1/20/2026 - FCPS School Board Governance Committee Meeting

001Okay. Good afternoon. The January 20th, 2026 meeting of the Fairfax County School Board Governance Committee will now come to order at 4:05 p.m. We may have someone join virtually. So, clerks, should we go ahead and vote that person in or we're not sure? I have to say I am a little uncomfortable with possibly people joining or not. I think it would be helpful in the future to know if we expect the person or not. Okay. Uh, Miss St. John Cunning has submitted a written request to attend this afternoon's meeting virtually due to a personal conflict as she has a family commitment as and is attending tonight's meeting from Great Falls, Virginia. All those in favor of approving Miss St. John Cunning's request, myself, Mr. Fr, Miss Lady, uh, opposed. Dr. Anderson. So, that uh, request

002passes and, uh, when Miss St. John Cunning arrives, we will check her audio and video. Okay, we will now um move to the approval of minutes item 1.02. We will vote on the minutes of the January 6th meeting of the governance committee. Is there a mover for that? >> Dr. Anderson moves and Mr. Fresh seconds. All those in favor? And that passes unanimously. >> It is a little warm. >> Okay. Okay. So, on our agenda today, we're going to go through uh maybe 10 minutes or less about formatting of the policies. We've worked hard to try and get things in order. And then we're going to turn to some HR related policies and just a few more facilities related policies including one that we had put um asked the superintendent to come back to in

003the last meeting. And then with at least 30 minutes left in the meeting, we will turn to a discussion about the new frontier of AI policy development. Okay. So we are going to look at agenda item 1.03, the formatting of policies. So madame deputy clerk, uh, Miss Brown, do you want to speak to this? >> It's pretty self-explanatory. We're going to get ourselves in order. Um, so what I have here is kind of I've been listening to all of the um kind of ideas that people have had about the formatting and come up with and taken um the previous uh regulation on formatting and made a template that where people can use this to make sure that not only do they have the correct formatting but they have the correct uh components and sections. Um

004above and beyond this I had added regulation 1104 which is the formatting of directives. I did have one slight recommendation on that for consideration and that would be separating the two so that we would have a regulation for policies and notices and then we would have a regulation on regulations. So a regulation regulation as a lot of times um the the the way that the um current regulation reads is a little confusing um as some things pertain to regulations which are Dr. Reed's perview and some things can you know are the policies and some notices that are the school board's purview and so I get a lot of questions on it. I just thought it'd be worth saying that it is my recommendation as someone who's been on the back end of these to separate

005out that regulation for the regulation regulation and the policy regulation >> only if it comes up with a really good name like R squared. Mr. fresh >> I'm not sure I'm not sure I follow >> for example the philosophy section right is in the board wants a philosophy section uh in the policy part Dr. to read doesn't always have a philosophy section. Um, and nor do we necessarily need a philosophy section in regulations. So, there's things like that. Um, where Miss Brown was suggesting that we have a template for regulations and a template for policies so that things are even and the same. Right now, we just have one template that's used for everything. Notices are also actually a little bit different and most notices don't include any of this. So you could actually have

006a third template for notices. So they are >> it's not even the templating, it's the actual, >> right? So there's different ways that things could go. Um, but that's why we were suggesting that if Dr. Reid has a template she wants to use for regulations that may be a little bit different than what the board wants for policies that we would separate them out. Anything [clears throat] further, Mr. Fish? >> Did you get any of this before the meeting by chance? >> I don't know if you have thoughts on it. >> I didn't, but I um I think, you know, as we draft regulation, clearly there are parts that we do not need in regulation that you want in policy. I think I would want to go back to our >> struggle to fill them

007in ourselves for policy. Well, and at the end of the day, the philosophy drives the policy, but the regulation is really how we're going to engage in the management to get it done. So, I don't even think it necessarily is appropriate, right, for a regulation. I would like to go back to our team though to look at what our template for regulations because we've just gone through probably 60 or 70 this year and I don't know that I want to go back and rewrite all of those again. So, I think I'd also want to be clear to that it would be a moving forward thing. Um, but I do think separating them from the board's template makes a whole lot of sense for sure. >> And and yikes, that's really loud. And as I said,

008the uh it would be a separation of this regulation 11:04 too. so that your regulation for regulations would be more aligned with your template because right now everything's kind of mashed into one and it's a little bit difficult to under understand which aligns with which sometimes >> um on the actual policy uh template. I think it's great to have a template. Um can you go back to the template really quickly? Thank you. The template on templates. There we go. Um, is there anything else underneath? Yeah. >> [clears throat] >> I think it might benefit us to I don't think definitions are something that are required in every single policy and the and and I worry that we might end up with competing definitions between policies. [clears throat] So, uh, maybe in red next to the

009word definitions, you could put as needed or as warranted so that we know that nobody has to come up with things just to fulfill the template. I think that's bad policym. Um, I'm comfortable with the idea of having philosophy and everything, but I don't want to be overly prescriptive on um, having to have different sections. I do think that the order matters and so having it having them in there even when they're potentially not used uh makes sense. Um I think what's missing after responsibilities is um the body uh section. Um uh I don't know what that would be called necessarily but the meat and potatoes of the policy. What is the actual policy? Um so um I think it's worth having something there that uh shows the format for it. I think responsibilities also

010would be uh as warranted. >> Can I share that I I think this is a good start but I envision something more detailed. Um and I happen to have pages of notes about sort of glossery type decisions. We agreed at the last session, you know, to say that the school board, Fairfax School Board believes that. Um so I think there could be more guidance like put in here like Mr. Fr is saying even verb tense, you know, and philosophy and responsibilities. I get it interchanged a lot and I commented on one of the policies about that. So, I think we can do more to clarify um and I agree about like what's the meat of the policy and I actually went through last meeting's policies and colorcoded them and said like which one has this

011section and that section. So, there's some more to do. Um but at least we've got a start. So, Dr. Anderson, um thank you and thank you for getting this started. Um, Miss Brown, um, I do agree that it would be great if there was a very quick and easy way to separate regulations from the policies, at least, um, at least visually, so that it's easy just to notice. And I do agree that I don't think the regulations require a purpose. And I don't think you do a summary. It's just a change. So, we know those two will be gone. And um I do agree that this should be what both the policy and whatever changes to regulation should be moving forward. It's tomorrow's work. There's no retroactive work to this. We will never get that

012done and I don't even think we should try. Um I do agree with some of the comments that were just made regarding components. There are some that are evergreen and will show up everywhere and that's essentially summary um and purpose and philosophy. I think those are the main stays. All of the rest is kind of interchangeable because as needed we've had definitions, we've had responsibilities, we've had procedures because I've also been doing a little charting of of my own regarding um some of the headings that you know we've used even going through today's they're all over the place. authority, rationale. I think we need to give ourselves a bank of headings to be used as needed so that we don't stray away from the language because I could see it where I'm just pulling something

013instead of rationale. Somebody could just write explanation moving forward. So having that as kind of some sort of addendum would be very helpful. So, we know we're going to draw away from these topics in order to fill out the body so that we don't end up with way too many words that are inconsistent and misaligned. Um, but other than that, I think this is really a good start. And so, what I can do is you we only had two weeks since our previous governance committee meeting, but I can um I'll try it two ways. I'll try it my old school way and think about it and I'll try it with chat GPT and see what it comes up with but to create some glossery type things and I think that will be helpful and I'm

014happy to keep working with our deputy clerk on that. So that sounds okay. One thing I did have um is this is a public facing document. I just sorry I had I did have comments in there of when to use things and when to not but I didn't want to add it in for this public facing one. >> Mr. Fr. My only last comment would be once we do fill in the things that we've all kind of talked about here. It probably would be good to have a sample model policy, just something that we It doesn't even have to be a real policy, right? Just an example, but it should show exactly what the policy format would look like in practice. Yeah, I I think we need that, right, to let people know and then

015I think once the committee adopts it. I don't probably something the board should look at at least for consensus um maybe the the chair and vice chair can circulate it in the um uh chair's notes with a poll um and then we can just kind of march forward with it. I think it's very close to being done. >> Great. We've come a long way. Okay. All right. So, let's go ahead and tackle some of the policies. We are going to start with the human resources related policies. So, this is agenda item 1.04 and um so we have seven and um I wonder if there's any well we could just go through uh from 440 onward. Uh so why don't we start with performance assessments and evaluations Dr. Anderson? >> Yes, thank you. Uh minimal here

016um two things. One is more substantive and the other is just a semantics. Um for section 4 I I think somewhere and I'm really comparing this with the sample from the SBA. We're missing, I think, some language that speaks to that this is applicable to all employees. Um, Mr. Smith, do we have any employees that are not evaluated? >> Are our hourly employees are not evaluated? >> Hourly part-time or hourly full-time? >> Our our hourly are part-time hourly employees. >> Okay. So, and that's a small group or a large group? >> It's a large group, but they're again they're hourly employees, so they're not a full FTE. They're they do not receive benefits. They're not part of a bargaining unit. >> Okay. Thank you. I appreciate that. Um I think somewhere here we need to

017talk about all employees and also what I see that is missing on the second part is speaking or providing some guidelines for uniform performance standards. We have it here for teachers and principles and it makes me wonder about the superintendent and central office staff which document that they're using. Um and again if you look at the VSBA document um it highlights teacher principal and superintendent evaluations. And thirdly, under philosophy, I think last time we were leaning into some other language that Fairfax County shall and my um proposal here, Fairfax County School Board shall require that written evaluation, written evaluations of the effectiveness of all employees. Oh, there's all never mind that. I think I was looking at that for number four. Um I'm so sorry. I would I ran through this really quickly. philosophy. My

