001Wondering. Good afternoon. My name is Kathleen Brown, chair of the Virginia Beach School Board. And I call this meeting to order at 400 PM in accordance with the schedule of schoolboard meetings approved by the school board at their January 13, 2026 organizational regular meeting. And pursuant to bylaw 146 in Virginia code 2.2-3707, the school board will hold a special meeting on Tuesday, March 3rd, 2026. The purpose for this special meeting is for presentations and discussions on Mercer update budget workshop number six and technology in K through2 and the fiscal year 2627 schoolboard proposed operating budget and fiscal year 2627 through fiscal year 3132 capital improvement program discussion by schoolboard and school administration. Please join. Oh, madame clerk, would you please announce the role? Thank you, Madam Chair. Present in the schoolboard chamber are Chair Brown,
002Vice Chair Williams, Mr. Bowensteel, Mr. Ken, Mr. Cummings, Miss Felton, Dr. Green, Miss Melnik, Miss Rogers, and Miss Dwire. Thank you. Please join me in a moment of silence followed by the pledge of allegiance as you are able. Pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. So we are now on to the adoption of the agenda. I call for a motion to approve the agenda as presented. Moved by Mr. Ken, seconded by Miss Dwire. Any discussion? Seeing none, I call for the vote to approve the agenda as presented. So Madam Chair, we have 10 eyes. The motion did pass for the adoption of the agenda as presented. Right. Thank you. We
003are now on to the Mercer update and we welcome Crystal Pate, chief financial officer. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Brown, Vice Chairwoman Williams, schoolboard members, Dr. Robertson. Um, with me this evening is David Kio. He's a principal with Mercer and also Linda Matkins who's the director of consolidated benefits. Um, Mr. Kio will be providing an update, a financial update based on the claims experience through December 31st, 2025. And so, I'll turn it over to David. All right. Uh, thank you all very much for having me back to discuss the financials for uh, 2026 and 2027. So, uh, first I'll just I'll start with just a brief recap to refresh on some of the terms that you'll that you'll hear. So as we talk about funding the health uh health plan uh there are s three sources of
004funding the employer contribution the employee contribution and historically there has been some reliance on the health fund and the health fund is in in in this term is uh the amounts that have accumulated over the past where uh experience was more favorable than budget. And so that was a a accumulation into the health fund and there has been historically some intentional reliance upon that to to reinvest the balance of that health fund into the plan. And that uh was done in a a couple of ways uh but most significantly to subsidize the uh employee contributions. And so as you all well know that that subsidization was lifted for 2025 uh due to the fact that over the last couple of years the the claims experiences has increased and the uh balance of the fund has
005uh accordingly uh retreated. So we'll talk about uh the implications for 2026 and 2027 using the updated experience. So just wanted to just wanted to refresh uh on that. All right. So, um Crystal mentioned we are we use the most recent data that we have and right now that data is data through December of 2025. So, uh as usual, we've got all the details of our methodology in the appendix, but I'll just uh refresh for you that we um we use uh trend. So we apply that experience or apply to that experience a health plan trend industry standard trend that we see. Uh and the definition of trend is uh the growth in claims over time and that growth is due to a couple of factors. The two key ones are increased utilization and increases
006in unit cost. So we're looking at your experience. We're adjusting it on a per capita basis and we're using that to project forward. And we're using again that we always want to use the most recent uh data that we have access to. And so um I'll remind you as well uh we also so uh the health fund there there's uh essentially two ways that the health fund uh balance uh can improve and that is uh as I described if the claims experience is favorable relative to budget there'll be an excess that's available to go into the health fund. Uh and then there is uh you know also specific action that um that the school board may may or may not take that that could influence that. All right. So uh this exhibit I think will
007be familiar to you all uh with a couple of adjustments. We've uh attempted to simplify it for you here. Uh but if I could steer you to the 2026 column and specifically the numbers above the light blue line, that's where we're going to focus. And so again, we've used data through December of 2025 to project the gross costs that we expect to be incurred for the full 2026 plan year. And you'll see that figure is 128.3 million. We didn't uh I I'll I'll do my best not to compare every figure that I cite here to what what it was last time, but I will I do want to share with you the the good news that uh that figure improved by about a half a million dollars from the projection that we did utilizing data
008through November. So that one $128.3 million is the total based on all the data that we have available that we expect the 202 2026 plan year to cost. So where and how will that be funded? Uh so the next line there employer contributions 103.5 million that's unchanged from the recent projection as is the employee and retiree contributions at 17.5 million. uh that's unchanged. Um we also knew and projected uh a reliance on the health fund at 7.3 million. So those are the three components that sum to 128.3 million for the 2026 uh calendar year. So, if we look specifically at the health fund, so I'm in that first 2026 column below the the light blue line, the health fund balance as of December 2025, the end of December is $13.3 million. U and and we
009were advised that the the u the school board was going to infuse $5.8 million of funds that were available through the through the reversion process. And so we've added that into the calculation here. And we expect uh an additional draw down of the health fund based on the projection of 128.3 million of uh of $7.3 million. And so the estimate of that health fund balance at the conclusion of the 2026 plan year is $1.8 million. And so we've talked in the past what what do we want that number to be? What's the ideal number? and and the the the industry best practice is to have a reserve of uh approximately 212ths of the gross cost. And so based on the revised estimated gross cost of 128.3 million uh 212ths of that is 21.4 million. And
010so uh right now there's a deficit of about 9.6 million. So uh I think that's about uh 55% of the targeted reserve. So that number is uh it's not ideal but um there are ways that it can be improved and part of that is to build some prudence into the projection. So we'll talk about 2027 uh in just a just a moment here. So, um, one, uh, one quick comment about 20, uh, 2026. So, uh, if I can draw your attention to the 17.5 million in the 2026 column, the employee and retirey contributions, uh, when you look at the total estimated cost for 2026, that figure that will be funded by employees and retirees is about 13.6% 6% of the total cost. So just just mentally file that away and then we'll talk about 2027
011and I'll tell you why that figure might be a a good frame of reference for you. All right. So we had previously provided uh projections for 2027 as well and uh as with 2026 we updated that projection based on uh the most recent data and in fact that also um improved by about a half a million dollars to $139.7 million. So I'm in the very first column there uh gross cost. So you'll see all the way across those three columns, the projected gross cost for 2027 is about 8.9% higher than 2026. Uh it's at that 139.7. And so let me first make a make a comment about these three columns here. So right now no decisions have been made about the 2027 employee contributions. These are strictly hypothetical uh for deliberation. We have regular meetings
012with the benefits executive committee and we want to provide as much data to you all so that you're aware of what the financials look like. Uh but I'll emphasize that no decisions have been made at this time. Um all right so so what are these three scenarios? So you'll see a column uh 0% 10% and 15%. the in the first column there that represents a scenario where employee contributions are unchanged. So they increase by 0%. There's no change. So the 17.5 million from the 2026 column is carried over. We already talked about the fact that the total gross projected costs increased by uh to $139.7 million. So in this scenario, the employer would would have to make up the difference. And so that increase is or that amount is $122.2 million. And so that's about
013that's about almost a $19 million increase or or 18% over uh the the uh 2026 level. So again, these scenarios are being provided as a way to consider what are the ramifications of making one decision versus another and and and what's what are the financial uh constraints that result. So as you go down, so in this scenario now, recall that the intention is to preserve the existing health fund balance and potentially grow it. So that means that there will be no reliance on the health fund and so there are instead of three sources of funding there are two sources of funding or 2027 and that is the either the employee or the employer. Uh so again we've chose these scenarios of increases to the employee contribution the balance falls to the employer. So if we
014stay in that 0% column uh the health fund balance of 11.8 million we're not going to rely on it. Uh that's that's the figure that we're projecting for the end of 2026. Uh so that's where where it would start. We're not going to uh there this exhibit here reflects no contribution to it and no draw down of it. So it's going to be 11.8 million at the end of 2027 under this scenario. Um, and then you can see there the resulting uh it it will be unchanged for all of them, but you'll see that um it's about 11.5 million below the targeted 20 23 uh.3 million uh fund. So again, just as a reminder that that fund can uh can improve uh by a couple of ways. One would be a contribution not unlike what
015you made with the 5.8 8 million uh in 2026. Uh but also improvements in the plan performance relative to the budget. And so uh you'll recall I think we spoke last time that uh we have uh refined our our trend percentage that were built into the projection and we've also included a 2% margin as uh as as prudence diligence for the projection um for 2027. So the second 2027 column you'll see there is is 10%. So that represents uh an increase of employee and retirey contributions from 17.5 million to 19.2 million. Under that scenario that $19.2 million if you do the math 19.2 divided by 139.7 that is 13.7%. That's why I previously uh emphasized the current percentage of the total plan that employees were asked to pay in 2026. That figure was 13.6. This
016scenario is is virtually right on top of it, a tenth of a percent uh different at that plus 10%. Uh so if that were done, u you'll see that the the employer contribution changes to 120.5. And if and those all sum together again, we've got to get back to the 139.7. Uh and then no change to the bottom half of that exhibit there with the health fund uh being unchanged. Of course, it is the health fund is there by definition to account for um unfavorable volatility. So, so the uh you know the hope is that the projection is sufficient uh and there'll be uh contribution to the fund as opposed to additional draw down. But uh as it stands we we are projecting no impact under under each of these scenarios. All right. So that
017that is the uh the scenarios based on the plan year which is the calendar year January through December and we also do the exhibits uh the exact same exhibit for the fiscal year which is the period July through June. Uh yes you have a question if it's not inappropriate to ask uh it's fine with me. Yeah you just need to turn your microphone on. I will be happy to let me bring you back to column 2026, David, to make sure I'm following you. You made reference to the employee contribution of 17.5 million and indicated that that represents 13.6% of the cost. But are you referring to 13.6% 6% of 128.3 or 121. Uh that that's a good question. I'm referring to the total cost of the plan which is 128.3. Okay. Well, the reason I'm
018asking is that as I try to figure out where the puzzle pieces were set on the board, I come up with 17.5 out of 128.3 million is 19%. Not 13.6. So that's where I was puzzled out of um so the 17 point so the yes so so we're in the transition year where the health fund will not be relied upon. So there is no balance or no reliance in 2027. So the frame of reference for what portion employees pay of the total and the total is inclusive of employer employee and health and health fund balance for 2026. Yeah. Got it. Thank you. So, as as far as they're concerned, um employees won't necessarily draw a distinction between funds that are employer versus health fund. They they just know that they don't have to pay them.
