question I I don't know if the initial discussion was based off of amounts whether it's 50,000 or 25 or 10 I I think it really was like Carla mentioned in the spirit of transparency whatever that amount is which we are entrusting to the superintendent to make those decisions we want to know that we have all of the information as to why that decision is being made. Um, and I don't know if Carla if that that's going back. I think again we're going we're we're we're kind of missing the initial spirit of of

135of the group. >> So So Darl, it felt like I was hearing you you didn't it wasn't so much about let's say the threshold and and the the procedures they're working. It was a little bit about transparency, but it I think the words that I kept kind of inferring were clarity and what's in it for me. You know, in other words, the community knows exactly, hey, these decisions were made and here's the impact to me. You know, just and again, I think that's a board level uh communication, but I didn't I guess I thought we had procedures in place that said, "Hey, certain amounts go to the board and we're aware of everything." And yeah um so the board actually on the the every function when the board approves the budget um so they're actually

136approving every like function um for instance like 11 function 11 function 51 so anytime uh if you recall like when Mr. King would bring a budget amendment to the board. It was because he wanted to move money from one account. I need to move money from function 11 to function 51. That does require uh board approval. That's not because we're making a purchase. It's just at the beginning of the year. Um you know, for instance, like in August when the board approved the budget as a whole, this is where we put all the money, all the different functions. Now that we're hey during the mid year, we need we need to move money around. The board is apprised of that and it happens through a budget amendment. So now the other thing what Dr. Yohosa

137was talking about is like the purchasing authority which is our it's a local policy the board um can adopt that and currently right now our policy is uh 50,000 as approved by the board but then Dr. Inosa when he came in he's lowered that as just like an internal like a u just a something that he wants us as leaders to to take that to the board. So it's not like we're not violating a board policy but it's just something that we're doing here internally. But that that's kind of just the the differences. I don't know if that makes any clarification >> and so I will let me chime in on a few things here that I've heard. Um first of all there is so there's the policies and what gets followed then there is

138what the board's responsibility in that is. So if it's it is absolutely the board's responsibility to understand okay how does this align to our work and if it makes sense then I should consider supporting that and it's the board's responsibility to understand that. So if the board is not and board members do not feel clear enough, there needs to be a policy in terms of your board operating procedure. How do you get that clarity to understand how this purchase impacts my goals so I can feel comfortable explaining it when I get asked by somebody at Walmart or whatnot? But that's really a board action as opposed to a class of action you're not allowing the superintendent to take. So we have two options here. Um it sounds like both groups came to this idea of

139finances which is also backed up by the exit criteria. What we can do is either continue to try to word smith and get clearer on these two financial ones or the board can delegate to the superintendent to say take what we've said. We've had a conversation here. Give the superintendent and the team an opportunity to put one together to bring back to the board. Does the board have a preference on whether to pause the finance conversation and delegate it to the superintendent to bring back a recommendation on or would you like to continue to hash that out here? >> I think I'd like to defer to the superintendent. >> Same. All right, superintendent. Any questions generally here? >> No, I mean and I can call u just to have individual conversations just to get a

140little bit more clarity just uh you know just so I have a good before I put it on paper so I have a good understanding you know I I'm I'm still uh a little u I don't have clarity. I guess that's the the too. >> We we started out with trust, right? And we got the transparency and then we we're trying to do it within the framework and so um yeah. >> We we'll work through it, but I'll communicate. >> All right. Do we see any others that are very similar to combine on here or to choose one or the other? I see quality educators and then >> quality teachers. >> I also see um effective teachers on both. >> But I didn't um if I can ask a question what the constraint was for

141them. >> So we have one that says the superintendent should not allow campuses to have inequitable access to experienced and effective staff. >> Okay. The other one was the superintendent should not allow a high turnover of effective teachers. >> I believe the one that says um to go without constructive feedback and support. Oh no, that's something different. Um experienced and effective staff. I think you mentioned the hiring, bringing people on that were certified and that >> what one is certified and effective is a quality teacher. So, um we want to make sure that we're building capacity. So, we don't want um because some teachers are going to be inexperienced, but are they effective? Right? So, that's our goal. I mean, our job in order to grow these teachers so that the kids have quality teachers