018recommendation for philosophy is to change that language to the Fairfax County School Board shall require written evaluation of the effectiveness of all employees. Just kind of word smithing that a little bit because I think we started with adding Fairfax County School Board with a lot of the language that we used last time. Um, and then in the back I just also I'm thinking we need to refer to the other guidelines that are utilized. >> Mr. Fresh, thoughts. >> Yeah, a couple things. One, um, I'm hesitant to say all employees because just because they're part-time and not uh, receiving benefits does not mean they're not technically employees. So, what modifying language can we use to indicate that we're being very specific about which employees we're talking about? Secondarily, um I don't want to include the superintendent

019in this. Uh if there is a need for a policy around the superintendent's evaluation, it should be separate because we do it separately. Uh and it's our it's identified in our governance manual. Uh so, um just my two thoughts. I think there's a very specific classification of employees. Um, and I don't think that uh including the one employee, well, not the one, but the the preeminent employee that we have direct purview over um in the same policy as everybody else. Makes sense. >> Okay. May I just check? Is Miss St. John Cunning on? Is that MC? Is that her? Oh, okay. Okay. So yeah, I don't think putting the superintendent in here is um [clears throat] is something I'm interested in. This is one where the philosophy and the responsibilities are kind of mixed. Like

020our philosophy is that we want to make sure that our staff are doing the job they signed up to do and if they need support within reason, we're giving them support. Um Dr. E, do you want to interject though? >> Go ahead. >> I just think that Mr. Smith and I were sidebarring for a minute. Um, I think we, if we're going to go with the suggested amended language, we would want to say evaluated in compliance with statutory expectations because not everybody's on the same cycle. And so, I think it's a nuance, but we would want to reflect that, I think, in the policy. >> I think we'd be amendable to that. I mean, this was yours to bring to us. So, if you think that's what's best, you know, please put that in there

021from the start. you know, we're looking for the the advice of council to be sure that we're not stepping over the line with our collective bargaining agreements and we're not overcommitting to anything. So, but it doesn't say anything about code. Does it Are you suggesting we have something in there about code, Dr. Reed? So, do we evaluate all employees? We don't evaluate hourly employees. I I heard no that's correct. Uh and we have anywhere between 11,000 and 12,000 um hourly employees at any given time. These are people who are in the hourly band position that you may have seen or may be familiar with uh performing a variety of functions. Um we have substitutes who are in that hourly um category. Uh all of those things. Um so those 11 to 12,000 employees generally not

022generally I'm sorry those 11 to 12,000 employees do not receive an annual evaluation. >> Thank you. So this um this language does not say annual and the frequency actually was something that I would want to see put in here that you know it it says something about frequency. >> The the frequency uh at least for instructional employees is defined in Virginia code. Uh so generally people who employees who are in licensed instructional positions uh need to be evaluated uh during their first three years because they're in a probationary term um and after that they reach continuing contract status wherein they're evaluated once every three years uh versus our operational employees who um are evaluated on a different cycle. So there is a little bit of nuance and difference there. >> Yeah. So I mean I

023just don't think this is accurate or I'm not sure how useful it is. the the philosophy is saying that we think that every that all employees shall be evaluated in some written way, but we're hearing that that's not actually what happens in practice. So, that doesn't seem right to include here. And if there's other language, whether it's policy or code or the collective bargaining agreement, this is one of those policies where does it make sense to stand alone? Should it be part of something? But that's a recommendation that we'd seek staff to give input on. So I'm not sure what we're doing with this policy right here. >> So outside council who worked with us, I believe Mr. Patel worked on this um reviewed all of the HR policies. I think that the statutes included

024on page two um under the sections and those have been updated to reflect uh 2020 and 2021 and the code of Virginia below responsibilities. So the language is there and it would be fleshed out more in the regulation um those different cycles for different groups. Um so if that's helpful Mr. Fish. >> Yeah. Um so I want to make a distinction between what we include under philosophy and what we include under general policy language. Um, so what I've recognized at least of late is that when we have philosophy, it usually speaks to like some kind of a value of some kind, right? So if this was in line with that, this would be something about why it's important to have um uh evaluations of employees. Uh, generally speaking, I think that this could go through.

025I I was looking at responsibilities and I'm like we would get into a mess if we tried to identify every single person who has a responsibility in the evaluation process especially when you consider that there are different jobs that have different people who are doing the evaluating. So having the uh the evaluator and the employee uh listed as the responsibilities makes sense to me. And then that is kind of described in our regulations and in state code which are listed. Um as for the language under section 4, uh I'm fine with that language. for philosophy. Um, it could be something like uh whatever we've decided the Fairfax County School Board uh require the Fairfax County School Board affirms that employees benefit from uh regular constructive, you know, something something along those lines, right? Because that

026speaks to a philosophy and not just a regurgitation of what the policy lays out. >> I I agree with you. Um I'm kind of thinking I wonder if we should just put a pin in this one for a moment and because I think we'll have other questions on philosophy, responsibilities, procedures, right? We keep having to go back and check our format and check our understanding of these sections, right? Um Oh, mislead, sorry, I didn't see your your thing up. Go ahead, please. >> Yeah, to Mr. DRC's point regarding value. I mean, I think the value of performance evaluations is a belief in a strong teaching force, right? So, we value um strength in our teachers. I think also if you're going to try to you were kind of words smithing, what I wrote down was

027timely and appropriate feedback, right? like there's a because everything's spelled out in regulation, right? So what we're trying to convey is we value strong teachers and we value ongoing we're we're educators. We believe in the ongoing improvement, right? So if we don't have and again according to state code, you know, if but if this is a value statement, I think you can make it a value statement. Um and I think as Dr. Ree pointed out, all of the codes are there and the regulation which is which I is is lengthy. I mean the regulation is nine pages long that accompanies this that breaks it down into who, when, where, and why. Um, so you know, I think the way the philosophy is written right now is kind of, you know, purposy, but anyways, I do

028agree with word smithing that. And if you want to be I don't know that we need to, but if you want to talk about contracted employees, you could say employees um with a C with a CBA because that's everyone non-ourly, I think. I don't think there's anyone who gets evaluated on these cycles that's not in the CBA. >> So what if we and then I'll go to Dr. Anderson. So what if we inserted the language Miss Lady just said that the school board believes that timely and appropriate feedback, you know, is essential to uh >> creating a strong workforce teaching or what whatever >> whatever language. I mean, I'm trying to think I don't know what language HR uses in its reports, you know, things that um >> yeah, I don't want it to be

029too long, but I think at the end of the day, the reason we value performance evaluations is because they generate dialogue. They generate timely and appropriate feedback. They generate coaching or they generate mentorship of someone else, right? You're you're you're an exemplar teacher. And so now we're going to have you mentor somebody who is, you know, is maybe in a needs improvement category. >> Dr. Anderson. >> Yes. Um, the other thing that came to mind is the procedures section. I I'm wondering, do we need a procedures section if we have a robust regulation that lays out the procedures? Um, is that misnamed or should that be part of the overall philosophy? Uh, because this is speaking to, you know, the basis. Why is this an important thing? So that would be my wondering there. Um

030because procedures means a set of steps that are laid out for you to complete a particular task and that sentence is not it or those sentences is not procedural. It's more part of the belief philosophy and so I I would advocate to perhaps marry that or rename it because those are not procedural. Mr. ish. >> I think it should be objectives. >> I agree, Miss Lady. >> No, I was just going to say back to the earlier form in conversation. I think that that when we create a an example policy, it's like may include these categories like we don't always have definitions. We don't always have objection objectives. We don't always have procedures. And I think that we box staff in because I think they've been feeling like we want each of these categories and

031I think they're struggling too when they produce some of these redline policies. I don't want to speak for staff, but my sense is if if they're trying to fit into the box we they think we've created, it's easier to have a toolkit of here are some of the category headings as this particular policy, which ones do we need to utilize to articulate this particular policy? >> So, I agree. I thought there was going to be a little bit more discernment in in this work and it continues to be a bit more regimented than I thought we were communicating. Um, again, I have all these pages that I will go through and pull out exactly the stuff um that we've been talking about. You know, as I look at the other HR policies to review in

032this meeting and think about the ones that we did a few meetings back, like about contractual employees and hourly employees, I would love if the superintendent and her staff could look at the whole bunch and say, does this all make sense? Are are we talking about objectives for each of these policies or are we talking about requirements? Are we talking about procedures? Like you are the experts. Tell us what makes sense. And I think our philosophy part I mean in this policy particular HR I think a lot of it comes in the philosophy the how probably won't be as much of the board's input. So, um, what I would suggest for this policy is we update the policy as, um, with Miss Lady's suggestion about timely and appropriate feedback, change procedures to objectives, and remove

033responsibilities. And that could probably get us close enough for now. Mr. fish. >> I I don't want to leave the assumption out there that staff is not taking that kind of thoughtfulness to the policy. Dr. Reid, when you're looking at policies and you've got a group of policies that might feed off of each other, are you looking at ways to when I say you, the collective you, right? Are you looking for ways to collapse things as as uh possible or to refine things? Generally speaking, >> yes, sir, we generally are. I think as a practical matter, staff um is trying to match our work with your needs or desires as a board at this point. The regulations right now we're in a situation where some regulations don't have a policy, some policies don't have a

034regulation, and that's been a historical long-term issue. So I I think one of the things we thought at this year, one of the I think really good ideas that we're working on is trying to clean up everything so we're current and then I think we could go back and look at if we're [clears throat] going to consolidate what would that be. right now I think the press is to really get current honestly and if we see I think we did sunset a couple policies and we've recommended I think there have been one or two along the line but um when there's a regulation attached we'd have to combine all of that and right now I think just getting things current and accurate probably is a number one priority for triaging >> Mr. refresh anything else?