019So, that's that's the I'm I'm simplifying it, but just keeping it in terms of of how they would see it. Thank you. Okay, so this exhibit is uh is the same that we just looked at simplified to just have 26 and then the three scenarios for 2027. And I uh I think I I failed to mention maybe it was obvious, but 2025 we were previously showing 2025, 2026, and then 2027. 2025 given the fact that that plan year is complete and done. Uh we are not showing that here. That's the the the books are essentially closed on that. Um so for the fiscal year you'll you'll recall we're we're ending the period in June whereas the calendar year plan we were ending in December. So the calendar year the plan year was further out into
020the future. Uh and so you'll see here the updated projected gross cost for the fiscal year ending June 30th, 2026 is 123.2. That is lower for uh for a couple of reasons. One, I just mentioned it's not going out as far into the future, so we're not adding as much um trend uh adjustment to it. And then also it doesn't in include the claims that will come in in the latter half of 2026 and and that notion of the fact that the plan pays a higher percentage as employees meet their deductible and their out-of- pocket maximums as the calendar year proceeds. Um so we've used the exact same claims experience to make the projection for the fiscal year that we did for the plan year. It's just a timing the period for which we're projecting
021is is is nearer. And so you can see in the results. So we'll go down and uh fiscal year 2026 column. The projection is 123.2 and there's three sources of funding in 2026. The employer contributions at 102.3. Employee and retirees will contribute 14.3. And that and that total uh sums to 116.5. And then there is a reliance on the health fund of 6.7 and that sums up to the total adjusted or or updated uh gross costs. And so that health fund balance as of December 31st was 13.3 million. As we referenced, we've acknowledged the infusion of funds. And then for the remainder of 2026, we're anticipating about a a.7 million $700,000 uh draw down from the health fund. Uh and that balance leaving the balance at 19.8. So for the fiscal year, uh it's it's
022about 90%. It's covering about 90% of the targeted figure. And so each of the scenarios now we're we're when we look at uh fiscal year 27 so that would end in June that would have six months of 2026 contributions that are known and six months of 2027 which as we we referenced the no decisions have been made on that but the three scenarios are reflected here. So each of these columns is a blend of six months of known contributions and six months of hypothetical contributions as uh as as titled in the three columns there. And so you can see in the in the uh the fiscal year uh at the 0% so that's if with the employee contributions are held flat uh it flows through and the the health fund balance is 18.4 million. Well,
023we're not we're essentially not relying we're not relying on the health fund in this scenario for 2027. Um there is still an additional um one $1.4 million draw down uh leaving it at 18.4 4 million. And and the rest of those figures will not change regardless of the contributions because again we're the scenario the dependent variable is the employee contributions and then the uh whatever's left will be funded by the employer in each of these exhibits. So I'll I'll pause there. The the the the comments um relative to the different scenarios would be similar to to what we talked about in the plan year. Um and that's where the the the contribution decisions uh that will be made in the in the near future will um will affect the the the plan year precisely for
024all 12 months. Um and and I'll share too. So uh so we gave you the last meeting we had a had a discussion we used data through November. This is data through December. Um Dr. Robertson has also requested that we continue monthly updates and we're going to do that and culminating in uh the use of March data to uh to finalize the uh the rate decision. So we'll have that that look um that'll that'll inform deliberation that may occur between between now and then. And using that March data we'll there's a little bit of a little bit of a lag in getting the data then doing the analysis. Um but but we'll we expect to have those uh that information for decision making in in May. Um okay. So that's that's all I had. Like
025I said, we simplified the the uh the exhibits a little bit, but I'm I'm happy to entertain some more questions and uh the methodology detail continues to be in the appendix. Thank you, Miss Melnik. So aside from the numbers um in the assumptions and methodology appendix the first the first bullet um states that projections are based on monthly claims data through December 2025. So I'm trying to So I'm just trying to think kind of globally when it comes to predicting in the insurance world, do they also use besides claims and what you say current trends, do they use the release of medical studies um as part of their thinking like what might happen. So, for example, there was a recent study about the rise of colon cancer in young adults. Are all of those factors
026all of those things factored into the guest work behind you're nodding your head? Yeah, that's a really important really important question. We we uh at Mercer have actuaries that take all known information. So, we're looking at our database of clients and the experience that we see. We have conversations with all of the large national and regional uh health health plans uh to get at just that. So we want to know what did the data say the the trends are uh and then also importantly what you describe what developments do we need to factor in to come up with a range. And so that includes um new treatments for old conditions, um new conditions that need to be treated, development of of of new pharmaceuticals and and and all of that. So very important. So you
027know, I know we've talked about in the past the importance of this. I mean, these are we we talk a lot about numbers, but but these this health plan, your health plan changes people's lives and and cures really really difficult situations. Um the the the result is there there is upward pressure on cost. So technology has is puts downward pressure on cost in so many industries. Uh that's not unfortunately the case in healthcare. Okay. So then I if those things are happening um within your self-funded division then of course that's what's driving up the costs even more. and kind of gives us dings if you will when it comes to our projections yeartoyear. Correct. Okay. That's right. That's right. Thank you. Okay. So, I have some questions related to slide four. If you wouldn't mind
028flipping to that. And and while you're um getting there, there we go. Um I brought this up last time that we had a similar presentation um the same slide like this because uh maybe I'm on the wrong slide. I'm sorry. Slide five. Okay. So my concern is is that it appears as though we are still drawing down the fund balance and it does not appear as though there is any plan uh to stop that from happening. Um and maybe Dr. Robertson can weigh in. I don't know if the numbers in these two charts here include the stuff that is in our proposed budget or not. Um, but my concern is that it looks like we're still drawing down and if my assessment's incorrect, um, any more information you could provide would be great. Yes. So,
029so you're you're absolutely right. it does show an additional um uh draw down in 2026. So 2026 contributions are set were set in advance of of the year and uh and there's no action that can be taken to address that fund. So we're projecting the impact to the health fund. Uh but it's not not able to be to be impacted. And so when we switch to 2027, that's the transition that has to be accounted for that um that that where there's no reliance on the fund. Yeah. Right. So I I think my concern is here on this slide five is actually when I am looking at 2027 that if I may that includes 2026 so fiscal year 20 okay that's that's why fiscal year shows that because it's including 2026 the last half the last
030half of 2026 okay so we are not planning to continue to draw down I just want to make sure that we're continuing to shore that health fund balance up because that's that's what needs to happen so that we can get it as healthy as possible. Yes. If you go back to slide four, um that's where in any of the three scenarios, you're going to see the employer contribution and the employee contribution. And then if you drop down under where it says um health fund impact, there is nothing is zero across where it says draw down from the health fund reserves remaining to year end. Okay. I see. All right. Thank you. I appreciate um that clarification. Miss Rogers. Yeah. I just wanted to say the way it I see the confusion because the way it's
031laid out, it looks like we are drawing down $1.4 million. But I believe what this is saying is that we are $1.4 million short from the amount we want in the reserve and not that we are drawing down $1.4 million on slide five. Right. So the so the uh that is it is an additional draw down of 1.4 million and that is because the fiscal year 2027 includes 6 months of 26 but we're not going to be short basically we have enough money in our reserve despite the $ 1.4 million right the resulting balance once the 1.4 4 million comes out will still be 18.4 million. So we are still in the plus. This doesn't mean that we're going to be abs. Absolutely. That is just the amount for the remainder of the fiscal year
032ending June, right? So we're not at the target goal of 22.3, but we're not going to go to June. We're not. Yes. Yes. That's basically the bottom line. All right. Thank you. That's right. That's right. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate it. There's a lot of numbers here and I think it also helps the community um to make sure that they have a full understanding as well. All right, I do not see any other questions. So, we are now on to the budget workshop number six and we welcome Crystal Pack. So, good afternoon, Chairwoman Brown, Vice Chairwoman Wayne, schoolboard members, and Dr. Robertson. This afternoon marks our sixth budget workshop presentation. This afternoon's agenda is displayed on the slide. We will start by addressing any questions received from school board members. Next, I will provide a
033budget update followed by a review of historical health insurance information. We will then open the floor for discussion on the SEO and revisit CIP. And finally, we will go over key budget dates and outline next steps. So, as of the close of business on Friday, February 27th, we had received no questions from school board members. So, there are no questions and responses to share with you this this afternoon. So, moving on to the budget update. Uh, the House and Senate have released their proposed amendments to the state introduced state budget. It is important to know that these are recommendations only and some elements of the introduced budget may remain unchanged. This slide outlines key elements of the House budget recommendations. It includes the state share of a $1,500 bonus in fiscal year 2026 for state
034recognized SOQ instructional and support positions. Divisions would have the flexibility to carry this funding forward to fiscal year 2027. It provides a 2% salary increase in both fiscal year 2027 and fiscal year 2028 for state recognized SOQ instructional and support positions. It allocates a one-time $4.4 million flexible supplement in fiscal year 2027 with the option for divisions to carry over funds into fiscal year 2028. It designates $10 million in fiscal year 2027 to expand support for students with intensive support needs or CISna. It expands special ed add-on funding initiated in fiscal year 2025 to address JARK findings. It provides $347 million in school construction grants over the bienium, an increase of $127 million above the base amount. It authorizes a 1% local option sales tax for school construction. If adopted statewide, localities could generate over
035$1.5 billion dollars annually for school construction. And it pauses additional literary fund loans due to limited participation, allowing $172 million to be redirected to support teacher retirement costs. This slide outlines key elements of the Senate's budget recommendations. It also includes the state share of a $1,500 bonus in fiscal year 2026 for state recognized SOQ instructional and support positions with the ability to carry the funding formula funding forward into fiscal year 2027. It provides an additional 1% increase to teacher salaries bringing the total proposed salary increase to 3%. It increases funding for the special ed at risk add-on. It increases the infrastructure and operations per pupil amount. It increases funding for the special ed out add-on. It raises the breakfast reimbursement rate by 22 cent. It authorizes the 1% local option sales tax for school construction.