142in front of them. So that was the the the mind you know or thought process on that one. >> If I could ask I guess my peers is experience and effective are they one and the same? >> No. Mm- >> like the way I see it like in the host just mentioned is you can have somebody that just came one year maybe two years don't have a lot of experience but they are effective they know how to do their job and they're able to perform so their performance is good but they might not have the years of experience that's how I see that >> so in that sense effective I think would be the stronger stronger candidate So, what I'm hearing is a recommendation to strike experience. Not that experienced isn't important, but what's most

143important is effective. Um, and then I have one. Oh, go ahead. >> No, I I definitely agree with that because you can hire an experienced teacher and they could be ineffective. Yeah. >> So, I I I do agree with Mr. Balama on that. >> So, that is a good way to combine both of these to focus. This one focused on effective teachers was in that conversation. Let me ask you a question on this because qu this one the one on the bottom speaks to retention. >> Yeah. >> Um does having access to in your mind imply we retain our effective teachers or no? >> Absolutely. Inequitable access. So yeah, I mean the students are going to have access but we're keeping >> and and we are keeping that's where uh I'm going just give you

144some examples. We're paying for performance in order to keep our best teachers, right? So uh the district has put policies I mean has has put some policies in place in order to pay our best teachers. um you know doesn't matter of experience we're going to pay them based on their performance. So that to me is a uh retention strategy that in order to make sure that we keep our best teachers. So question on the quality teachers superintendent should not allow high turnover. So I am assuming that you measure um the retention and and the turnover ratio but but I feel like that can be that can be hard to measure even if you're paying high performance even if you are developing and giving all the resources somebody can just choose not to work here and

145go somewhere else because um they can leverage whatever their contract somewhere are different. So then we're are we truly measuring the right thing here versus the actual having access to an effective staff? Is that the intent to actually have an effective staff or is it just holding a ratio at a certain level? >> So in order to mitigate that, I'm just going to give you some things that we do. So this um I'm just going to call it merit pay that we give and even tia the teachers who are identified as highly effective. We don't pay we don't do the payout until January or August. So they've already signed their contract at that time. So that is a way uh the teacher knows if they leave then they're going to lose um potential 15 20

146$25,000 uh by going to another district. So that is a way that we uh leverage of keeping our most effective teachers because then they would not be eligible uh for the payouts. So, >> so with that being said, for our team members that brought up that one, will that be sufficient because I feel like those two can be integrated together. If I might add, um, I think what I'm seeing here as I kind of take a step back and it's it's getting at the same sentiment of like we want highquality educators for all students. I think the qualifier in the second one, the quality teachers is like not at the expense of them or like some insights from them. So maybe that could be teased out and like how we measure that of like how

147do we get insights from our highly effective teachers, right? like it's like there's some type of like I don't know if they say it's co-creation but like the insights are shared and uplifted or concerns or feedback structures and it could also go to support which you know direct that but I think like the sentiments are similar. It's just like the level of like insight that we get from teachers is captured and valued from what I see or understood. >> Okay. And I think so in hearing the two differences here, there's one of these constraints is about students and campuses having access to effective staff. The other one and access happens two ways, multiple ways. It happens by retaining effective staff already. It happens by growing staff in to be effective and recruiting staff to be

148effective. Like there's a bunch of ways to get to effective staff. Whereas this last one is about keeping it's about one of those buckets, keeping those effective staff. And then what I'm hearing you tease out, Kelly, is a whole another element of like how are we getting feedback which isn't either one of these two. So it might be worth a conversation which we'll come back to. But in terms of just the difference here between access to effective staff or retention of currently effective teachers, does the board have a preference or see a value in one more than the other? If retention is implied and included in that access to um effective staff, then I feel like the one about the high turnover of effective teachers might be too restrictive. >> Okay. >> If it is

149included and implied. >> So the group over here that has superintendent shall not allow campus have inequitable access to effective staff. Is retention implied in terms of access? >> I sorry I I'm just gonna add and I think I I I'm in agreement with the the turnover. I mean that's why we have strategies in place. I think I've mentioned some in order to make sure that we keep our our best staff and and and the strategy is identifying who your high performance are are and you let them know you value them and you're going to u reward them. but you reward them the following year to make sure that you know they return. So there there's the you know that that's been the you know the the I'm just going to say the strategy to