035No, Miss Lady. Oh, okay. So, my recommendation was that to adjust the philosophy to say the Fairfax County School Board affirms that um employees benefit from timely and appropriate feedback. We could just leave it at that for now even and then um make the second Roman numeral four objectives. Um and then get rid of responsibilities and that would get us further along for now. But what do others think? >> Mr. all of that. I did think that the responsibility section made sense because it speaks to the collaboration's necessary in the process without getting too in the weeds about different classifications of jobs and how they're evaluated which is spelled out in regulations. >> Okay. I feel more passionately about philosophy, so I'm cool with that. Um Dr. Anderson and Miss Lady, do you have any

036thoughts on that? >> I agree because it is a responsibility of the person being evaluated and the evaluator. I mean there there steps that both have to do and so they both have responsibilities in abiding by the code. >> Okay. >> So keeping responsibilities in Dr. Anderson >> I agree with what Miss Lady just said but parts of me is feeling as if all of this is part of the objective. I I it's not really identifying that um you know what my part is as the evaluator or what your part is as the employee per se. So it looks like it could all kind of be under the objective just to talk about that this is a a two-step process that it involves both individuals. But we all know, we've been in schools long, well,

037not all of us, but some of us have been in schools long enough to know that if the evaluator does not initiate, nothing happens. So, and I don't think we're necessarily needing to spell this out here because that is spelled out in the regulation. Correct, Dr. Reed? Oh, [laughter] >> yes, ma'am. That's true. >> Again, I it's not a hill for me to die on, but I just it just seems like >> Let me say this. I I do believe >> it is still my turn. Let me just finish out my time. Um I I just wonder because if we look at the language that is right above it that speaks to you know performance assessments and the basis what they are we could also just pull that in to identify that evaluations are a

038collaborative process because typically when we have responsibilities we identify who's doing what and that shows up elsewhere here when we have you know with other policies that we'll see. This does not identify who's doing what. It is saying it is a shared task. I think we could accomplish that under the umbrella of the objectives. >> Okay, Miss Lady, and then let's look to wrap this up. >> No, the only thing I was going to say, and Mr. Solomon can correct me, but I do believe that yes, the evaluator uh I mean, if I'm under evaluation, I know in my in my PTE, I'm getting emails, I'm getting reminders, they're not directly coming from the evaluator, right? Yeah. So, that's what I'm making clarification, Dr. Anderson is that in in our system it's not just the

039evaluator who initiates everything. The system itself initiates it. I just wanted to put that clarification out there. >> So can we then about a compromise? So remove the responsibility section but keep that sentence under objectives so that it still includes evaluations. Evaluations are collaborative endeavor. >> Yes, that will suffice. Okay. All right. So again, we're going to update the philosophy. We're going to change the procedures to objectives. We're going to have all those things up there. List the summary of change and then uh include that evaluations are collaborative. Uh without objection, is this policy ready to be sent to the board? Let me look at the uh the governance committee send policy 4440 performance and assessments and evaluation as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption. Well, Mr. Fish will move and Dr.

040Dr. Anderson rule second. Any comments? Comments? No comments? All those in favor? I was going to do without objection, but we are in favor. All right. 440. 4440 goes to the board. Excellent. Okay. All right. Next, let's look at grievance procedure 4460. Dr. Anderson, is there a regulation that goes with this? Because I could not find one. 4460. >> There are two regulations that go with this. Uh 4464 and 4465. >> That's what it was. I think I was looking for the exact number and that's why I couldn't find any. Uh I'm sorry. Can you repeat that again? 4460. >> Yes, ma'am. 4464 and 4465. >> Not to ask you, but I wonder why are they differently numbered? Do you have that answer, Janet? Miss Brown? >> Um, the answer to that is for $5.

041No, I'm just kidding. Um, the 4461 and 4462 were the old ones that were related to the CBA until the CBA was ratified. 4464 and 4465 weren't able to take over as those. So, those are the policies that are current. 4464 and 4465. This was just me missing that I didn't put the right one. So, I'm sorry. Regulation >> regulation 4464 and 4465 are the current ones. It was just this is the old one before the CBA. The new one is 4464. >> Something we could clean up. >> I can clean it up right now. >> Okay. Yep. >> Perfect. So 464 and 465 will then become 4601. >> No, typically when we have because the way things work, right? If we renumber them, it's basically like saying the old ones never existed. We generally

042keep those numbers and we retire them so that if something were to happen, we would still have them. If legal needed them at some point, they would still have that it existed. So that's why >> I open this canopy, >> reumber them. So therefore, we have to give them different numbers because we can't replace the ones that currently or that formally existed. >> Move on to kind of my statements. I thought this was a little bit more simple than what it's turning out to be. I just couldn't locate them, so I couldn't figure that out. Um, just a couple of things. Um, under purpose, I'd like to strike the words that there are just so we end up with to establish grievance procedures for employees of the school division. Um, so that's one under philosophy.

043Again, being consistent with we've been saying the Fairfax County School Board. Um, that would be what I offer there. And also responsibilities. I also thought that that could be included as part of the philosophy because again, we're not necessarily identifying what each of the individuals are doing because we have a a procedure, I'm sorry, a regulation that is very clear. you will do this, you will do that. So that would be the um third thing that I would like for consideration. Is that all Dr. Anderson? >> So just a time check, we have 45 minutes to get through the remainder of the HR and the facilities policies. So um I will say the philosophy is clunky. um it should remove the word shall and and the second time the school board and I think the

044philosophy and the the uh responsibilities could be flipped. I I just I don't know um is are we okay with the philosophy statement andor the responsibilities moving that together? I feel like the responsibility statement is more of a philosophy that we support an employees right to discuss a complaint with the school system administration or to file a grievance. I'm thinking of Mr. FR's framing here. Um >> thoughts can you share that again what you just articulated? >> Well, the responsibilities that seems to be more of a philosophy that we support an employes right to discuss a complaint. The philosophy is a clunky sentence and we can edit that but I don't know that it adds value. I'd be fine with making the responsibilities the philosophy, but can we also take action on my um I'm

045sorry, what was your to omit the three words under purpose that there are sure I agree with that objection to establish grievance procedures. Mr. Trish is >> I assume we just did that without objection, right? >> We did the purpose without objection and the responsibilities one still appear. >> Yeah. I think that um the sentence under responsibilities uh could be changed to the Fairfax County School Board affirms and employees right blah blah blah blah blah. Make that the philosophy >> the responsibilities change um the number five to objectives >> and make uh number five uh the objectives but we're getting rid of philosophy so we get rid of a section I mean out of responsibilities right >> I don't think it's necessary >> okay so the changes from the top would be under purpose to

046establish grievance procedures Right. Okay. I'll wait for you if you want to scroll to the top with me. Okay. Right. Okay. And then the next one would be to remove Yep. remove the philosophy statement. Yep. The Fairfax County School Board affirms an employees rights. Yep. And then objectives. And I think that would be it. Does that look good to everyone? >> Just one point of clarification. Last time um we met we had the sentence. We used three different sentence starters. It was Fairfax County Board believes and there were two others that are escaping me. >> Shall here shall recognize recognizes that >> we like confirm that because I think supports is fine. Um >> I'm not a big fan of I had captured it. I captured it forward. So it wasn't >> I thought that's

047what we're supposed to do moving. >> That's what I thought too. So, you know, I guess without objection, we'll have the clerks make it. We said the Fairfax County School Board shall adhere. The Fairfax County School Board shall and the Fairfax County School Board recognizes. Those were the three things that this committee agreed on two weeks ago. That was the understanding that that's what would be put in here as the philosophy. Yes. The Fairfax County School Board recognizes an employes right. Okay. Is this um okay to go then? I think it's okay to go. Um if we do without objection that the committee send policy 4460 grievance procedure as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption. Are there any objections? I see no objection. So 4460 will go to the board. Nice. Okay.

048The next one is employee certification procedure 4520. 4520. [sighs] I did not have anything substantive on this. Dr. Anderson. Um thank you. under purpose um to establish the requirements for being a certified employee or um I I think it should be to establish the requirements for designation as a certified employee organization. So that's one um same comment about philosophy and responsibilities. Well, let me pause here and ask. Is there a um regulation that goes along with this policy? >> Yes. >> Listed in the >> Oh, isn't it? Yeah, that's I have that because again I think I'm raising the same question about responsibility. If we're if we have a regulation that's going to outline, you know, who's supposed to be doing what, I wonder if we can bring this all in under philosophy. >> Well,

049it's sounding like responsibility is isn't really a the best fit for the HR policies, right? because it varies with different groups of employees >> for the ones that we've done so far. >> So that's one thing I'm hearing. The other thing is, you know, while I did not have any changes when I reviewed it earlier, you know, this is about collective bargaining and this was a really big deal that we brought this forward and so I'm wondering if we want to again put more in the philosophy about that um and maybe come back to it. Mr. Fr, >> can you repeat the three phrases that we've used for the philosophies? Yeah. So they each start with this Fairfax County School Board shall adhere, shall and recognizes. And actually not the school board affirms its belief.