036And it endorses 274 million in non-general funds in the first year and 25 million in non-general funds in the second year to enhance support for school construction. This next topic is on the health fund and earlier just now you received an update from Mercer that included December 2025 claims data and health fund balances of December 2025. This slide provides some historical context by outlining revenues, expenditures, reversion, and fund balance from fiscal year 2020 through fiscal year 2025. From fiscal year 2020 through fiscal year 2022, revenues either exceeded or matched expenditures, which include health and pharmaceutical claims and administrative fees, and the fund balance remained relatively stable. After rates were reduced in 2023, revenues fell below expenditures and we began drawing down the health fund to cover claims and cost. The chart at the bottom of
037the slide illustrates the percentage change in actual expenses over the same period and reflects an overall average of 5.2%. As shown by the year-to-year percentages, you can see the volatility of expenses and how they can be subject to fluctuation. We are also sharing this information to provide additional context. At the close of fiscal year 2022, the fund balance was nearly $40 million, almost twice our current recommended reserve level, and gross cost has steadily increased since that time. During that period, teacher recruitment and retention had reached what could be seen as a critical point. In response, the administration of that time made the decision to substantially reduce employee contribution rates as part of a recruitment and retention strategy. It is important to know that that decision was based on a review of prior 10 years of
038data and during that time our health care health claims trend consistently per performed below Mercer's overall book of business and at times we even experienced a negative claims trend. However, as you are aware, claims experience changed significantly after that decision, resulting in an accelerated doll down of the health fund and ultimately requiring us to reverse course. So we just did want to provide that historical context for everyone. Once again moving on to the seon discussion at this time. Um this was presented to the schoolboard last week. The next two slides you have been presented um several times in prior presentations. In this one, we have redlinined and zeroed out the $250,000 line item that was originally included to assist in the unpaid student meal debt liability. To maintain a balanced budget at this stage, the
039$250,000 has been reallocated to the textbook line item as reflected in the box section on the slide. We would like to be able to open the floor for discussion as we move toward budget approval on March 24th. We welcome your comments, questions, and any areas you would like to review in greater detail. Miss Rogers. So, I have a quick question. I'm not exactly sure if this is going to be for you, Miss Pate, or for Dr. Robertson, but with the um with the House and Senate putting together a proposed 3% increase in salaries, uh you said it was for SOQ and instructional is that going to be on top of what we have already decided on or is that going to be included? So when when they come through with their recommendations 2% for the
040house and then that state money is already factored into our budget and then what we present to you for salary um um recommendations is money above that for non-SOQ positions. Okay. So what has been presented is included what's we built it off the governor's which is 2%. So if we get another percent from the Senate that would be new money. Yeah. Okay. That's what I was trying to figure out. So, it's not a full 3% on top of what you'd already presented. That 2%'s included. The extra 1% from the Senate is not. Thank you. I just need that clarification. Can I um ask what edupoint multi-tiered systems of support subscription is? Yeah. Mr. Jameson, do you want to take that one? Is that the total cost of that contract or is that an increased cost?
041It's a number one. Good afternoon everyone. It's a believe a 5% 3% increase over year-over-year from what we spent last year what we're spending this year to what we'll spend next year. So the 183,000 is the increase. That is the increased amount for the 2627 school year. Oh wow. Excuse me. Okay. So that's that's a pretty pricey subscription then overall. That's the total. Oh, okay. That's what I was trying to figure out. Sorry, I misunderstood. Yeah, that's the total amount. Thank you. Okay. And what do we what do we use that for? So all of our student reading plans are currently using or housed within that MTSS platform within Synergy, our student information system. Okay. So for data purposes we have 6,93 plans supporting 10,000 about 100 students. That was really good for being off
042the cuff. No problem. We talked about it yesterday. And three. Yes. All right. Thank you. I appreciate that. I was just um curious what that was last time. So all right, Miss Rogers. Sorry. I have another question. I noticed that funding for unpaid student meal debt that has come off and gone to zero. What happened there? So, as I mentioned, we zeroed that out because of the comments from the board. And then just to keep us balanced right now, we put it in the textbook line item because it is an item that we need and so we just so it stays balanced. So, we're just letting you know that's where it is, but certainly it's at your discretion. Yeah. And I want to bring Mr. Freeman up. um he's been working with uh a number
043of staff including school leadership and has they've created a really nice plan to address this school student meal debt. So we believe we have a solution. Um and so Mr. Freeman uh yes so in partnership with the dosel team we brought together a group of principles to try and continue to drill down uh with the uh resources that we have available. One of the big ones being communication um to uh try to address this and we're on a good path. Again, it'll take time to be able to work through it and once we get through a kind of a pilot program with those principles, rolling that out to other schools uh and then continuing this process to be able to see what uh what headway we can make. A lot of really good things that
044are uh being covered. Again, number one, all our kids are going to continue to get meals. Um, we're going to continue to communicate related to the outstanding meal debt. We have opportunities are coming up. We talk frequently about how can we get external support to be able to help us out with it. We brought in many different experts that are uh addressing the challenge. Okay. So, we're just rolling the amount in to keep the balance even, but we h have not figured out exactly what's going to happen with it. Well, we kept we kept it so we continue to have a balanced budget as any changes or recommendations are made and then we would make those adjustments and bring that back to the to the board for them to so we will always probably present
045you at this point with something balanced based on your recommendations since we have to balance before we approve. Okay. Thanks, Mr. Ken. This should have been something I should have asked a long time ago, but light bulbs come on at varying degrees at varying times. I'm on slide number seven. And since all of the revenue that's made available to us comes from outside sources and we receive what we receive and if it's not what we would like, it's what we receive. In other words, we don't have the ability to increase our revenues. But the point that page seven brings out is a comparison between the approved and amended fiscal year 2526 and how that compares to the proposed in 26 and 27. And then the final variance column shows us what the difference between the
046two is. But since we don't have the ability to control the revenues that we receive, are those numbers under the variance column just a reflection of what increases we're anticipating from those various sources? It is. It's what we know right now from the governor's budget, the former governor's budget. So certainly as the House and Senate go into conference committee and and then one of the dates is they will have to I think it's tomorrow they will be coming out with their what goes to conference committee for them to reconcile their budgets and then that will come to the new governor who will then approve that and based on that those numbers could change and based on the previous pages of information you were giving us the indication is they will likely be the recipient of
047increases even further. Would that be fair? They will have some increases. Yes. Okay. Thank you. And I'm happy to see in here that we have some increased workforce development um CTE path pathways expansion. Um I do actually have one more question for Mr. Jameson um related to the CHKD bridge um which I support by the way just in case anybody was worried about that. But um so we have the CHKD bridge program and we have Kosales and now we have you will correct and it's seeming to me like some of these may be duplicative in nature and so what's the difference between each one of these things? Sure. Um the CHKD bridge program back to our multi-tered system of support on a tier one level to go in order. Careless is available to everyone uh
048all students and all those who reside with a VBCPS student. And so that is accessible whether with a staff member or in the privacy of your own home to secure a mental health appointment. Usually about a two to three week process from when you start with your application or submission um to then securing that first appointment on average. Going to tier three for a second is where you'll find CHKD bridge program. It is designed for students who are at risk of going to a short-term or potentially even long-term stay at a mental health facility. And so though trying to prevent that from occurring, bridge program exists. We also have students who are leaving the Chemville Center or leaving CHKD's programs of short-term or even partial hospitalization. So to get them reaclimated to school, we have
049that bridge. It's literally the bridge program to get them back into the comprehensive school. you will is it's solely mental teleaalth so or telemental health that is more for your tier 2 so a student who might need or a family who believes their child would benefit from mental health supports there might be a delay if they have not used care solace but you know that we need them to be receiving services more quickly and more I'd say frequently that's where that tier 2 piece of whether you're again at home and it's only for secondary students um or working through a school counselor or staff member that you then use you will. So the difference in summary, you have the ability to connect with mental health supports through care solace. You have those who already have
050very specific identified needs of having been at a we'll say a facility and we're bridging either them not going or bridging their return to school. Then you have students who are just in need of support and services and you will can fit that in solely from again a telemental health standpoint. Okay. And that is grant funded. That is grant funded. Correct. Through June. Uh it's through June. Through June. And there uh Mr. Jameson has a mental health update uh presentation. I believe it's in May. It's in May. In May where you'll get details including usage details for all the various programs we receiving. Correct. Um so Dr. Robertson or Miss Pate, does this budget include continuing the contract with UL whether or not it's grant funded or not? It does not. No. Okay. And and
051this is and it'll be very honest with the with the board and well I guess the community this is a brand new resource you will in the fact that we have never had a large-scale telemental health provider uh in our area and having that level of a partnership. So this is a situation where as we look at this if the need exists to continue then we will reapply for the grant. If not we will find other ways to make sure that the needs of our students are met with the programs that we do have. So if the grant does not continue and we do not continue with you will we will still be in a great position to offer a lot of services to our students and families. And are those services being offered and
052these are just questions I've had from the community. Are those being offered during school hours or are they after school? There's only after school hours. So, weekends, holidays, and after school hours. Okay. All right. Thank you. Yes, ma'am. Well, I don't see any other questions at this time. Okay. So, now at this time, I will turn the presentation over to Miss Melissa Ingram for a revisit to the capital improvement program. Thank you. Okay. Thank you, Miss Pate. And um good afternoon all. I want to thank you for the opportunity to review the proposed uh CIP with you again tonight. So, as you may recall from our last brief, the first slide here shows our CIP funding sources. Starting from the bottom of the page is flat funding per direction of $61.94 million. Highlighted in red
053just above the total is a new funding source PEG fees or public education government fees. This is a new dedicated funding source for the related new CIP project 1-034. Moving up the slide highlighted again in red is PIGO which is planned to continue to increase annually with an equal decrease in the special reserve fund or planned reversion shown above the new PEG funding source at the bottom of the table. The remaining items funding the CRP as part of this proposed plan are bonds, charter bonds, public facility revenue bonds, and energy performance. In the green above, this table shows the proposed debt service plan over the next six years. Our current debt service budget is $50 million plan to increase to $80 million incrementally over the next six years of the CIP. This next slide shows
054this proposed debt service plan in graph format, represented at the top of the page by the red line, increasing in incremental steps from $50 million by $6 million per year starting in fiscal year 28. New on this graph from the approved CIP is the area in blue showing the debt service capacity needed for Princess Anne High School which is now fully funded in this proposed six-year CIP shown below the blue table area for Princess High School and under our current $50 million budget are in dark green existing debt in light green maintenance related projects and in tan the tri campus additions. Updated with the proposed CIP is the modernization replacement program highlighted in red. An updated proposed construction start for Princess Anne High School moved up to 2028 with a solicitation for a progressive design