150to keep these individuals >> and I will say yes and because we did have that discussion about the internal pipeline in the growth. We want to make sure that we're not always hiring um the expertise and access you know to effectiveness but we are developing and growing the staff that is here. Um so to answer that question that is the segment of our discussion when we talked about quality ed educators. >> Okay. So it sounds like retention is implied in the access to effective staff. So we will remove this one knowing that is it implied and the quality educators as above. Um and then there were two left that we haven't spoken about the rigorous curriculum one and the support one. Um does anyone want to talk about either of these clarifying questions? >> Is

151there value in adding in parenthesis retention implied? >> No. And I'll tell you why. Because this should communicate what you're hoping for here is this access to it. And what you will see when the superintendent brings back how they plan to measure it if retention is implied in that. So for instance, if he brings back measures around how do we make sure we're identifying our highly effective teachers and compensating our most effective teachers, then the board says, well, if identifying and compensating our most effective teachers helps retain them, then I should be okay with that. But but but on that but the superintendent owns his measure marks right so we really shouldn't >> but what you will do is you know that in your minds retention is implied in what you mean here correct I

152think that's what I've heard from the board is that true >> right >> I think I've heard that from everybody that retention is implied in this so yes the superintendent does own what will be measured but this board is still going to have to look at them and say yes those represent what we meant when we when we did this so you will get a a check on that you don't get write it for him. But you do get to understand did those mean what we said we meant and if so then yes and if not then you can >> and I I I'm completely aware but I'm coming in bad actor case after us right that scenario where they won't know we've had this conversation and that's why I ask >> and so what

153what can also be done is this can be wordsmith and so I mean Dr. and Jose and his team have heard the conversation here. So maybe as they word smith it and bring it back, they can put those potential ways to do that. I would just stay away from parentheses like >> say it if you mean it. So >> yeah. Yeah, of course. >> All right. Um rigorous curriculum. Does everyone feel like this makes sense and is meaningful for South San Antonio? And does it align to our exit criteria and action plan? Okay, I see a lot of head nods, a lot of vigorous headnots. Okay, so% >> yes. All right, and that one will will remain. Um, what about the last one? The superintendent shall not allow staff to go without constructive feedback and

154support and superintendent, do you have any questions about what might be meant here on this one, or do you have thoughts? >> Uh, I I I know I mean I I think I know what it means. Um, I would just say it ties into quality educator because you can't um identify a quality educator if you're not going in there to give them feedback and allowing them to grow. So, in other words, you you uh >> I mean, we did like I'm just going to give you example, we did 3,500 walkthroughs, right, the last three months, right? So we were able to identify who our quality educators were and who who who weren't and and we've kind of we we're continuing that pattern. So um to me they're they're uh one and the other. So let

155me um clarify a little a little bit the value that we were trying to uh protect and that was uh leadership. Not just um like you as a leader but the type of leadership that is constructive. And I think the way we kind of looked at it and said um what is um an attribute of a very effective coach, someone who's constructive. So with all this feedback, with this very rigorous curriculum, with um with these standards that are set so high, how do we make sure that it's always constructive? And I think that's as far as we got with the constructive feedback and support which might be interpreted as of course it's constructive. I'm building them up. They are um you know they're evolving from this level to this level. They are very aligned with

156what's meant to be. But how do we keep that always um constructive and not just from one side? Might I also add um I believe that support was kind of written in between the lines and implied in like the teacher quality, the regular curriculum. And I think what um we also wanted to tease out was uh similar like on the student level like we can't have these high expectations for students and not offer them the resources and support um adequate enough to like help meet them where they're at to grow, right? like opportunity myth. Same thing with our teachers like how are we um you know supporting them and giving them the constructive feedback which I think y'all have intentionally planned out in your plan and it's just a matter of like should that steer

157or like not be as steady that's something that is like our staff have made it very clear and the community has made it very clear that like they need the support in order to do that and um I think that's also something that's like in the in the sentiment ment or what we're trying to get at where it's um yeah like constructive collaborative co-creative um and that again I just like it was like teased out a little bit more going towards the there was one around like ineffective PLC's at one point and so like we were trying to get even more ah yes um thank you uh to get a little bit more specific um because like you know our teachers like co-creating those agendas for those clusters, right? Like do they have input or

158insight? Like how collaborative is that? Whereas it's like, you know, as a teacher, I'm showing up to this training and like where do I find myself in that or how am I growing? And like again, I think that's happening in the teacher evaluations and how that is constructed, the walkthroughs, the feedback and again the sheer numbers that y'all have done is like very impressive. And so it's like how do we protect that, right? like not as it like it's not happening right now but it's like how do we protect that because we want like it's all connected right like to keeping our effective teachers right like so they're in the loop they're along on the journey with us so just wanted to add additional context so is this one specific to and I'm trying to