050I have that in red. So shall adhere, shall and recognizes. >> Okay. Uh, I would like to suggest that the philosophy uh read that the Fairfax County School Board recognizes the importance of an orderly process for the certification of uh employee organizations. The Fairfax County School Board recognizes the importance of an orderly process for the certification of employee organizations. >> Mr. Mr. Fish, would you want to say anything in there about the board's role to do the certification or >> I don't know that we have a role >> while we certify the the units. >> Those are I don't I think these are two different things. This speaks to the non so we have a group of employee organizations that still exist um that are recognized um they are folks that folks that don't have

051their own uh units etc. So, we have specific things that speak to collective bargaining. And then we have this uh this was something that was uh talked about a little bit when we talked about um disbanding the uh 4510s, right? Um because for some people there still existed a framework for them to continue meeting with staff um while others did not because they were now covered by collective bargaining. So, um, >> not FEU. >> Okay. So, this is still necessary to have something like this. Okay. It would be good if it said, you know, this does not include the collective bargaining units. I don't know. Again, these are if it's fine, it's fine. I just >> Well, it's the board's policy. I think that might be helpful to communicate because there'll be future boards that

052don't have the opportunity to have all of this background. It's already in here. So, I think that makes sense to add that kind of background. And I have a question. I thought 4510s were entirely disbanded. So, these groups that are seeking certification, what is their platform for solution for solutioning? So this is a unique situation. The groups, two of the groups in question here uh comprise FEU. So FEU is a separate union, but FCFT and FEA are certified organizations. And so that's an example of two certified organizations that have come together to create a union. And in the absence of the ability to have the certified organizations that we would run a foul of the board's resolution identifying FEU as the uh exclusive representative >> right so I think my question is still has not

053yet been answered what's the platform for communication because I believe we sunset 4510s >> like those monthly meetings are not happening >> we did so those are separate the 4510 meeting those were disbanded. This is a separate group for those certified organizations so that they can exist FEA and FCFT being able to exist to create FEU. >> So it's only for those organizations not like the Hispanic associations or um there were like 17. >> So those are separate those are not all certified uh uh board certified employee organizations. We have associations and organizations. >> So, this is only applicable to FCFT and FEU. I'm sorry, FCFT and FEA. >> Those were two examples. I don't have the exhaustive, but those are at least two examples. >> Okay. I think I'm more confused. Mr. Fresh, did

054you have a comment? So, it seems like we could use some more information about this one. I'd like to set it aside because it should be distinct and it should be meaningful. And if we're not even clear on who this is covering and how they even get certified, I don't think we're ready to move this forward. So, can we at least Well, can we put it aside for now? I don't know if we'll get to it in 35 minutes, but um Mr. Fresh, Miss Lady, do you agree to putting it aside for a moment? And >> that's fine. >> Yeah, Miss Lady, >> I don't have a problem with it as is, but I'm okay setting it aside, too. >> Okay. All right. So, let's just set that aside. Okay. Um 4630 payment of personnel

055supporting community use of facilities. Um I was okay with this one. So Dr. Anderson comments. >> Um my comment is about definition. Where's the definition? I don't know what we're defining there because typically when we have definitions, we have a term and we have language. What is the term that is being defined here? Well, it says it defines personnel. Then I would just say let's write the word personnel and then identify that it's persons who are working in support of community use. Why are we defining personnel? I guess that's what that leads me to. And I wonder if this would be better to be rolled into the community use policy itself. There was also that because there's like not much here, but this speaks to payment and making I'm not against that. I I just

056want this to make sense. If it's better rolled up into another policy that's going to be more robust, let's do that and sunset this. But I would actually lobby to just cancel the whole definition section because personnel is not a term that we would define. We define things that are a little bit more explicit. Um, and I just don't well not even explicit that are a little bit more challenging to understand the context. And I don't think that meets that threshold here. But would this make sense rolled up in um a larger policy? Mr. um Solomon, do you have thoughts? >> I don't know that this makes sense to roll up into another policy only because when [clears throat] we're talking about community use and the costs associated with it, um one of those costs

057is the payment of personnel. One of those procedures that we have to follow is the payment of personnel who are working, be it overtime for staff members who are working above and beyond their 40 hours and or flexing their time, hourly staff members who need to be available to support that community use, all of those things. >> Um, Dr. Do you have further comments or >> just >> I'll located this regulation. Um the regulation that crosscuts this policy is likely the same regulations that talk about uh payment of staff essentially. So salary guidelines and things of that nature. >> Okay. Okay. Uh Miss Lady. >> Yeah. I just I would agree with Mr. Solomon. I would not roll this in. Um I think this is distinct and I actually had to read it twice to

058grasp community use, community use, community use because it is a differentiator than all the hours we need to be there for school activities uh which is the majority of our time but then there are community use and you have to have the proper custodians other supervision etc. So I think it should be a standalone policy. >> Okay. So how are we feeling about what's there? Now we have uh there was a suggestion about the definition. Is there a proposed change? Exactly. Then other thoughts about that to remove the definition of personnel. Okay. It seems like we're okay to do that. Um >> and then to have the philosophy be consistent with the language that we just talked about. >> School board um recognizes recognizes. Okay. So so uh without objection uh the government's committee shall

059send policy 4630 payment of personnel supporting community use of facilities as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption. Any objections? None noted. Okay, way to go. All right. 4640, payment of salaries. See here, Dr. Anderson. Oops. Just a couple of questions. I know this is speaking to just pay. Is there an assumption here regarding stipens and afterchool work? Because I know very often um an example that I could think of is math and science oliads for which some of the schools are provided with funds to pay teachers to do that. Where would that fall? That kind of payment well that kind of compensation. Uh >> we have regulations that uh specify salary supplements and stipens. So that would be separate and distinct. >> So there's a separate policy that speaks to that as

060well. I will verify that, but there are definitely separate regulations that speak to it. >> I wonder if there's no separate policy and I don't know if one does not exist, would it make sense to have it be here as well? If one does not exist or even if it does exist, I'd love to kind of evaluate to see does it make sense to separate. Um, so that's one. Um, and then you know just kind of some language issues under responsibilities. Clearly there's some things there for financial service and office of payroll management to be responsible. Uh it's just responsible for pay of personnel. I is it is that the word that we're looking for because they're not you know necessarily paying them. They're doing the logistics the administration to make ensure like checks are

061cut. So, I wanted to share that. And then kind of going back to what I said earlier, if there's a regulation with this that is super clear in terms of who's doing what, should this responsibility be as we've talked about before, which is the superintendent will ensure that this is happening. It doesn't necessarily have to be these offices. So, that's a wondering, Miss Marin. Um, and And then I guess the last question philosophy do we really okay I don't know if my philosophy is that everybody be paid on a bi-weekly or monthly basis it's just so that they are paid um how does this fall into with what was started a couple of years ago Dr. to read which is the or maybe it doesn't and tell me if I'm mixing apples and oranges where

062we had we were not able to give more frequent paychecks to certain groups of employees. Part of that was connected to the I don't want to call it the ancient but I think I can HCM system right so as we're updating our HTM system and HR and business we're going to have more flexibility uh to look at more flexible pay schedules but it my understanding is that it was very directly related to um the software system and Mr. Solomon maybe could comment further, but I suspect that that um was really one of the big drivers that we weren't able to do that manually. >> That is exactly correct. Um it's our older systems um that in the current state are not industry standard um that we've had as a school division for about 30 years

063that make it difficult to achieve that. So just to add to that, I will say that um as we were planning and preparing to implement the HCM staff were surveyed uh and overwhelmingly shared that they want to keep the pay structure, monthly pay for contracted staff such as teachers and others and then bi-weekly pay for our bi-weekly staff such as hourly employees the same. So staff were surveyed and given uh the option to provide input um and ultimately opted to keep it the same. >> So it's not a matter of individual choice, it's whatever the collective is supporting, that's what we're doing. Is that accurate? >> We're we're going to keep it the same. Uh when you when you say individual choice, um >> like could I decide as an employee that I want to

064be paid monthly, somebody else says I want to be paid bi-weekly. >> The reason I'm going to say no is because introducing that level of variation and not having a set structure for employees uh exponentially increases risk and opportunity for error. >> Um thank you. And I think I'm waiting for your answer on the regulation that goes with this. Thank you, Mr. Fris. >> Uh, so I had um similarly striking the responsibilities. I think there's an assumption that the superintendent's responsible for um effectuating the work of our policies. I don't think it needs to be spelled out here specifically, especially when a department could be retitled at some point. Um, for the philosophy I had written, the Fairfax County School Board shall pay FCPS employees on a bi-weekly or monthly basis according to the established

065schedule. You can just delete up to the word pay. >> Dr. Anderson and remove pay employees at the beginning that you wrote. >> The regulation is 5610. >> Yes, that's the one that goes with policy 4640. So, we we still think it's a good idea to put in bi-weekly or monthly. >> Didn't hear any reason not to >> or just leave it out altogether or >> Yeah. Dr. Reed, thank you, Miss Marin. I wonder if it's just on a regular basis. >> Um, >> how about this? Because I think at the end of a season, >> the Fairfax County School Board shall appropriately compensate FCPS employees >> appropriately is subjective on a regular schedule. >> I do think we need to identify schedule, but I do agree that it doesn't have to be very specific