055bill delivery model currently advertised. And our last table, the proposed fiscal year 2627 funding summary. Starting from the bottom of this table, the total flat funding of $61.94 million. Above that is the new CIP project 1-034 school cable access infrastructure and this is highlighted in the red. In the middle of the page are maintenance related projects which we've briefed you on in the past and these as these are a high priority for the school division in maintaining our existing buildings. And highlighted in red in the middle of the page is triampus additions which we are still on track with. And at the top of the page, again highlighted in red, is Princess Anand High School, which has been recalculated with updated info for a 2028 bid or GMP and is fully funded in this proposed
056six-year CIP. Uh, with that, I want to thank you again for uh your time and your input and direction over the course of this last year as we develop this proposed plan. And I'll now turn it over to uh Crystal Pate to complete the remaining parts of today's presentation. Well, uh why don't you hang for a second? See if they have questions on the CIA. Okay, sure. Miss Mel um sorry um Miss Melnick then Miss Rogers. Um you you said that the Princess Anne High School replacement is recalculated to bid in 2028. Correct. we we uh our approved CIP had it bidding about a decade from from then. So uh moving up to the progressive design build model um helped us to uh be able to recalculate that for a 2028 bid or the guaranteed
057maximum price we hope to achieve through that delivery model. But the bid not the actual construction. So the construction would start then we would go to 70% uh design by 2028. So lock in the price hopefully. Okay. and then complete that design to start the construction process if it was approved by the board. Okay. So, the awarding of the bid in 2028 and that's our start. Okay. All right. Miss Rogers, again, I'm not sure who is going to answer this. You, Dr. Robertson, there was discussion with regard to the House and Senate with regard to a possible 1% sales tax to go to CIP. And so I think it's important that should that be considered in our locality that our community understands what that tax money would be purchasing for them because it's really difficult
058to ask people to pay a tax when they don't understand what that purchases them. So should the locality decide to do that for our CIP, what specifically will that do to what we're looking at now? So, um, Miss Pate, have you been able to kind of calculate what a 1% sales tax might be? Yeah. So, we're trying to get a final number. We tried to get that number, um, when we did the PPE because that was, um, something that was coming through the general assembly at that time. Um, at that point it was, I recall it was about 18 million. So, um, we're trying to recalculate that now because certainly that would change. Um but it would substantially help um our CIP program along with other the the barrier the or the is it has
059to go to a referendum. It has to be put out to a vote um to the voters for them to vote on right that but that's why I'm asking so like we would be a I mean the ask would be to vote on this. So then you you're saying we're saying it would help. Can we give specifics on what they would see? Yeah. So the process would be first we'd have to bring this proposal to the board, right? The board would have to approve um for this uh proposal then to go to the city council and then the city council would have to approve it going to the voters and so we would make sure that and when we came to the board we were very clear about what the potential usage could be of
060the 1%. So again, are we looking at things like moving up replacing buildings, moving up maintenance? Like is are those the things I think we would be considering all of those factors. Um our our big needs right now is the sooner we can get major projects done, the less we're going to be impacted by inflation. So, school divisions that have used this 1% have accelerated their long-term maintenance um their construction projects and they've been building new schools um and doing so in a much faster manner because they're able to uh rely less on debt service and be less affected by inflation because you shorten the window to get things done. Okay, that's really what I wanted to hear just because I want to make sure the public knows that if we are asking them to
061do this, there will be an immediate result should they vote for it. Okay, I don't see any more questions at this time. Thank you. So, we are now on to technology and K through two. Oh, we're not just a couple more. It's only really quick. Really quick. I know. I know. Trust me. Um I usually wait until the end. So, just to cover a couple of things. So, we just um want to outline this um several of the upcoming legislative and budget related dates. And as in previous updates, we continue to share these with you um to keep them top of mind. As I previously mentioned, Wednesday, March 4th is the deadline for each chamber to act on budget and revenue bills from the other chamber and appoint conferees as necessary. On Monday, March 9th
062by midnight is the deadline for committee action on all legislation. Tuesday, March 10th, we will have a schoolboard workshop and a public hearing. So, we hope to be able to update you on some of that activity that occurs prior to that. March 7 March 14th on a Saturday, the general assembly is scheduled to adjourn Sindai. On Tuesday, March 17th, we do have another schoolboard workshop. And of course, March 24th is adoption of Seon and CIP. Monday, April 13th is the last day for the governor to take action on legislation. And Tuesday, April 14th, tenatively is what we're scheduled to present at city council on that day. And then, of course, by code, Friday, May 15th, city council has to approve the budget. Hey, can you leave that slide up for a second? Just a couple
063of things. So, um, I shared on Friday with the board some numbers potentially from the House and Senate. Um, and that was based upon my review and understanding of what was in those two documents. I asked Miss Payton and her team to go through those numbers and confirm. And, uh, those numbers are are lower than the 30 to 45. It's 8 to 23. So, roughly $8 million additional in the Senate and $23 million additional in the House. So, just know that. I'll share that with you. But I also share there's a couple of bills that are progressing that are going that if passed would have an immediate financial impact on us that are unfunded. So, there's an air quality bill that Mr. Freeman estimates would cost the division about $1.25 million a year. It is
064unfunded. There's an ADA bill out there that if passed would cost us, it could cost us another million dollars a year. that's unfunded. So when we finally get a state budget and we have additional revenues, there could be some bills that are impacting us that are unfunded that we have to uh obligate and allocate funds to. So there's a lot of things to happen over the next month. Um and our goal is to get that information to you as soon as we possibly can. So this is this is definitely a time where you want to check your email regularly. um when we send that information out so that if you have questions as you're trying to deliberate uh prior to March really 17th because that's really the last opportunity for you to give us any
065direction to make any adjustments uh for the final seon and CIP to be presented to you March 24th. So really March 17th is the last bite of the apple two weeks for the seon process. Of course, after that, there can be adjustments made based upon discussions with city council or if we don't have a state budget by then, but really the big one is March 24. So, any questions you have, please, and Miss Pate is going to go over that piece now. Yeah. So, also too on um it's important to note there's a 48 hour rule. So, if the general assembly is scheduled to vote in a journal on March 14th, um the budget must be publicly released for 48 hours before the vote. So if the general assembly remains on schedule that means the
066budget should would need to be released from the general assembly on March 12th. Um so conversely if necessary Wednesday April 22nd would be the date if the general assembly needed to reconvene but we we feel confident that they will release and adjourn on time and that that budget information at least um a higher level of that will be released on March 12th so we can get a good idea of what what we're looking at. And so finally, if you have any questions, as Miss Dr. Robertson said, please feel re to reach out. Questions can be emailed to Dr. Robertson, Miss Woodhouse, Miss Ingram, or myself. Please submit those questions by Friday of each week so that we can prepare responses and provide you something at the following Tuesday board meeting. Um we will have weekly
067workshops um continuing and leading up to the adoption of March 24th. And that concludes the presentation. All right, I don't see any further questions. So, we will move on to technology in K through 12 two. And we welcome Dr. Ryan Goldberg, director of instructional technology. Good afternoon. Good afternoon, Chairwoman Brown, Vice Chair Williams, Dr. Robertson, and school board members. My name is Ryan Goldberg, and I serve as our division's director of instructional technology in the department of teaching and learning. This afternoon, I'm joined by Dr. Lena Kelly, executive director of elementary teaching and learning, and Mr. David Den, Chief Information Officer. We will provide an update on technology use in kindergarten through grade 2, including instructional structures, usage data, stakeholder input, and funding context. Our goal is to provide clarity and respond to prior board
068questions. We will begin with current instructional guidelines and usage data. Then walk through what a typical kindergarten through 2 grade day looks like. Review instructional implications under different device models. Share stakeholder input and close with funding context. We are intentional about Chromebook use, ensuring students do not spend more time than necessary on devices. We hope this presentation clearly demonstrates strategic balance and purpose. In kindergarten through grade 2, technology use is limited, teacherdirected, and used for clearly defined instructional purposes. It is not a replacement for hands-on highquality instruction. Devices are used briefly and purposefully to support foundational skills such as early literacy, numeracy, and accessibility. We align our practices with the Virginia Department of Education guidance and distinguish between passive screen time and struct structured instructional use. Most assessments in kindergarten and first grade are paperbased
069with a limited mix of paper and digital assessments in second grade. Over the past year, we have reduced the number of digital programs available to elementary students through a formal review process. Each tool is evaluated for its instructional value and then compared to non-digital alternatives. As a result, we have discontinued several programs including Achieve 3000, Newella, BrainPOP, Smarty Ants, Stoia, and Prodigy. Our focus continues to be remained on our focus continues to remain on evidence-based instruction, including hands-on learning and instruction led by the teacher. As a school division, we are committed to monitoring the device application and usage to ensure alignment to our strategic plan and high quality tier one instruction for our students. On this slide, you will see the average daily Chromebook used for kindergarten through 2 grade comparing last year and this
070year. Our monitoring system called Lightseed reports average usage across seven calendar days. The chart on the screen is going to show you usage for 5 days. For clarity, both of the years we converted to a 5-day school week to better reflect what students are doing. Using that consistent approach, kindergarten averages approximately 24 minutes per instructional day this year compared to approximately 20 minutes last year. First grade averages approximately 31 minutes this year compared to 35 minutes last year. Second grade averages 36 minutes this year compared to 45 minutes last year. It is also important to note that the monitoring system measures what we call an active window of time. This includes periods when a device remains open even if a student is working on paper or engaged in discussion while the Chromebook has not yet
071gone to sleep. The the program says going to sleep is after 10 minutes of the device remaining open. Screen time data can also be impacted by remote learning days where students are likely on their computer for longer periods of time for at home instruction. There are also a few elementary schools that send their devices home with kindergarten through 2 grade students daily. As a result, these figures may slightly overstate direct screen engagement. Overall, this data shows us that device use remains a limited portion of the instructional day. This slide provides context for how technology fits within the full instructional day. In kindergarten through grade 2, students receive approximately 155 minutes of literacy instruction each day using approved evidence-based materials aligned to the division literacy plan. Math instruction accounts for approximately 65 to 75 minutes daily,
072excuse me, 75 minutes daily. Also grounded in evidence-based practice, students also engage in 20 to 25 minutes of science and social studies through inquirybased learning. In total, kindergarten students receive approximately 240 minutes of instructional time per day and grades one and two receive approximately 250 minutes. This slide shows the top most frequently used digital resources are Lexia Core 5 and Imagine Math, both of which are computer adaptive programs that are used during small group rotations in the elementary grades. An adaptive computer program is a digital tool that adjusts to each student's learning level automatically. For example, when a student answers the question correctly, the program will give slightly harder work. Alternatively, if the student struggles, it's going to provide them with easier practice and extra support. In turn, the teacher monitors the progress and then