159get to a class of actions that's not allowed so it can be something about what we want but Like what is not allowed that is not getting to this constructive feedback? Is it like what's not allowed is allowing a teacher to go a like a a while without getting any feedback? Is that what you're referring to? Like from there they should be receiving feedback on a regular basis and the superintendent can't allow people to go without feedback. Is that what you're speaking to? Or is it that they they can't because I also heard you talk about the PLC's. Is it is it more about like the superintendent can't allow teachers to operate in a silo where they don't have a chance to build collaboration together and own this like which of those things are you

160asking the superintendent not to allow >> the word that that comes to mind is ensuring >> we're not we're not talking about ensuring that we want to assure a lot of things this is about classes of actions we don't want the superintendent to allow because they go against our values but >> I understand that what I guess that's how the the initial conversation, that's how we got to the support um value was ensuring that that students had that support. >> I got you. >> Does that make sense? >> So, if that's the Yeah, that's what we want. That's our that's our hope for it. Then, are there actions that the superintendent or the system has taken or could potentially take that we want to say no, those actions work against this idea of ensuring people

161have support? And if there aren't those actions that are happening, like I've definitely seen systems where feedback is not a regular thing in that aspect, that might be something we don't want to allow. So that's what we clarify by this. And if you look at your system and everything we seems to based on what you're saying seems to be going and we see staff getting constructive feedback, then it's not what we need to put into a constraint because that's not a need in this moment. So the question would be from what we've heard is that performance evaluations were not done in the past >> and that um it was hard to measure the performance of teachers, administrators, you know, everybody in the in the process. So now from what we've heard is that there is

162those process put in place. So will that be enough or I feel like the team here wants to see that we are for sure doing those performance evaluation across the board consecutively and fair across the board. >> Dr. Gutz, do you want to answer what we're doing u in reference to that >> currently? So our um principles, assistant principles and master teachers um have a minimum of five walkthroughs in each classroom every week. And through that walkth through they offer strengths like what are some things that they saw that were glowing in the classroom that align to our curriculum, our instructional practices that we have trained on. And then what is one piece of feedback that we can leave you that we're going to follow up and support? So if that master teacher needs to

163go in there and coach, if they need to go in there and model for them, um how will we follow through on that? So they are left again with a glow and a grow every time. That is in addition to our evaluation system through the NIET uh teaching and learning standards rubric which then um allows again our principles, assistant principles and master teachers to do two formal observations in the classroom on top of one practice one so they can calibrate. So they are in classrooms on a consistent basis providing feedback and making sure that again there's follow-through with support. It's not just providing the feedback but how am I going to help you attain um the feedback that I have provided for you >> and and Dr. Gutierrez, thank you so much for that information.

164I I think again going back to add a little bit of context to what what the initial um conversation was is some of that may have been implied in the past in terms of lip service. We were wanting to make sure or ensure um that it is happening um and it's not just being stated but actually follow through. So just so I appreciate that I guess that's kind of where at least the conversation that we were having that's all that's wonderful but we want to make sure that it is indeed happening >> and and again I mean I I don't have an issue that actually is providing another layer of support for our staff right from the board. you know, if you add that, it's telling uh our staff, which is our teachers, hey, you're

165going to have people in your classroom and hey, the board is uh in full support. So, I I I can see that as well. >> I think that's the two things I like about it, >> Jesus said, put his light on next. >> Yeah, >> I was just going to say that Dr. Inosa or Dr. Utier's hit the lottery tomorrow and the practice goes away. This the lead at the leadership level up here. It it it sounds like that would be the right place for it. >> Okay, Adrian, >> ditto to what Jesus just said. That's where we're going to go. If we're not here, it continues on. >> Yeah, >> that actually contributes to staff retention. >> So, I'm wondering if like there's like a there's a world where that lives. Um, yeah. I