066for the reasons that were just stated. Some people are just once at the end of the season. I imagine that meets coaches and I don't know how these stipens and those other things that I've raised are working. So I think putting in a regular schedule will give you a place to go to to identify what that schedule is. Do you know if we have a policy on benefits, a similar one? likely because benefits falls under right now finance that Yes, ma'am. Got it. >> Okay. >> Um Okay. So, I would say to remove appropriately. Are you okay with that, Mr. Fresh? Yep. Okay. Any other comments on these changes? >> No. So, >> Sure. So the philosophy has been updated to be the Fairfax County School Board uh shall compensate really its employees um according

067to the established schedules. We refer to that the responsibilities um we do cite the office although we were going to get rid of that and keep it to the superintendent's jurisdiction. Okay. And then are we okay to leave the payment structure that explains monthly, bi-weekly, optional deductions? We also had seasonal procedures. >> Sure. >> But it doesn't mention the seasonal folks, Dr. Reid. So, should we add something in there? Is this accurate still? I guess I think I'll defer to Mr. Solomon in part because those are categorized as hourly and not, you know, I think there may be a distinction here, but I'll ask Mr. Solomon to respond. >> Correct. And in looking there are policies and regulations that speak specifically to salary supplements um completely separate from this which is salary compensation for employees

068who uh earn a regular or receive a regular salary. >> So do you suggest we leave it in there as is? >> Uh to answer your uh earlier question I'm suggesting that salary supplements and stipens for coaches uh doesn't need to be included in this policy. >> Does not. >> Where is that included in here? The reason you don't see it in here is because there are separate policies and regulations that govern supplements. >> So, yeah. So, are you confirming that leaving what's in here under payment of employees is accurate and appropriate? >> Yes, ma'am. >> Okay. So, okay. So, we've updated the philosophy. Um shall um we go ahead and pull that up. So the without objection the government's committee send policy 4640 payment of salaries as discussed and revised to the full board

069for adoption. Any objections? No. Okay. So 4640 goes to to the board. Okay. We've got two more HR and then three facilities. 4920 workplace diversity. and colleagues. Um, if your placards are up, then we're okay. Dr. Anderson, >> kind of had a lot of questions on this. I I I feel like this should be related to a lot of other policies, and I also would like to understand how does this dovetail with our non-discrimination policy. So this policy is specifically talking about and affirming the board's commitment to workforce diversity at large. Right? So those other policies um related to making sure that employees are in an environment free from discrimination, harassment, and bullying uh as an example have completely different policies and regulations that govern it. This policy as I'm reading it is essentially saying

070the school board values um a diverse, adaptive and supported workforce. >> Okay, thank you for that. Um so given that under philosophy, if we could just change to the stock language, that would be helpful. And I also feel like the rationale is part of the philosophy if not should be the philosophy. So bringing that up I think would be important. Um, and responsibilities. Again, I'm teethering here. Um, I'd be fine with it, but I'd be fine if it was not there, but the rationale, I think, needs to come up to philosophy. I agree. It seems like there's a lot of sections that are trying to say the same thing. Um, anyone else with comments on this? Are you okay with combining some of these things? Um, Mr. Fresh. So to confirm uh the philosophy sentence

071would be stricken and then the rationale section will be stricken and a lot of that language will come up and that language though is the Fairfax County School Board recognizes this is under the um philosophy recognizes that diversity not only promotes equal opportunity in employment but also results in the highest quality of education for students. >> It'll be easier for you if you just copy the >> Okay. So [clears throat] >> and then are we striking responsibilities as well? I feel like responsibilities is not just responsibilities of program managers. >> Well, hold on. The philosophy um is is not quite there. Um sure. So, it's the Fairfax County School Board recognizes that diversity not only promotes equal opportunity in employment, but also results in the highest quality of education for students. Is that it? I

072got that. Okay. And then responsibilities. We've talked about that about being >> I don't know if this makes any sense. >> We have a robust regulation on this. Correct. >> Is there a regulation on this, Mr. Solomon? >> I'm looking for it now. >> Okay. Because if there's a regulation on this, then I don't think we need to have that responsibilities. And I would also say goal of the workforce diversity commitment, we could just change that to objectives because that's been the language we've used thus far. I think that's a good suggestion to change goal of the workforce diversity commitment to objectives. Okay. So we have the change in philosophy. We are going to remove responsibilities. We'll change the last section to objectives and remove rationale. Dr. Anderson, yes. The regulation is 4920. >> Can

073you give us a quick like does it say who's doing what? Does it identify program managers or anybody else in terms of bringing this to life? >> Uh yes, it outlines the responsibilities of the division superintendent, human resources, program managers, etc. >> And we certainly don't need it here. Thank you. >> Okay. So uh without objection the governance committee will send policy 4920 workplace diversity as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption for adoption. I see no objection. Okay. Final HR policy 4950 sexual harassment. Mr. Fresh, should you 4950 Dr. Anderson? Um the purpose needs to be reorganized to state the policy. Again I I think we have been a little bit better about that unless I haven't caught it elsewhere. Um philosophy I think is fine here. The responsibility I had a

074question and this is how I'm reading it. The title N office in conjunction with the office of employee relations is responsible for implementation and monitoring of sexual harassment complaints. What are they implementing? They're not implementing sexual harassment complaints. Is it implementation of training? What are they implementing? I I believe it's implementation of the policy and then monitoring of sexual harassment complaints. >> Then we need to add that because it looks like they're implementing sexual harassment complaints and um just some wonderings about um section five. Um should we retitle that to be more in linement in alignment with what we've done so far? >> Which section, Dr. Five, prohibition of sexual harassment. And I don't have a good working [clears throat] title because objectives doesn't really sit here well. Yeah. The title of this policy is

075just unclear. It's a title about sexual harassment. Is it preventing it? Is it having a procedure for when it happens? Is it the um prohibition seem says you know we want to avoid it but then it also the last sentence says that we will take appropriate action when complaints are received. So maybe the purpose itself needs to be outlined first. Is the purpose is to establish a procedure or it's to denounce sexual harassment or is it both? Because the statement doesn't lead us anywhere. I'm sorry. The purpose doesn't lead us anywhere. I would recommend that. So, it sounds like this is going to need a little more work. I think not a lot more. And I I do want to try and we have those three um facilities policies left. So, um, so yeah, I'

076I'd like to say let's come back to this one, please, just given the time, see if we can get through our facilities ones and then um because it it's unclear if this policy is about a statement saying we do not tolerate sexual harassment and or is it a policy saying that we are going to have a process for if it occurs, it will be addressed. Right? Those are really the two distinct things. Okay. Return with clarification of whether it's about um preventing it or address. Okay. All right. So 4950 is going to remain for review. Um okay. Facilities policies. We've got three. Uh maintenance of physical facilities 8560. We had asked that that go back to make it more encompassing using that phrase public school facility assets. Um we had value engineering and then we

077had wireless telecommunications facilities. So why don't we go to maintenance of physical facilities since we've already had a bite at that apple. So 8560 8560. Any comments to kick us off? uh Mr. Fris >> or the philosophy uh the Fairfax County School Board recognizes that school buildings grounds and employ uh equipment should be preserved in an optimum condition by planned and orderly methods um for the revisions elsewhere. Um, I'm inclined to not need a responsibility section because it is driven by the superintendent and regulations. Um, and it does depend on what it is that's being done, right? There are things that are the responsibility of the school to request. There are things that are done from central office. So, um, there's that. Um, >> it could be expectations. >> Okay. So, are we clear what

078needs to be recognizes? Okay. Is there anything else to be captured, Mr. Fresh? >> No, I think this covers everything that we talked about. >> Okay. >> Previously, >> any other comments? >> Just very quickly, I agree with um the philosophy comments. Um, is expectations going to be a new a new term that we're introducing to the bank or is there any space where this could work under either procedures or objectives? >> Which section are you looking to replace? There's philosophies, >> responsibility for maintenance. probably just responsibilities would be more in line. So making it responsibilities that's the >> okay >> standard one. Yeah. Okay. All right. Okay. So we're good with these changes and we reviewed it quite a bit last time. So without objection um the government's committee send policy 80 >> 560

079>> 8560 maintenance of facility physical facilities as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption. I don't see any objections. So 8560 goes. Okay. Um value engineering 8275. Let's do that one. 8275. Okay. >> Question. I do have a question about that one. The heat is kicking back in again. Um, so, okay. Now, we're determined to be warm. Uh, your feet are frozen. Oh, boy. Okay. Um, I can't find my value engineering page. One of my wonderings here regarding value engineering and again not knowing what the regulation is that goes with this because I'm just looking back on the debacle that was value engineering application at false church high school where this project was presented and then went back and value engineered and pieces were taken out and the presented project was already it

080resonated and people were married to it. They wetted it and it became an issue. Should we be speaking as to the state? Like I again I don't know if this lives here because I have no idea what the regulation looks like but I I'd like to ask the question in terms of when is value engineering going to enter the um the process? Is it going to be done before anything is introduced to the community? because after is disastrous. >> Yes, ma'am. I understand and agree. Mr. Gordon, do you have a sense on the value engineering? >> So, the answer is it could be. I think in best case scenario, if you know that you have a bid bus or a project that doesn't come within expectations for, you know, costing, then yes, you do it

081prior. But you're going through a design process. Typically, valley engineering occurs. You go through a design process, you bid the project out under under the old procurement method, right? Design, bid, build. You bid bid the project and you have a bid bust and you have to go back to value engineer something out to make the project awardable project. Now, >> so you're saying it could happen before and after. >> Yes. Depending on what what you know about the project at the time. Now we're using now that we're going towards a CM at risk where you bring in uh an owner's agent rep in that helps you with the the the development of the construction documents in the project. You you eliminate, you know, some risk of having a cost overrun and so you would know

082more on on the front end before you fully present. So, I think now that we're heading down with A240 with a uh procurement method of uh CM at risk, I think we'll know more on the front end than we have in the past. >> But it doesn't remove the risk entirely or not the risk, the potential the potential to have to u to require value engineering after uh >> that's that's correct. >> Okay. So given that I'd like to make sure that we are super clear here because our our policies it's a communication to the public as well as directives to the superintendent. What happened as false church is nobody knew that this would happen after the fact. So we have to find some way to articulate the language here that this is in various

083stages of the process. Where could that live? Because our public is not going to look up the regulations, but they're going to look up the policies. I think the implementation and I don't know if it's highlighted because we're changing the title term or not but it indicates that we'll that really every single construction project needs to be valueered as a standard practice and my understanding is that's been there period. I think the question you're posing is what is the timing of that? And um I think wouldn't that be part of the bid process too, Eric? Um but maybe some clarity around once the projects have been provided the community unless there's some huge compelling reason we would want to you know keep our commitment. So I'm just curious about your thoughts on that. >> Yep.