073makes instructional decisions based on the student performance within those tools. Additional platforms such as Pebble Go support structured research aligned to curriculum standards and Seesaw is our tool for communication and documentation of student learning. The image that you see on the slide provides the percentage of instructional minutes on the Chromebook. Devices account for approximately 10% of instructional time in kindergarten, 12% in first grade, and 14% in second grade. I want to draw your attention that this is the instructional minutes of their core day. This does not include the minutes which would include PE, art, lunch, etc. The vast majority of the instructional day remains teacherled and hands-on. The next two slides illustrate what a typical day looks like in kindergarten through 2 grade. Students begin each day with a welcome and morning meeting to build
074classroom community, review their schedule, and prepare learning. Teachers then deliver engaging evidence-based whole group instruction across literacy, math, science, and social studies to introduce new skills and concepts. During small groupoup literacy instruction, students receive targeted support, enrichment, and intervention based on individual needs, including guided practice, excuse me, including guided reading, writing practice, research, and then programs such as Lexia. In math and content areas, student engage in hands-on activities, teacher guided instruction, and an occasional use of digital tools when aligned to learning goals. Students also participate in specials, physical education, recess, and closing circle. Devices represent one instructional tool within a full and varied elementary experience. If access to devices were reduced or eliminated, several instructional adjustments would be required. First, students would have reduced access to adaptive literacy and math programs that are currently used
075during independent work time while teachers provide small groupoup instruction. These were the programs that many of the teachers mentioned on their open-ended responses on the survey that was put out. Second, schools would need to increase reliance on print materials and vetted instructional resources to replace those digital tools. Teachers would also need additional planning time to design aligned independent activities that the students could use during small groupoup rotations. Access to developmentally appropriate digital tools such as Pebble Go for research would be limited as would access to certain curriculum embedded creation tools used for student products. Finally, any shift in device deployment would require adjustments to our remote learning continuity plans. I'll take a minute to explain that our team anticipates that if the school division is not onetoone at any grade level, there will be organizational
076implications at the school-based level. Currently, teachers are able to send devices home with students at a moment's notice. Without a onetoone model, schools would need a system for distributing devices and addressing decreased famili familiarity, excuse me, with the Chromebooks. These shifts could impact efficiency and in turn reduce instructional time during the school day. The final instructional implication encompasses the computer science and digital learning integration standards. The VDE adopted computer science standards that are currently in a full implementation year for this school year. In elementary grades, students will be introduced to computer systems, develop their understanding of how multi-step solutions are executed within computer programs, and develop awareness of safe and responsible device practices. On this slide, you see an example of a kindergarten computer science standard and a kindergarten through 2 grade digital learning integration
077standard. The information highlighted in yellow are shows the sample of the standard that we believe students would need access to a device to to fully to fully obtain mastery of such standard. We want to acknowledge that not all of these standards do require devices or onetoone activities. In fact, we also recom we we additionally recommend unplugged activities for some of these standards. Our digital learning integration standards are typically taught mainly in a whole group classroom setting with the teacher guiding the lesson without access to onetoone devices. For computer science, while many of the activities do in fact involve a device, this year we have emphasized the creation of unplugged computer science activities in elementary school. At the February 17th schoolboard meeting, questions were raised concerning how different device deployments in kindergarten through grade 2 might
078affect teaching and learning. To inform that question, we conducted two anonymous surveys, one for kindergarten through 2 grade teachers and one for parents. The teacher survey had an 84% response rate representing each grade level. The parent survey was available in 15 languages and received over 2,300 responses representing a response rate of 13%. The purpose of this these surveys was to understand perceived instructional impact if a shift were made from onetoone device deployment. Kindergarten through 2 grade teachers were asked how many minutes per day students typically use Chromebooks during an instructional time. In kindergarten, the largest group of teachers, 49%, reported usage between 21 and 30 minutes per day. In first and second grade, the most frequently reported range was 31 to 45 minutes. Looking at cumulative totals provides additional context. 79% of kindergarten teachers reported
07930 minutes or less per day. In first grade, 91, excuse me, 93% reported 45 minutes or less. In second grade, 83% reported 45 minutes or less. As you can see from the bottom of the chart, these reported percentages are in line with the actual usage data from Lightseed, which I showed you on an earlier table. These responses reinforce that device use in kindergarten through 2 grade classrooms is limited to a portion of the instructional day. When asked how devices are primarily used, over 90% of teachers across grade levels identified adaptive reading and math programs, which are the programs I defined earlier that adjust the level of difficulty as ones that they use frequently. Across all three grade levels, the four most frequently reported uses were the adaptive literacy and math programs, research, small groupoup differentiated
080practice, and enrichment. These uses reflect integration into instruction rather than open or unstructured screen time. Teachers were also asked to consider the instructional impact if Chromebooks were no longer available. The percentage of teachers at each grade level selecting each response is reflected on this slide. As you can see, a majority of teachers across grade levels indicated that they anticipate some or substantial instructional limitations could result. At the kindergarten level, the combined percentage for these two response options equaled 75%. Among first grade teachers, the combined percentage was 89%. For second grade teachers, the combined percentage was 87%. Based on how teachers reported using Chromebooks on the previous slides included areas that would be impacted the most would be access to adaptive literacy and math programs, small groupoup differentiation, and the research tools. When asked about a
081classroom cart model with 10 devices per classroom, responses were more varied, particularly in kindergarten. In grades first and second, however, about three quarters still anticipated instructional limitations. When asked which model they would support, a majority of teachers at each grade level preferred remaining onetoone. However, a kindergarten However, kindergarten responses were more mixed with a notable portion indicating support for a reduced model. This variation likely refle reflects developmental differences and classroom structure across grade levels. In addition to teacher input, we also gathered feedback from parents and guardians to better understand how they believe device access affects student learning. To provide you some context for the remaining questions, parents and guardians were asked about their familiarity with how the Chromebooks are used in the classroom. Approximately 85% indicated that they were aware of how the devices were
082used in the classroom. Among parents who indicated awareness, the most frequently reported uses were practicing reading and math skills, learning basic computer skills, and research. Again, these responses closely align with the teacher reports and with our usage data. Parents were also asked how they believe the removal of onetoone access would impact their child's learning. Responses reflected a range of perspectives across grade levels with no sing no single dominant viewpoint. This range reinforces that families hold diverse views about instructional technology and early grades. I will give you a moment to review this slide. We've now reviewed instructional structures, usage data, and stakeholder input. The final piece of context to consider is how devices are funded. Chromebooks for students are purchased and replaced using the technology initiative grant. There is no direct impact to the division's operating
083budget for these device purchases. If the board were to shift from a onetoone model to classroom sets, the amount of grant funding allocated to devices would decrease over the device life cycle. Over a six-year life cycle, approximately $2 million in grant funds could be reallocated within the parameters of the grant. On an annual basis, this equates to approximately $333,000. In addition to device purchases, there are accessory and maintenance cost such as chargers, cases, carts, and peripherals that are supported through the operating funds. The impact of a model change on those costs would vary. For example, shared devices may reduce some purchases, but increase wear and replacement needs in other areas. It would likely not represent a significant operating shift. Either way, as we've shared this afternoon, technology use in kindergarten through grade 2 is limited
084in duration, aligned to instructional goals, and integrated within a broader teacher-led instructional day. We've reviewed current usage data, instructional structures, stakeholder feedback, and funding context. Any change to the current model would involve instructional trade-offs and funding reallocation considerations. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you this overview and are happy to answer any questions you may have. Miss Melmik. So, at last week's meeting, we had a few parents speak and they talked about their kindergarteners, first graders bringing home their Chromebooks and they specifically mentioned throwing the book bags on the ground and in those book bags are these Chromebooks. That is not happening at every school, I do not believe. Why are some students bringing their Chromebooks home and is that a way to kind of end? So, let me and I'm going to stop that
085sentence without finishing it. The parents talk specifically about uh the competitiveness of some of these programs, some of which you say we don't use anymore, and they feel this need to get ahead kind of out of the out of the classroom to win badges and awards, whatever it is. Um why are the little ones taking home the Chromebooks and why is that only happening in some schools is my first question. Yeah, great question. There are several schools. Um, there's three that send it home total for kindergarten, first and second grade. It would be a principalbased decision to send those Chromebooks home. They might be sending it home for a variety of you reasons, maybe for enrichment or in extension activities or perhaps to use Lexia or Imagine Math in addition, but it is it's a
086sitebased decision, right? And so so the overarching thing for me here is equity first. Um and I worry about um some and not all, right? But more so in inclement weather opportunity. You know, the inclement weather is is real. Um we're a hurricane prone coastal city. Um our winters clearly are getting colder. We've had more instances of um asynchronous days this year as opposed to years past. Um we have more snow this year than we've had. And I worry about um students not being able to complete their school day whether synchronous or asynchronous um or in any weather type related issue. So there's that for me first. a a class set of 10 is not going to solve our problems when it comes to that. Um, never want to repeat COVID, but we were the
087division that kind of slid out in in first place when we had to oh that dreaded word pivot. Um, we we came out first in the state. like we were poised and ready and that's a and and we did really well because of those onetoone devices. Um yeah, the equity piece is really um important because a couple of the parents we we we've heard from um kind of name their schools and statistically speaking they're not statistically speaking they were parents who aren't going to have have trouble logging their child on on a missed school day and I think that's a fair statement. I think that's fair to our community. And I do want to remind everybody that 40% of our student population qualifies for free and reduced lunch. And there's one thing I think that
088will stick with me forever. And that was when Dr. Spence arrived and he did that poverty overlay of the map of the city of Virginia Beach. And it's actually very shocking when you look at it and you see the level of need in this community. And I would hate to be a premier school division who then takes away these opportunities um for some of our children who are most in need. Dr. Green. Well, Miss Melnik, you stole my thunder, but thank you. the the equity piece is is large. So rather than go through all that again, so thank you. Uh Dr. Goldberg, my um questions or or or editorial are related to when um and and Mr. Den may have to help you with this one because you may not have been with the division.