166don't know. I'm just spitballing here. >> All right. Um, thank you for that conversation. The Dr. Nosa, Dr. Gutierrez, based on that conversation, are you more clear on what that could mean and does it fit with the strategies in place to achieve what's in the exit criteria? >> Sure. I mean, I it's just I I see it as a reinforcement for the board and which is a good thing. I mean, I I appreciate that. >> And I know I spoke to teacher feedback specifically, but we also have a process for our master teachers to receive feedback for our principles, for assistant principles. So again, everybody in the system has a way to receive feedback from their supervisor appraiser. >> Great. And I actually see just stepping back, it seems from this conversation that you know,

167while the value might be slightly different, support is a way towards one of the recommended ones, which was teacher capacity. the focus being a little different is not so much on the PLC's as the only thing but just feedback and support in general and how that looks. though. All right. Um, so we have four that we're working with. I will the last se segment here is if you will just take a few minutes and look at your exit criteria cap. Remember what the superintendent had. Talk to your partner. Is there anything else major missing that we have not touched on that we need to that is worth taking away focus from these? So talk to the person next to you and decide if there's any other major things that we are totally missing. Sure. >>

168Mhm. raise your hand if you need more time. >> No hands. All right, we'll start on this side this time. Was there any other major elements that we are missing thus far? Do we feel good with the four that we have? rigorous curriculum, quality educators, uh support and fiduciary responsibility. >> Yeah, I think we saw one on safety. Um >> on safety. Okay. So, I'll put this here for just a conversation point real quick. >> Yeah. In particular about safety, making sure that um we do not deviate from any statemandated requirements that we're adhering to all of them. >> Okay. Um, and one note if we we're one thing that we want to steer away from is anything that is legally required is not worth putting in a constraint because that's the law to follow

169it. So I would say if it's beyond the law, like there's something else above and beyond, then it might be worth it. But if we have to tell Dr. Nelson that he needs to follow the law, then we probably we're in the wrong place already. So that's just something to consider. But we'll leave it up here for conversation. But I don't know if it went deeper than that. But thank you. All right. >> We our ours was very similar uh not on safety because of the uh special ed you know to follow >> or not deviate from uh federal and state uh >> guidelines which have been violated. So I know Mr. Bal. So, one of the things just compliance in general, um, which maybe isn't implied with a federal law or state law, but

170are we in compliance with rules and regulations that are instituted by the state or the federal government? >> Yeah. Okay. Anything else? >> All right. So, we talked about these. We got safety specifically as it relates to state mandates, special ed as it relates to state mandates or compliance in general as one of these. Um, let's open up for the board conversation. Is it worth putting in another one, removing a little bit of focus from these other four to have a little bit more transparency at this level talking about it or do we understand and trust and delegate that to the superintendent to do and make sure we're adhering to those? It's an open conversation. May I ask what um checks and balances are in place now >> that um would prevent something like this

171from just happening again or maybe oh nobody noticed that we didn't submit what we were supposed to submit. We didn't have the numbers we were supposed to have. >> I'm I'm going to touch on both of them. Uh so the governor has um a system where there is somebody who comes and uh they check all the locks uh as far as safety and they check every school. If we are out of compliance, we are um uh we we have to um present it at a board meeting that we were out of compliance. we had a door open for whatever the situation was. So there there is a system in order uh for the board to um to know right even if if we met the the target uh we we I know chief would come

172and say hey we're in 100% compliance uh special ed uh that's going to be one uh again that uh we have to present we're mandated when we're out of compliance um that TA states that we have to uh I Uh Dr. Gutteres uh had a presentation, you know, we're out of compliance. These are the indicators and then we had to have a correction action plan. Uh so the state is the one that is the monitoring and uh they will let us know that we're meeting the criteria um as designated for and I'm just talking about those. I'm not sure if there's any others you guys were u uh referencing. >> Referring to the special >> Okay. Mr. Mr. Mackey, you said, "Hey, we don't need to tell Dr. Henosa to comply with the law." I

173mean, I I get that, but again, we're looking at exit criteria that says, "Hey, you missed." So, >> that was one of the reasons why it probably came up in conversations for us. >> The only thing I would add or change would be I wouldn't focus specifically on the special ed qualifier in there. I would make it generic because you don't want to have another instance of something similar with some other state or federal law. And that would be the only thing if it were to stay or we would request it to stay. I would request that we just make it more generic so we're more broadly focused. >> Yeah. And again, I think this is constraints are always a little bit trickier, but the constraint should tell a superintendent what thing or class of