084For sure ma'am. So it's, you know, two parts. If you're, you know, see it at my risk that we're currently going through with a new procurement method. I think we'll know earlier on if there's a issue with the cost and we have to take something out. We also have a component where through our CIP process where we over the last year or so, two years where we're actually going out to the community and giving updates via the project on the front end. This is something that's uh I think we've gotten better at over the last year and a half, two years where we're communicating with the community on the front end uh during and throughout the construction process. >> I I'm sorry. I just want to be a little clearer because we saw the disaster

085that was when a project was presented to the false church community and then they went back and value engineered and components were taken out. People were very upset to say the least. If this is going to be something that is likely to happen, even if the likelihood of that is very low, we need to communicate that here clearly because I think what you're articulating is not quite matching what Mr. Gordon is saying, which is the risk is going to be lowered, but it could still happen. We just need to say this to individuals because it came across as a very as a big surprise and people felt >> some kind of way about it. So, where in here can we say that value engineering could be occurring at any stage? It looks like Carl was

086drafting something because he's never heard of value engineering either. >> Well, and I think you're both correct, right? We had COVID, we had cost escalation and budget concerns. So, but I'm sure Mr. Fr, I can feel it, has the answer. >> Well, he raised his hand. So, that was the hint. >> Mr. Fresh, >> pardon [clears throat] me. Uh, under implementation, I would suggest that it read, "The division superintendent shall establish regulations and procedures requiring that all school construction projects be value engineered as standard practice and that value engineered outcomes remain aligned with community expectations wherever possible with the community engaged and informed throughout the process. >> You want me to read it faster? >> Yeah. Okay, >> that's exactly what I was just thinking as my reference point. All right, >> sure. I'll also

087reread it just so people have it. >> The only thing I think it's missing is they'll be informed throughout the process, which is good, but they have to be forewarned that it could happen at any point in the process. Can we add some language that's a little bit more explicit there? >> Just a moment. Um, so despite the valiant efforts of Mr. fresh to edit on the fly. Do we want to come back to this one? Because we're also wondering if there are changes that could be put into whatever policy talks about the engagement process around renovations because we do talk about that. But also, it's 5:30 and I want to leave us time for the AI conversation. So, would we be okay with um capturing Mr. Fr's recommendation, which Have we done that, Mr.

088Fr? Not yet because of Dr. Anderson's comment. >> Oh well, at least the part of it, but then there's a second part too. So, um, okay. So, let's pause on the 82 8275 value engineering and let's also come back to 8335 wireless telecommunication facilities. If anyone did have comments about 8335, if you could, you want to send them to me. I'll shepherd them so that we can get that policy closer to where it needs to be next time. Okay. Does anyone want to take a a break? Stand up real quick. Want to stand up? Stretch. Okay. Are we ready to innovate? >> Sure. >> All right. So, we are going to do something that we've never done before, which is create a policy for which there is no template. So, >> have any draft at

089all? Um we're going to start with the discussion today in talking about you know first of all we have some lessons that we could we could look to. We've done the comprehensive boundary policy change the grading policy. So we know about you know how we want to engage and the kinds of things that we want to be you know doing. We might have thoughts about the engagement process. How do we want to engage the board uh the public? But also a lot of us are coming to AI with different experiences and so thinking about what information that we want to know more about as a board as individuals. You know, we have our meetings planned from now through May 19th. And so if we want to get something to the board to approve, uh you

090know, May 19th is that last scheduled committee date, we could certainly add meetings. But so here is meant to be thinking about how we've approached large policies before and how we want to do that as a committee, engaging the board, engaging the public, providing in this conversation some direction to the superintendent to say we need more information about you know XYZ. Um again this could be reflective of past policy creation work or knowing that this is a new area that we're still learning about. [clears throat] We can talk amongst ourselves around the categories. We've heard lots of different things, you know, um workforce development, data security, uh lots of, you know, we could throw out those buckets and start to talk about what would we want to see a policy include? What does the board

091need to understand to develop a strong policy? So again, our superintendent has put some work out there, but now this is the time to really say, you know, in order to do this policy, we really need to know, you know, this or that, hear from an expert. What should we even be doing for the next month as we prepare for February 17th meeting? And then again, what is it that we're even looking to implement in the new school year? What about this policy is going to come through in students and staff experience in time for the school year? Yeah. Dr. Mr. Fish, did you have your placard up? Yeah. >> So, I appreciate the want to be falsome in our considerations here. Um, all of the mentioned previous efforts though started with a draft. Do

092we have a a draft policy of any kind for it? We are going to start with a conversation rather than start with some We want to start with something of our own creation. That's fine. From the ground. >> You're using the royal we for all of us. >> Sure. Well, I want to start with the conversation with >> Were you shared a draft from somebody? >> I was given a draft that I didn't realize I even had. I don't know know how I even came to have it and I haven't looked at it because I think it's important for us to come with this with a fresh mindset because it's the board's policy and we only get to do this one time. >> With all due respect, we can't say this is the board's policy

093and then put high expectations on what the superintendent is supposed to think about in bringing it to us at every single one of these meetings. If it's the board's policy, it's always the board's policy and we shouldn't be asking the superintendent to go out and do work for us. I don't think that's where we want to end up as a board because we get tremendous value out of the superintendent's work to help develop suggestions that we then maul and kick the tires on. Um I I would appreciate it if we were at least forwarded uh what was shared with you. >> Sure. I honestly do not know how I I was looking in my Google Drive and it came there. So, I really don't know. And I've said to the superintendent, the governance committee needs

094to consider a lot of different perspectives and I think we deserve the opportunity to just talk a little bit before going right to the superintendent's recommendations. >> So, I'm happy to send it to you. I wanted to give us the chance that we can't do this fresh after tonight. So, yeah. Dr. Anderson. >> Um I I know when we had the the grading policy, we kind of went round and round and round with the draft that was in front of us and then at some point we kind of paused. It's like what is it that you're looking for this to have? And that was a very helpful exercise for me um particularly same thing with the boundary policy there. there was an and I wasn't even on governance but that was how I recall the

095first meeting going which is what are the big buckets that we want to have included in here and those big buckets were shared and it went on to just inform the policy. So I think there's some value to just kind of thinking out loud a little bit because what I think it avoided is missing the mark entirely because when we're writing about and this is brand new so we don't have you know anything per se to kind of already talk about or to think about but sending the superintendent on a wild goose chase is never a good use of time. So even a very preliminary conversation in terms of these are the things that we're thinking about, these are the things that our constituents are thinking about, I think it will be very helpful to

096kind of at least have that um that data dump for a lack of better words just to help with a draft that we could look at at our next meeting. So I appreciate the opportunity, Miss Lady. >> Yeah, I too uh because I've asked before to the to uh got do we have a draft and I was told we were so I was surprised not to have it as part of this discussion so um I don't not sure I understand I mean here's the thing like we have an IT department who has a specific expertise just like we have an is department instructional services has an expertise so I guess I'm not sure why we wouldn't let them help guide the work. I'm I'm interested in the conversation. You know, I think we can do

097that. But I but I guess I just want to reiterate what my colleague shared, which is that yet I would like to take a look at whatever's been drafted. Um because I'm sure that even though maybe it's a shell, um it's being drafted by someone who's immersed in this every day all day and I'm not. So just, you know, welcome the conversation, too. But I'd like to see the draft. So it is a bit disappointing that my attempt to be innovative has been [clears throat] grounded. Um I think we all come to the AI work with biases. We all have it. And what I've heard um while the our tech staff may have expertise, our families also have livd experiences that they've been sharing. And so I thought it would be valuable to come with

098more of a of not having expectations for what should be in the policy and reflect on what we've been hearing which I don't even want to you know color the conversation but there are different opinions and the superintendent has one opinion and backed by a lot of expertise but our community also has opinions and feelings and so I thought it would be a good idea to approach it in a more pure way. So, um, yeah. Uh, Dr. Anderson, >> I I I I'd like to play [laughter] because I I I'd like to just jump in because we could talk about the talk and or we could just start to talk because it is 6:40. I'm sorry, 5:40. Um, I know one of the things that has come up quite a bit that I was thinking