089I recalled when I was employed by the school division when we had the big push for integrating technology in all our instructional um initiatives. Um could you take a moment and remind our public um of the state requirements for for for use of integrating tech the some of the technology standards into instruction. TEP, the technology standards that the state required all teachers to have. Tep. You had to pass the assessment. That was before you, David. Yeah, that's what you're speaking of. Green. Yes. Yes. But um anyway, I I I feel that we I would be remiss if if if we didn't at least let our public know that there w there are state requirements for it and and as well. Well, Dr. Green, I'll respond because I think you're looking for the old educators in
090the room that went through those. But but I think what is important as we talked about TIP was what that training looks like compared to the instructional uh coaching we give teachers on the proper use of technology today. In those times we were very excited just to turn a computer on and show a kid how to use it. You were pretty much evaluated on a high standard if you could do that. Today it's much more how are we integrating that effectively throughout our instruction. And I think I'm hoping as you looked at the presentation and you read the comments that are in the survey of teachers saying we use them mostly on the adaptive end that meets students where they are and hits them with where they need to be or where they can go
091whether it's remediation or more importantly some cases enrichment. So I'll take that one as the T-P because I do remember taking those tests and in a computer lab with other educators that were extremely nervous about having to integrate that in their instructional practices. Thank you. And then the last thing um I wanted to uplift, I think some of our discussion originally started because people may have been under the impression that there was a significant budget implication. So I I certainly um Dr. Goldberg want to uplift again and and reinforce what you stated that um there that we receive these devices right on time through uh through uh grant funding which you know it's just a matter of us monitoring um the the funding and then I get very nervous when we start talking about consumables
092because I live in one of those communities that when you say consumables the path I have fear that it's going to be a pack of worksheets in a backpack um with the expectations that parents will sit there or and have to guide students through that. Whereas with some of the uh asynchronous lessons, you have a teacher that has pre-recorded ready to show because everyone um may not be able to guide their children um through certain types of instruction. And I for one I have a grandchild and I would not want to have to do some of the math and things that I see her doing. Thank you, Mr. Ken. Thank you for the report. I would like to make a statement and I don't want it to be perceived in any way as a criticism
093as much as it is a request for information. But throughout your report, and I've had this done uh by other reports at times, there's a reference to the terms that something is evidence-based, but there's never any reference to the evidence. And it seems to be a term that's used to add legitimacy or support to the information that we're receiving, but there's never anything other than the term And I don't want my spirit to be one that's pessimistic or critical as much as it is, and I'm not from Missouri, but I would like you to say, well, show me what you mean when you say you got evidence to support this. And the topics cover the wide spectrum, but they're never answered. And if we're trying to get more informed and aware and there's a point
094to the term to support as I say the legitimacy of the information help me understand where the evidence comes from. I think Lorraine Dr. Kelly the information Mr. C is looking for is available on the Department of Education site where they list those evidence-based practices. Several years ago, the Department of Education, to your concern, we were using the term researchbased, and it was like, okay, well, who's research? And so, it got ramped up to evidence-based, which is peer-reviewed research. And so, the state actually puts on their site now, so we're not going to answer the question. And we're going to send the information to the whole board with the evidence-based because there's so much information on that site that's going to be helpful to them more so than you standing listing three things. Mr. Call's
095question is legitimate. Show me. So, we're going to send them the link to the site that lists the evidence-based research. Thank you, Miss Rogers. Thanks so much. I actually have a lot to say about this. Um, so I have my degree in early childhood education, worked for the division, including during COVID on computers with my students having 1:1 devices and I currently work for the department of education conducting observations in early uh childhood classrooms, prek classrooms, infant rooms, toddler rooms. I have been trained to be um a trainer for other people who want to do that kind of work. So I I'm I'm currently in this field and so I appreciate my colleagues who reached out to me and asked for my thoughts and opinions on this simply because I I'm currently working in the
096field. I do have questions especially on slide 14. Um, it's really difficult for me to understand why there is such a high response of substantial and noticeable instructional limitations if we're only spending 20 to 40 minutes a day on Chromebooks. Why would there be such an high impact if such a small amount of the day is using Chromebooks? I can share. I think personally from being a principal and being an administrator the seeing the teacher impact when you're looking at small group instruction which is so important in kindergarten first and second grade when you consider that long period of time 60 minutes 70 minutes where they're working in small groups for literacy and for math a lot of that time the 15 20 minutes when they're on those adaptive based programs is going to be
097in that small group setting when they're getting that adaptive work right I think when you're talking for implications for a teacher when they have to consider something else that they're going have to find for those students to do during that time. That's where you're going to see substantial limitations for them. Well, it's interesting that you talked about something else to do for that time because I'm looking at all of the responses that we were given that you guys were collecting from this survey and I am actually shocked to see in kindergarten teachers saying 10 Chromebooks fails large groups hurting instruction. Having onetoone computers support students when they are doing whole group lessons. How are kindergarteners doing a whole group lesson on a Chromebook? I don't understand. We have another response. If they don't have onetoone,
098they won't be able to work on them all at the same time. If they're only using them in small group, they shouldn't be working on them all at the same time. And then another person um stating that it would significantly limit started student learning and processing when students and here's someone else. When students are doing independently, what students are doing independently while we meet in small groups would be significantly impacted if we no longer have onetoone Chromebooks. If students are working independently on their Chromebooks, then they're using them more than just in small groupoup instruction. And that's my concern. If we go back to educational theory, John PG, this is way back, who is the father of understanding that children learn through play. This is what they should be doing in kindergarten. This is what
099they should be doing in first grade. And while our Chromebooks are fun for them, this is not hands-on learning. And I will die on this sword that our children need handson learning. I I cannot overstate this enough. I understand that people are concerned about equity and I have worked with title one students my entire career. That is what I spent my life doing. These are the students that need hands-on learning, need face-to-face instruction. If they are interfacing in an individual basis in a and in small groups with a a computer, they're not looking at their peers and seeing the words coming out of their mouth and understanding how to even move their mouth appropriately to make a correct letter sound to make a form a correct letter word out of their own mouths. We need
100to have them in face-to-face instruction. And while I think that teachers do get some benefit, I absolutely do not believe we should be sending these Chromebooks home with our students even up to fifth grade. If we don't give homework, why are the computers going home? We don't need to do that. That is not something our children need to do. We talk about limiting their screen access with their cell phones, but then we're handing them a device and we have no control of what happens at home. And while that might be a parenting issue, it is still our device that we are giving to the children with no limits. And then as study after study shows, screen time, screen time in early childhood is essential, managing screen time is essential for healthy development. If we don't
101set limits, it can cause things like sleep deprivation, behavior problems. We are seeing an increase in behaviors across the division at the early levels in elementary school. If we want to do something about that, limiting our screen time is a no-brainer. And so I think that I don't really I realize that this is easier for teachers. There's a lot of positives, but I think at this point they're telling us they're not just using it for 20 minutes. They're giving it to kids on an individual basis. They've told us they're and and and this might not be happening in every classroom, but we should be delivering equitable education. So if not every teacher is giving it equitably, then we need to look at that. We need to be able to say 20 minutes is it. No
102teacher should be giving it outside of small group. Then no teacher should be doing this. And if we are only doing small groups, do we need a onetoone for a kindergartener? Nobody should be sending it home. It shouldn't just be well these guys do and these guys don't. That's not applicable. And if parents need interaction with a computer and the Chromebooks, they're only out. The city has other resources. These are supposed to be for educational purposes and we need to make sure that that's what we're doing. That's going to be my 10 cents for now. Vice Chair Williams. Um, thank you. I agree with much of what um, Miss Rogers just said. Yeah. Yeah. I was kind of confused because at one and and I think that we often do this when we try to
103make a point to like go the other way. So So now we're like barely using them, you know, like and so then my thought is okay, if we're barely using them, then why have them at all? Um so but I was very confused also on the small groups versus large groups. Um I definitely don't think they need to be going home. Um I don't believe that we need them K through two 100% K kindergarten and first grade I might can be convinced of a compromise for second grade. Um, as far as co how well we did, I think that's a philosoph like a philosophical kind of debate there because now we're we're we're dealing with the ramifications of all our students being on screen times non-stop, the socialization, the the inability to be able to
104um have tactile learning for for so long and um and the the reading skills, the writing skills, the paper to pen. So, so you know, we we do have some some negative ramifications that we have all all seen and learned and now we're pl trying to play catch-up. So, so that's kind of interesting, too. Um, research is overwhelming. I mean, I I don't think that that needs to be debated as far as how um screen time has negatively affected both adults and children, but mainly younger children. And it's been said before, sleep, just just um distraction, the gamification of of school, um reducing skills, um perhaps some behavioral challenges as well. So, so we listen to the data with the with the cell phones. So, I hope that we listen to the data for the