174things not to do. And so when you make it generic, it's what are you what are we really talking about? So I think it's it's helpful for the board to get clear. For instance, if there is um you know, if if a board determined that not getting regular reports on how our compliances was was something that was missing, a board might say, "You're not like we're not permitting the superintendent to go without quarterly reports about progress towards compliance. Now, you're talking about something specific as opposed to saying the superintendent shall not be out of compliance." So like that's what I would like what is the action you're actually asking him not to do in order to make sure that this value is getting there. So, um I just feel the one about special ed is

175already kind of covered, right? You you in your GPM 2.1, the school meets all federal special education requirements with a date like so I feel like it's already covered. So, taking attention from all the other items on something that you already are measuring and need to adhere to. Um, now going to the safety, I feel like the state or federal checkups should be a minimum and we should not be dependent on that. So, we should have something in place internal for our own checks and balance on safety. And if we have something like that in place, then great. If not, that's where I feel like maybe we should lean into to ensure um we don't just depend on the government for something to do because you know that can be a very minimum level. All

176right. Thank you. Um I'm not hearing resounding agreement from the board to put something on there right yet. Again, this is just the beginning. this is not the end. Um, so unless there is something different that everyone's like, "No, we need to put safety on there and let's hash it out." Um, I'm going to recommend that the board pause and we go through the first iteration and we come back and have that conversation other time. Does anyone feel strongly otherwise? >> I just had a clarifying question. Sure. >> So, I agree completely. And just a reminder for me, how often are constraints modified or uh amended? Is it only when we achieve one of the student outcome goals or is there special case scenarios that you can modify these? >> So generally you want them

177five years and the reason being you want time to focus. If we're going to focus on quality educators, we need some time to focus there. Um you will measure it regularly. This board owns a monitoring calendar that you will determine how often it gets ma monitored, measured with support from Dr. Nelson and Dr. Gutierrez. Um, and then once you start meeting it, yes, you can definitely review it, but also as you move into your board operating procedures, it's recommended that you actually set what's the regular cadence at which we start to review when it's time to adjust if context changes. So yes, these are meant to be the top priorities and things to avoid doing today. for the coming years and then there's definitely will be time and the board will get to determine kind

178of what that is as we move forward. What are those cadences at which we review these because it does change once we knock these out of the park. It's time to focus on something else. >> All right, any other thoughts, questions, Jesus? >> Yep. My last one and and again I agree with this and I know that um you mentioned scratch off ones that didn't align and I think we had community up there. I don't think there's um anything on there that and again at this point in the time you know moving to focus and student outcomes but okay and we will keep all of this represented on these as as this because this is again we might not have it there now what we will do is we'll work and Dr. Nosa and Dr.

179Gutierrez will take it back with the team and start now that we have a clear direction from the board on these and start to flesh out okay what does like more specifically what do those progress measures look like as it relates to this they'll do some analysis on say the high school literacy be able to say what where are we today what should we be what's the way to measure that um and given that this is a board of managers the conservator also gets to weigh in so even though uh Dr. Seedra is not here tonight. He will get to weigh in and say actually no, you are going to put one on this way or or something else and that'll be again a conversation when we come back. So that's the next step. Um

180I would expect it'll take usually takes a few weeks for superintendent and team to kind of really start putting some thoughts to this. But I would expect again all in public when we come back in September to be able to see what this draft looks like and go through this process again. Is there anything else we're missing to have additional conversations etc. Any last questions here? I know that was a lot. So, thank you. Thank you. Thank you for going through that and engaging in the process, especially since you just became deeply more deeply familiar with this over the last couple days. Um, so we will now turn down to our last two items, which I promise are a lot quicker. Um, this is step one, setting these priorities. The rest of the work that

181the board will do is to how do we align all of our systems to achieving the priorities. So there are two areas that we're talking about and both of them came up tonight. The first one I think it's listed on the agenda is board operating procedures if I remember correctly. Um so I heard a lot of things about well maybe we need to have a policy about how we make sure we have the information so we can transparently communicate to the community. What is our role in terms of communicating this etc. So board operating procedures is where a board lays out all of those things. uh the question for the board and I had asked usually um I'll ask President Ray kind of if he has thoughts on this but he wanted to punt this