099about as um, we were listening to parents that seems to be a huge piece. So, I'm hoping that the policy can be reflective of privacy issues, safeguarding information. Um, and I don't know who's taking notes for us on this. Is Jed, are you taking notes for the superintendent? Okay. um and is um getting into AI optional for students like can I as a parent opt out of that? So I think those would be important things to articulate as well as again this is not my space but I am learning a lot and I have read a lot and I need to know more. We need a very robust definition segment. I think you've even said it yourself Dr. that when people say AI, we may not be working with the same definitions and what does

100it mean to be concerned about large language models. What does it mean like what how is chat the chat GPT that we have different from the public chat GPT? So I would love for the definition section to really highlight what is it that we're looking for um here um and of course a responsibility section. This is a space where there's a lot of different parts. Some of it is Gotham's department where it's just the um logistics and much I think much of it is going to be with the instructional department like how is this going to get get to kids? Um I would love for us to be really explicit about our instructional plan. How are we going to boost up our digital literacy? because what we've had so far I you know it has

101served our purpose of physical tools but I don't know if it is as clear as it needs to be for the tools that will be available with AI um yeah and also what kinds of AI are we going to be using what kinds of AI are we not going to be using um what is the expectation of teachers because right now we're in the space and Dr. three, correct me if I'm wrong, where teachers are opting into the pilot. >> So, there there are a number of different activities currently occurring. Um, as I shared with Miss Marin earlier today, uh, our Lighthouse Schools project was one of our, it's now, I believe we're three years into that and that's our partnership with ISTY and AC or ASCD and one of the obviously it's to be

102a a front-facing um, innovation lab, right? Incubating new ideas. So to the lighthouse schools were optin for those schools and staff within those schools. Um there are also if you're referring to the current open AI uh chat GPT for educators that's also optin and we did u meet with all of our T-Specs and ESPITS our school-based technology instructional and technical staff so they can also be resources and we'll be meeting with principles as well on that topic but it's currently opt in because it's in the adult learning space exclusively the open AI chat GPT pilot. The lighthouse school's work is something, you know, like I said, that's been going on now for three years. >> Sure. So, that's another piece that I think we could have some robust language around. Um, where we are currently

103is not necessarily where we'll be in the future. So, this has to be a policy that speaks to kind of that timeline. where do we want to be and how we get there whether it's opt-in this year mandatory next year that's the regulation work but I I think those are the pieces that I'd like to see um and also a communication a community engagement component I I think would be important what can the community expect from this how are we going to bring them along as well because there's a there's an education that I think is important there and clearly when we had the December meeting where person after person who came to speak to us spoke with AI spoke about AI. Um how do we ensure that those kinds of concerns are embedded in

104here and and and addressed? So I'll pause here and hear from others especially since my time is up. >> Thank you Mr. Fish. >> Excuse [clears throat] me. A couple things I think about. Um on the data security front, it'll be good to know how our current data policies and uh trust policies which are trust policy rather which are agnostic to the technology. It's specific to the data security would play here. Um uh I also think that something you know looking at how our professional development policies might come into play here. I think the resulting policy should be platform agnostic and not lean too specifically into the technology aside from definitions. Um otherwise we're going to be constantly redoing this policy to keep up with the technology. Uh which is something that Congress has dra

105grappled with in terms of its tech policy. Um, I think there are things that naturally become thoughts about our work here that don't necessarily belong in policy, but do belong maybe in a follow-on that is proposed along with the policy. In other words, like a note on implementation, right? And that could include what kind of engagement we're expecting from the community. Um, you know, how the community is informed of this roll out, etc. Um, so that's my initial thinking. Uh, I appreciate the the want to, um, uh, pursue it in a more creative fashion. Um, some of us just benefit from, you know, benefit from having something to spark our thinking. Um, and the royal me, one of us may have told community members that the typical process is that we get a draft of

106the policy. And so I'd be looking forward to that. Um, and I don't have anything to share them from this meeting. Um, even though I told them that that's typically what happens. So that's my advocacy there was that I was expecting to be able to provide something to members in the community have it shared an interest and it also helps ground my thinking in the types of things that we should be thinking about. Uh I think there's a lot to this conversation that does not belong in policy. >> Yes. Um and uh you know I think it's essential that we have guard rails for students, guardrails for uh staff. Um how that impacts the SRNR and other aspects of uh uh the school division I think needs to be discussed as well. Um there's been

107a question about uh costs. Um, you know, so making sure that when we are communicating with people, they're aware that we have specific policies about the types of contracts that the board uh has to review and that there can't be some secret thing where, oh, it was almost nothing at first, but because it had, you know, different provisions in the contract, eventually it went over the price that the board has to approve and the board didn't get notified. That's all covered. We've already thought about those types of things in the past. So, um, this just some initial thinking. There's a lot of policies I'd like to drag into this conversation that are tertiarily related. Um, but that's my initial thoughts. >> Cool. Uh, Miss Lady. >> Yeah, thank you. Um, so I guess I when

108you think about buckets, obviously a major bucket is teaching and learning. Um I think about um I'm also to back up a second I'm a less is more person right because you know regulations detail things um and policy sort of you know creates the the guards and the framework. So uh one particular bucket could be like data privacy security and ethics. Um and then this concept of like AI for all which would mean like all students, all staff and families like a three- tiered approach to understanding. Um obviously academic integrity and how we redefine our work. Um another area that I think about a lot is um instructional differentiation and personalization. Um but I think that people need to understand that the that the the need for like the human in the loop. Uh for

109example, you know, this will never replace teachers. You know, we will always have highly qualified teachers who are going to instruct our students, but these are people who are going to be trained to, you know, leverage technology, um work smarter, um but differentiate the other buckets I've talked about. Um, I think that, um, like high stakes decisions like obviously grading or the writing of IEP goals, things like that, you know, you could use AI for data collection, you could use AI to sort of augment and help you, but ultimately those are human decisions, right? Like, you know, humans write IEP goals and adopt them. Humans are going to, you know, do the grading um, and, you know, disciplinary recommendations, etc. Um and then obviously this has been outlined in a lot of articles but you

110know the other human element of this is the the time it saves teachers. Um you know a tremendous amount of our teachers are are utilizing teachers pay teachers. And I I think that what we're doing at Fairfax is which is not, you know, um they're they're finding that as a means of working smarter, not harder because they're in essence using their own funding to purchase materials that are produced by other people. Um but that's not what should be taking place in our collaborative learning teams, right? like what we've the way I understand the work that we're embarking on in this county is that we're creating the the framework and the guardrails that we're all going to operate within that all teachers are going to operate within. Um and so as to not have teachers doing

111those things on their own. Um and again when it first came out I certainly understood it because of the time it takes to um you know lesson plan and and and also it's like run out of ways to innovate yourself as a teacher. So sometimes you're tapping into that because you're you've got an idea but you don't have to flesh it out. You know I see AI helping support that. So, I'm out of time. >> So, I have a few thoughts and um just, you know, from Miss Lady, you know, hearing as usual your expertise on how teachers work and how learning happens, you know, that's something that I don't have as intimately. And so, I just wonder is that something that, you know, we all should learn more about so we could really see

112like what does it look like to transform a teacher's work and save their time? like I can envision what it looks like on an IEP, you know, to do that, but not maybe the the collaborative learning team. So, I just wonder like how much do we need to know about what's happening now and where it could go um so that we we can see that vision. Um some of the thoughts actually is interesting the comment about the money. So you know our board is has a policy that we review contracts of half a million dollars and more but we don't have any policy about reviewing partnerships with entities that are valued at that or billion or billions of dollars and we currently do already have such partnerships and the board didn't have a role in

113reviewing the agreements or even knowing it and so I think the policy has to have something about you know recognizing that business is business technology is business and you know they have some great great things but our mission is to educate kids and that's not the mission of business and so we can partner but we have to I think acknowledge the risks and I think the board does have a role in reviewing you know something so I'd like reviewing partnerships of a certain size and being briefed on them. Uh, I was thinking about like what does it mean to lead in this area? And maybe leading in this area isn't necessarily doing all the things first to make it happen in classrooms. It's thinking about kids health and safety because what I hear a lot

114and when I looked at the Brookings report that I shared with you all last week, it's a big warning bell about the danger to children, especially with generative AI. And I want to learn more about that. And I haven't heard that talked about a lot so far in public meetings. Um it's been about yes, we want to be human- centered. But um I think it's important too perhaps to put in the policy. This is a slide from our October 7th work session where there are three types of AI and conversations in ed conversations. Future readiness of students um so that students know how to under you know how to use this the tools with AI in them um that maybe we don't even recognize that the AI is in there. And then there's the AI

115tools to support adults. And so I'm most comfortable talking about the AI tools to support adults because I feel like we can have sort of the most I don't want to say control but influence. We can require certain professional development. We can check for quality control because I am concerned about if people are just developing their own things. Well, who is checking to make sure that it's equitable and, you know, anti-racist and, you know, normed with state standards even? Um, I'd like to know more about the role of professionals like, and do we have an advisory committee? Maybe the board needs to have, you know, people advising us. Um, not just technology professionals, but other professionals in different areas. So, I'll uh I'll pause there and uh let's keep the conversation going. Uh Dr. Anderson.