105um for the screen times. Um, so as far as learning, early learning, uh, I'm assuming that that these are the skills that we want our kindergartens and first and second graders to to build upon, and that is reading and writing, number sense, problem solving, um, fine motor skills, socialization. So in your expert opinion, if we don't have onetoone devices, is that going to negatively affect a student's ability to build on their number sense or problem solving or motor fine motor skills, socialization? I'm going to ask Dr. Kelly to support you with that. If if we don't have them the 23 minutes a day or whatever, my opinion in this matter is um that I like to look at the facts. So, when I look at this and I see when we're in buildings together, because
106I've seen all of you in buildings, what do we see? And you're right when you said we're on the devices for a very limited amount of time. I'm proud to say that when I'm in buildings, and I know when you're in buildings, you're seeing the same things, the same things you saw in those pictures. Our kids are holding books, they're writing on paper with pencils, they are engaging in conversations. So when I look at that, I look at the data, what is the data telling me? People can say things, we can have our opinions, but I know that our vows data, our so data is all showing us that our teachers are providing a strong foundation in kindergarten, first and second grade. And I want to make sure that we are looking holistically that we
107are con considering not just what good instruction looks like all day long. But we are thinking about providing them that opportunity to have access because by the time they get to third, fourth, and fifth grade, they are typing responses. And I I know um everyone's everyone knows we can catch up, but I just want us to think about it holistically. and my opinion is less important than what we actually see in the buildings. And that's what I see. I see kids engaging in hands-on science and social studies. And you saw the pushets for uh literacy. You see the manipulatives for math. We definitely display things using our digital components like discovery ed for science. So sometimes you do see our students who are engaging in um our earliest learners might be watching an experiment, the
108teachers leading it and they still have material with them. Just like when they're doing math, I know you guys have seen them. They're doing imagine math, but they have paper and pencil. And the teachers actually collect that paper because they use that information to help determine what the students are doing well and where they've made errors and how they're going to use that to drive their instruction. So that's what I'd like to share about that. It is that it's a definitely a combination of all things. So are they being used for whole class, whole group classroom instruction or not? So there seems to be a kind of because I I still if it's small group instruction I I don't know why 10 would not work. It is it is used for multiple things. It can
109be used during whole group time. Um we have digital access to text. You guys are aware of that. You supported us through our textbook adoption. So students have print materials. They also have access to the digital um resources and the textbooks. So there could be times where the teachers are using an artifact and not only are they displaying it, but they have access there. And then our days, you guys know how this is. We go back and forth from the teacher is leading it to a small group of instruction. Especially in science and social studies, it's kind of mixed. The teacher does some instruction, then you're in pods, you're in groups. So, it's it's not as clear-cut to say we are using it only in this way and we're using it only in this way
110because our instruction is very dynamic and is based on powerful learning experiences for our students. So, our teachers when they're designing those they can use a mixture of that. Okay. Well, I So, Miss Williams, if I can just to be direct in your answer your question there is yes, it does get used at times in whole group instruction. Thank you. And that total of minutes that you see does encompass whole group. So the example Dr. Goldberg mentioned is Pebble Go, which is a research tool that you'll see often used in our social studies curriculum that could start as a whole group. Take a look, search this, and here's what you're going to do. So I don't want anybody at the dis thinking that it's only small group. Okay? We trust our professional teachers to make
111decisions on how to best utilize the tools and resources they're provided. So you can see it whole group, you can see it small group, but that minute total is not just small group. That's whenever it's being used in an instruction. Okay. Thank you. Well, I would like to make a comment and I I guess maybe Dr. Robertson heard this and and you guys heard this years ago because I have definitely seen a decrease in the use of of these Chromebooks because four three or four years ago I would walk in a school and every classroom they were on computers. I mean seriously and then now it's not the same. So I don't know. Have y'all strategically done something intentionally because I I last year and especially this year um I have seen a total decrease
112and so can you just elaborate on what what intentionality that you've done um to make sure that that is happening? Yes, I mentioned in the presentation, but we have done a review of all of our applications and we've put them through additional lenses through all of our department of teaching and learning to consider do we have do we have other digital resources that we fully support such as Lexia, imagine math and those pieces where we don't need other components like the Nuzella, like the story, like Prodigy and Math as an example. Um, a parent last week when she was speaking mentioned Prodigy and mentioned some sites that are gamified as an example. Right? We've talked about let's use an adaptive math program that is division supported such as imagine math and let's physically block those
113other applications that students no longer have access to those pieces. So through that review we are seeing limited usage and those pieces are now blocked. Um we have worked at our ITS's in each building that if there is a site or an application that your your teachers are accessing and it's not on our approved list then you need to reach out to us and we put it through the software approval process. My team, Department of Teaching and Learning, even secondary, everyone reviews it. Then it goes to Department of Technology for security pieces. Through that, we have really honed in and tightened and aligned the resources that we're using. And we have provided some professional learning around those pieces as well. Okay, that's all. I might have something later, but that's all for now. I'll yield
114to the next speaker, Mr. Cummings. Yeah, thank you so much for sharing, and I appreciate Dr. Roberts and you also sharing the feedback from the parents and teachers um as well. I felt like that was you know really good for us as board members to go through and see the words that our stakeholders from both the community and within our profession were saying about um this topic and the fact that we had 84% of our teachers respond shows a significant investment by our staff in this issue. Um and you know some days as a board member I'm just going to be honest. I'm trying to sit here and think like what's the problem I'm trying to solve here. Um because you know when I think about education you know if I looked at it through
115the lens of business you know our product is education our profit would be our students learning you know and as you just I think eloquently spoke you know we do are we are seeing remarkable results from our product um from the outputs from assessments the data from SOS and so I kind of live life in this lens of you know being the importance of disruption and not always doing the same thing, but also, you know, if it's not broke, don't what's the why fix something? Um because those downstream effects as we're seeing could be significant. You know, I sit and think about my own community that I represent where we have, you know, board members here who also have very uh similar communities. One of my elementary schools has over 10 languages uh represented represented
116in its you know elementary school and one of the things I got to learn was that students were able to learn or listen to you know coursework in their native language like speak to me a little bit more about that. Um because I'm sitting here thinking like well could this be you know if we go down what what's that look like in a kindergarten first grade environment like how are students utilizing that? Yeah, I don't so I don't have access and knowledge on every single program that our ESL team is using, but I will tell you that our K through2 gifted programs, they and the department through the ESL team, they have approved several applications that allow our teachers and our ESL team to translate into different languages, especially and I know Mr. Cummings, you
117do some work in AI because we've spoken about it, but the use of Gemini will allow you to translate things into many different languages. Um, there's other applications. Are you familiar with any others? Our um ESL teachers work with our classroom teachers. They collaborate and partner and some of our programs do offer different languages. So our students are able to access just like our website. When you click on our website and you're able to access things in different languages, our computer programs can do the same thing. and they have stories in different languages and things like that that we don't have in print but you are able to access through our digital um devices and I can also provide a list of some of the other resources that we are using with our ESL students
118to give you a little more clarity on some of those applications. Yeah, I think that's that was when I I think I I saw observed this when I was visiting one of our dual language immersion schools. Um, one of the teachers pointed out that we had a new student and this is how this person was, you know, able to onboard and learn both in their native language but also be learning English uh at a significantly quicker rate. I thought that was impressive. That was something I didn't uh know too much about. And so, you know, looking at this from a fiscal lens, you know, we learned that, you know, these are uh Mr. Den let me know is a state is through state funding uh that covers these these Chromebooks. you know, I'm trying to
119understand what it what why would we even consider going to like a 10 to one verse every one ratio um when we could just have kids put their Chromebooks in cubbies or something like that? Like walk me through if we have are we looking at like one cart per classroom if we went to that model? Do we have to purchase fif I don't know how many class elementary school classrooms do we have? Yeah. So I think uh Mr. I mean, your question is valid, but your question should be to your colleagues on the DAS. This is not something we brought forward. Yeah. This is a conversation among the members of the board to determine what's the best resource to provide to students that's going to promote learning. Um, and so what we're trying to do
120is provide information as to the impact of any decisions the board may make related to this this question. And I appreciate what's the problem we're trying to solve here. Yeah. So I mean we have what 55 elementary schools. How many elementary classrooms do we have? Well or sorry not K through two. Yeah. Like is that tell you in kindergarten we have 200? Yeah. Hi team. Hi. Sorry. I apologize. Um just for perspective we have 253 just kindergarten teachers. Okay. So 250. And so if you just metriculate that up, they're about the same in kindergarten because of the small class sizes there. So 253 times three. Yeah. So we probably have a lot of classrooms. And so that include a a nice purchase of probably carts for each of those classrooms. You all know how much