182back to this entire group and see how this group wants to move about these things. The first question and it's going to be the second question for the superintendent evaluation process is how does the board want to engage with giving feedback and really clarifying what those are. There's really two options. The first one is we all want to read through the board operating procedures and come back and do a workshop all together probably like this and actually talk through each of the different elements how we want to do that and then I will help you go back and forth and we'll get language and it'll eventually go through your full process to approve a policy or boards might choose to have a committee of a small group of people who are going to dive into

183that go through that process and then bring back recommendations to the entire board for the entire board to look at those recommendations. So one the full board is engaged from the beginning and the other they give it to a smaller group to do this work and then bring back and have the discussion when it's more baked as a full board. That's the first question is does this board have any thoughts on how they might want to pursue doing board operating procedures? So that's going to be an open question. I was like, can you talk to me about I remember >> my my question would be uh like to the board given the training and everything we're doing to get all seven together once a month and then with our ne next training in two weeks

184and us just having gone through this weekend, do you think it's likely that we will be able to get all seven here again? Because then I think it would be worth it. If we think we're going to miss a couple, then we might as well have a committee for it. That's my input. >> Well, then who would be on that committee? >> Ray. >> My initial thought is we've done everything together already. Um, I feel like it would be more powerful for all of us to do it together, lay the groundwork. I mean, we're right now what we're doing is we're laying the foundation for what it's going to look like for whoever replaces us later on down the road. So, like I feel like if we just get a committee, that'd be great. I

185mean, we're all great around this table, but I feel like together we're stronger, and I feel like this is really part of building that foundation out. Um, I know it's a lot to come in and it's like to get all seven of us here, seven of us here is a challenge, but I feel like, you know, if we can get this done and get this through and get on the other side of it, you know, then we can start, you know, Dr. Hinosa and his team can start focusing on educating kids and then we can just move forward. So, that's my thought on it. Um, but yeah, >> I'm gonna agree with you, sir. I I think I would uh put it back on the full board to make that make those make those decisions.

186>> I also will agree. I think we all bring some good feedback and we kind of feed off of each other when it comes to questions and and understanding on things. Um, I do recommend that we do it earlier in the day and um um and also that um if we get if there was already one in place, right, that we get it ahead of time. It gives us time to really go through it and really understand it, highlight it, put our own recommendations so when we come in, we just go line by line and and changes or recommendations and it makes it go faster. >> Yep. All right. Um the last one was the exact same question with how to design a superintendent evaluation process. Um in general it's superintendent evaluation process should be

187agnostic to the superintendent as we look at the feedback it's really on how does it make sure that it focuses on incentivizing achievement of the priorities we're setting. Um but the board needs to also kind of codify what that will look like. What's the timeline? How that all works. Um, so from that conversation, my gut tells me this board is going to say, "We'd like to do all of this together as well." Is that an accurate reflection? >> Why not? >> All right. And that that's great. Um, it's just great. We can do that. So, I can work with you, um, Rey, and we can find some dates and the board can decide, do you want to do a Saturday and do a big workshop on all these things that are going to be coming

188up and knock them all out at once, or do we want to do a bunch of broken up ones? It's going to be an opportunity for the public. on that last item, you would come to us with a hey, here's a benchmark or recommendation what I've seen work somewhere else. So, we don't start from scratch. >> So, in both of these um I will point you to your uh LSG manual which is you I know everyone kept it and it's online also if you want it. Um, so there is actually a re a draft potential recommendation for a superintendent evaluation that we could start with, but same thing I will send both of these. I will actually go through and review your entire board operating procedures and I will make comments section by section by

189section on what I would recommend and why. Um, and then I will actually send that out to the full board once I complete that in the next week or so. So people can review that in advance. But don't let me stop you and don't wait on me. You can feel free to pull your board operating procedures as well and also start that reading early. >> So you're talking about is that like the evaluation tool that we would use for Dr. Henosa? >> Correct. >> Okay. LSG has its own. >> LSG has Yes. It's example >> Page 48 in the manual. Thank you, D. Nice one, Darl. >> I mean, I have one, but I think we need to >> and I think like that that's a conversation to look through and and talk about it.

190But all right. Well, Mr. President, that concludes a very meaty agenda. So, thank you all so much for engaging. I'll pass it back to you. >> Awesome. All right. Well, uh, can I get a motion to adjourn the meeting? >> I'd like to make a motion that we adjourn the meeting. >> Thank you. Can I get a second? >> I'd like to second that motion. >> All in favor? >> I >> Meeting's adjourned. The time is [Music] >> 9:30. I came up