116Yes. Just very quickly, Dr. Reed or and Mr. Smith, I I wonder if this is one of these um policies that the um regulation should be evolving along with because I remember when we used to have our meetings back here when I first got on the board, policies and regulations, they kind of worked in tandem. It's just a wondering. You don't have to expl you know answer it right now but I I think it kind of makes sense for us to know if it's not here then it lives here because as I've asked Mr. Solomon today what do we have in the regulations then we don't need to reinvent the wheel and the policy that's been very helpful. This could be one of those spaces if you had the bandwidth to help develop the regulation

117as we go along. It it's been informative when we've had that opportunity. Um, do I have some other thoughts? I I think we I gave the rest. Let me see. Um, trying to see what did you I I think I'll stop here, Miss Lady. >> Yeah, I was looking for the email that Dr. Reid sent. Um, I read the Brookings um article that you sent to me and I didn't I actually thought we were aligned with it. Um, so it's interesting. we can both read the same thing but come out with different impressions, right? I mean, I think the concerning thing is um the safety um given the percentage of our kids that are currently using AI as a companion um and their parents are not aware of it. Like I don't think our parents

118understand that. So part of the work we're doing will be to create I think Dr. read some kind of parent hub or parent community a way to teach parents around AI safety because you know the second you hand a child this which they all have done they're going anywhere in the world without a parent supervision if they don't know how to put things on their phone so the the as a former school counselor and a counselor at heart it's essential that we teach about safety around AI um and that piece of it uh and that was noted in the article is the number of people But but Dr. Reid, I think it was Friday that you sent us the study that had some other data in that. I can't find that particular one and I

119I I I didn't get through it. It's very meaty and and and there's a lot of information in there, but I appreciate that you did send that. Um so, you know, again, I think I think we all have the same concerns. Um, and I think that education is essential for every everyone, parents, our students, our support folks, our teachers. Um, but if we don't get moving with every day we don't have a policy, with every day we're not trying to teach parents, we're putting more kids in jeopardy because they're accessing this with no supervision, no guardrails. Um, so we've got to get I believe we have an obligation um to do good by our students and teach them responsibility. Um, I think another benefit to the, you know, us not having cell phones in schools

120is that our kids are actually learning to look at one another and h engage in conversations. Um, they're they're learning to be social and in ways that that that went, you know, underground, if you will. Um, as a result of being isolated during COVID and then coming out of COVID and then being masked and then being comfortable being unmasked. We had lots of kids continue to wear masks just because they were they'd rather not show their face out of insecurity. uh than maybe for for a health risk. But we we need our kids to develop self-esteem, strength of character, you know, all the things that make them strong humans emotionally, but we also need them to learn how to engage with one another. Um, and I I I do think we've turned the corner on

121that, certainly with our cell phone policies this year, but you know, we got work to do. So, I you know, I appreciate the conversation and there definitely are some buckets that we need to look at. >> Thank you, Mr. Fr. Miss [clears throat] Lady's comment about families made me think of something that I share regularly in my newsletters, at least I did when we were initially considering the cell phone policy about steps that parents can take immediately, right? To control their kids cell phones. Um, you know, how do you disable all of the features of the phone except for texting a parent during school hours, right? it's left on the school division to police that even though every parent who provides their kid with a phone has the ability to rein it in themselves. And

122so I do wonder as part of this and it doesn't necessarily have to be in the policy, but one thing I'd like us to think about is how do we help fill the void of information about this? not just about what we're doing in FCPS but you know what they need to know about their kids use of AI um kids are using it we know that adults are using it too even you know long before we partnered with open AI students were using AI and faculty were using AI maybe not in a structured or condoned fashion but it's happening it's happening in every industry so how do we demystify what's happening, what the rules are in FCPS once we have a policy and whatnot. Um, and ensure that parents know that they have a role

123in this too. Um, because there, you know, there's only so much we can do, especially on the companion part during a school hours. That leaves a heck of a lot of time for talking to a companion outside of school. um when potentially less policing is happening with their devices. Um so um I'd like to noodle on how we might be able to assist families with more information. >> Thanks. I um so Oh, is it six o'clock? Okay, I'll just uh finish up then with this second last turn. Um, so as I've thought about this and I thought about cell phones and our approach to rein that in and I think about violence and bullying, it really all comes down to the same thing, which is the pedigogy that is used in schools. How do we

124teach kids? How do we teach kids to think critically? How do we teach them to have social emotional resilience? I don't see this as any different. And so we need to talk about the things that make kids strong enough and sharp enough to make good decisions about AI and choosing it. But like cell phones, the technology is designed to be enticing and to keep you coming back for more. And children also have their brains are developing differently. I'm actually wondering what the effect of AI is on literacy. I sat with my son at his 504 meeting and we're going over his accommodations for dyslexia and one of them is predictive text. Well, does that help someone with dyslexia or not? Because we moved away from that style of reading of, you know, suggesting things, you

125know, that there's no research yet. And maybe he'll be okay because he's 12 and a half and he's overcome a lot of the dyslexic barriers, but would a first grader who's just learning to read? So, I would rather see us talking about how how are we ensuring that the level of what our adults are using is consistent and of high quality. And everything that I've I've witnessed since August, since I first read something in an infog, it has been very optional. And this is when Dr. Reid says, "Are we a system of schools or a school system?" And when I think again about literacy and how in one pyramid I had one school with 12 teachers trained in Orton Gillingham and one school that had zero trained teachers, how are we going to ensure that

126the quality of what is being used is high and so I think you know also but the professional development is optional and it's also the professional development provided in early January was by a company it was by open AI. So what are we you know what do we expect our school division? How do we marry the business part of it with what we know is pedagogically and developmentally appropriate for children and then add on trauma English language learner disability. None of that has we don't know those answers yet. So I'm not saying sit and wait but I think you know focusing on the adults is is really the way to go. Um, and I think it needs to be much clearer. It's just been too much information coming in spurts and fits and starts. And

127I'd really like to see the superintendent and board working on this together. So, however the policy can speak to that work. And again, I think it comes to us approving things, that's the way we get things in front of us. So, I will leave it at that. Miss Lady, do you want another comment? >> Well, I just want to say that in terms of, you know, we're a huge school system, right? So, I'm thinking back to, you know, when we were first getting a student information system that was electronic, right? Um I remember I forget maybe it was CIS that Woodson was one of the schools that piloted it, right? Because one of the reasons that you do this and you and you it's choice to opt in because it's extra work is you're trying

128to determine it's sort of two steps forward, one step back, right? like if they rolled out cyst to the whole county the way that it was packaged it would have been a colossal train wreck and so I am very supportive of the idea of piloting things because it's it's it's a learning by doing but it's also protective because it's it's you know we we we want to make sure we understand with fidelity how this when implemented correctly all all boats rise right like all students are accessing learning and and all those things are taking place. So, I think there's a timeline every time we engage in these things. It's just like piloting a course. I mean, MLAN High School piloted AP pre-calculus in a vacuum and then had highest scores in the in the country

129and now we've now every school has that. So, I I think that part of this will always be continued. I I don't ever want to see us roll something out to 200 schools like like this. That's just my my hesitancy. I think that would be reckless of us. I think we have to dip our toe in things and let certain people who are early adopters perhaps work with it and provide feedback to it feedback to is feedback to ba based on interactions with families concerns. I think we grow from that. >> Hey Mr. Fresh, do you want to wrap it up? No, we're done. Okay, so let's be clear on our next steps. Thanks for I'm sorry. Thanks for the few extra minutes. Um, okay. So for February, uh February 17th is our next meeting

130and um let me just look here. So we'll come back to the four policies that we touched on today but didn't get through. We'll continue with the AI policy and you know we can obviously Dr. Reid, please send your draft out, but also we'll gather the notes so that we can it can continue to inform. Well, I don't know if you want to send the draft out now or if you want to reflect on it given what we've just provided with the further, you know, thoughts and directions if that's all, you know, if that is all captured in your policy. Um, but can we be clear about that and what we want then? I want to make sure that we're proceeding in a way that everybody wants to. So for the AI policy, do we

131want to have the superintendent consider what we share today, revise her draft and send it to us, you know, as as soon as possible? Do you want to see it now? What what are your preferences, Miss Lady and Mr. Fresh, since you're here? >> Yes. And I think both are fine. >> Yeah. And I think that, you know, again, I'm I appreciate the exercise today. Um, and I think that whatever notes we have, I mean, if they're archived and shared with Dr. Reid and staff, maybe they look at their draft and then maybe incorporate some of the dialogue and then, you know, share a draft. I don't know. Just a thought. >> Okay. So, we will very soon after today receive everyone will receive the draft. So, Dr. Reed, you'll send it to the committee,

132please, all of us. Um, and we can get you the notes from today. Then we also have a few other things policies that are due on some other items and back to the groups of policies that we identified way back that could be tweaked and some that could require more. So there's really no shortage of looking at this but the focus is the AI policy and that's what we'll start with the next meeting uh to really start hammering it. But I hope that we can keep talking, you know, among us, we board members to figure out, you know, more of what we even want that February 17th conversation to look like. Um, just, you know, what kind of questions we might have and is there information we want to get and look into more. So,

133I will work with the clerk team to get all of our materials together. And I do have copies of a few of the Brookings pieces, uh, including an eight-page handout that they had as well. So, yes, Dr. I'm sorry if I missed this. Um, but you may have covered it, but if not, here's my question. I remember when the boundary work just started, um, one of the things that the chair of the governance committee at the time tasked the group with is to go reach out to other board members just to preliminarily get some feedback. Are you looking for us to engage in a similar activity? >> It sounds like a nice collaborative idea. Um, I think it's always encouraged. Um, well, why don't we let it simmer a little bit and then, excuse me,

134[clears throat] we'll get the draft out. We can certainly divvy up. I mean, we thankfully having a whole another month before the next governance committee meeting. This was a bit hectic since we just had one two weeks ago. So, um, yeah. All right. Well, with that at 608, the governance committee is adjourned.