121carts cost. I Googled it. It's like 600 to a,000 bucks it looks like per cart. Looks like you can get them on Teemo, too, but I don't know if those will actually end up working. But Hey, I'm just do just trying to do my my diligence of the taxpayer money, you know, but from the school supplies website, we're looking at 600 to a,000 bucks. So, it'd be a uh a good amount of money. Um, and then I was also recently in a classroom on this last Friday and I got to observe our our wonderful, beautiful children and teachers in action, seeing some of the different stations. And not only did I get to see stations, I got to see a good group of kids sick, you know, and we're talking about stations, you know, we're
122talking about sharing computers, we're talking about germs and all those things. And the more I sat here and thought about it today, like I'm just like I don't really want I mean they're already going to be sharing like blocks and things like that. But that's the reality of the scenarios if you're sh you know this increase of the the Chromebook use you know it's just I don't know it's just more sharing germ spreading I guess but I mean there are sharing blocks and different resources in those small groups. So, I don't know if there'd be too much of a difference, but it got it was something I think about. But then you're also talking about logging in, logging out of systems, logging into online platforms. How's pro, you know, I assume it's all cloud-based, so
123it'll all you know, save progress. So, it seems like it's a pretty significant downstream impact, right? Um, if you know, we went to a direction of carts or abandoning. And so, I think those are the things that I think about as a board member. What would good policy look like? I do like, as we heard earlier, a little bit about um you know, our decrease in minutes uh and how that's had some significant impact. So, I wonder, you know, from a board perspective, if there's caps on time utilized uh per grade, I think that could be or a KPI or a goal or something like that. Um I think that's a good, you know, step in the right direction. And then I also think, you know, I I read through the parent um feedback as
124well, and I do think there is good feedback in there, like my kid comes home and throws a Chromebook on the ground, they're in kindergarten, their backpack's heavy. I don't Yeah. Yeah. I think there's some good having a more I think divisionwide policy on approaching this topic would be good but I also see how one to or how important adaptive learning is because within a classroom we see and I think this is actually kind of the coolest thing about technology now there's you know pros and cons to everything and I think the feedback on gamification and people just clicking to get through stuff is is real but in this room, right? You know, we have a a huge dichotomy of intelligence and learners, people's skills that they have. And how remarkable is it that a
125student who's high achieving and a student who needs support at the same time they're able to get a resource that adapts to their educational needs? You know, how would we actually replace that? Um, you know, we'd have probably a stack of advanced work, you know, advanced worksheets or support worksheets or something like that. But here we have personalization and customization. Those are things that I think actually really enhance our student journey. Um, and so I I appreciate that in that piece and what I've read from our teachers, how important that piece is to our educational delivery. Um, and I feel like there's probably a couple more points I was just thinking about, but I would say, you know, there I do see the concerns that folks have. I think we see the concerns around Chromebook
126use. I see, you know, the research around, you know, what what many board members have cited and I do think like the time piece could be the time restriction could be a step forward for policy and I also think about, you know, more policy around who can take things home and maybe thinking through um if there's other additional things, but I feel like, you know, just from my own perspective, there really isn't I don't see a win and going to a 10 to one like a cart-based system because it's fiscally you know it's neutral in our budget and if we have access to have them we can just I'd rather see kids take them out you know their own device from a cubicle on the side like there's not like if they're taking their device
127from a cart what's the difference between a student taking a shared device or their own device I I don't know that just doesn't make sense to me but those are some of my initial thoughts I might have a few more questions just as we go through but thank you Miss Dwire. Hello. So, with literacy being a very strong priority, um, and as I'm listening and hearing all that you've had to present tonight, I'm assuming this is a newer curriculum that we're using with the emphasis on Chromebooks uh, being used less. And I guess my bottom line is like Mr. Palen, I want to see the evidence um of a percentage of students in each grade that are literate, that are reading. So, and I guess because I wasn't going to mention this, but I will.
128Um because last year a teacher came to me and said that their fifth grade students were on a third grade reading level. And then as early as this weekend, I had a substitute teacher come to me and tell me that the fifth grade students cannot read and they cannot write sentences. some of them. So needless to say, I was very concerned because I place a very high priority on literacy. To me, it's my number one. So if you could comment on that. Sure. We've had the support of the board um always and especially over the last few years with the Virginia Literacy Act. So the Virginia Literacy Act, as you guys know, is a multi-pronged approach where it really focused on professional learning, ensuring that all of our teachers have strong professional learning. It provides
129partnerships with parents, but a main focus of it is the curriculum. And as Dr. Robertson was speaking earlier, he was talking about the list, the approved list on the Virginia Department of Ed. Lexia Core 5 is one of the programs that is on the approved list. Um, we must use evidence-based literacy instruction. That's the term evidence-based literacy instruction, Eley. That is what our research is u excuse me our curriculum is all based on. We have to select programs from the Virginia Department of Ed approved evidence-based literacy instruction list for core for supplemental and for intervention. So, we use that as our curriculum. As I noted, Lexi is one of the approved resources. The majority of our day, as you saw from the um charts, students are engaged in hands-on reading and writing. They think, listen,
130speak, collaborate. Um some of you are experts on this um board and you really know literacy instruction. We focus a lot on uh articulation, decoding, encoding. That is the foundation of our literacy work. And Lexi is an approved s resource but it is a small portion of the big picture of instruction that occurs all day. So like Mr. Ken, can we get the evidence of where our students are at in reading skills? Is that possible? We provide updates throughout the year. Um yeah, Mr. Ry, we're going to have a midyear update that's going to include some of that data. And then as as Dr. Kelly just shared just for your uh personal reminder if you go to slide five and and it shows core content minutes there and um Dr. Goldberg shared in her presentation
131that students receive 155 minutes of literacy instruction each day. So as I heard your question I just want to clarify that that's not Chromebook instruction. That's 155 minutes of literacy instruction and that was on slide five on those core instructional minutes. But we will provide an update on some data as we do every year on how our students are performing in those areas. So then can I assume that they're on Chromebooks less? Correct. Maybe the fifth grade students from before. I'm sorry. Sorry to interrupt. If you look at slide five, it gives you the core instructional minutes of 240 for kindergarten. We we can give you the fifth grade numbers at another date, but I'm just anchoring you at that slide. You see that 24 with it? That's 24 minutes on average of Chromebook time
132out of a total of 240. And then the following slide just shares with you percentage of time of that instructional where they're on a Chromebook. So I just wanted to just share those with you. So you just have those uh and we could talk about that. Thank you, Miss Melnik. So I think we need to make sure we're distinguishing between educational tool to tools and cell phones and use of social media platforms, YouTube. That's that's not that's not what's going on in our schools. These are educational tools. And I wrote this down before and I didn't say it the first time. So I appreciate that it's come up a number of times. The adapted resource the adaptive resources are so important. And for anyone who has not seen that in action, they really need to
133see that in action. I do not believe that these devices need to go home. I was actually shocked to hear it from the parents that those are going home. They need to stay in school. Those are school devices and that's where they need to stay. I appreciate my comment the the comment from my colleague um about play. I think children do learn from play and I think that's a really important prek objective, but we don't play in first kindergarten and first grade anymore. And and I will tell you my first year, my first year out um of college 1990, I taught first grade and children needed to be able to write by the end of the year four good sentences by the end of the year. It was the development of writing like a sentence
134a quarter and by the end you were writing a little paragraph. Right now if you're not an emergent reader out of prek coming into first grade you're behind and the world has changed rapidly and as educators and kudos to our educators and we forget this. I asked for our educators to be asked. I wanted their opinion and we got their opinion. Go spend a week in a first grade classroom and see what happens in a first grade classroom. And I am telling you, we are going to move from a a portion of a center time on a on an educational resource to more papers, more copies, more stress on our on our copy machines. More paper, more paper, more paper. I came from a paper world. Paper was a problem. And these worksheets for some
135kids will go unfinished because they need help. And so I have so I wrote down so many things. I just don't want to lose sight of the fact that these this is an educational tool. Um good educational tools. Um again we have done our part as educators. I thank the teachers for the decrease in minutes. Um, I don't want these to go home. And I also thank the teachers for their continued work with the Virginia Literacy Act, right? Like that has been a lot of work and our teachers have done an incredible job. Um, and my last comment is our numbers are way down on screen time in schools. I really need parents to help out with that at home. that that is also has to h happen in the home. We have young elementary
136students with cell phones and they're using them um and our high schoolers aren't using them anymore in our schools and so we need the help at home. Thank you. Okay, so I'm finding myself just a hair frustrated and I'll get to that in a minute. Um before that, um you mentioned three schools that send Chromebooks home. Um what are those three schools that are sending them home in K through two besides Kingston? I'm just pulling up. Give me one second. I got it listed here for you. Sorry guys. So there are three schools who send it home daily. kindergarten, first and second. That'll be Kingston, North Landing, and Providence. Additionally, there are three schools who send it home for first and second grade daily. Would you like those as well? Yes, please. Ocean Lakes Elementary,
137Salem, Shelton Park. Okay. So, I appreciate the presentation. Um, I have never in my time as a board member felt so frustrated when more than half of the board has asked for information related to the impacts, how it could be done, seen so much push back. Um, I like almost like I don't feel like I can even ask those questions. Um so do we have a cost related to the programs and licenses that were mentioned related to the Chromebook use? So the programs such as Lexia and Imagine Math those are based on their license not based on Chromebook numbers are licensed based on the students that we would have access to. So, as an example for Lexia, we if we wanted to if the board were to select to not have Chromebooks in kindergarten, as
138an example, we'd have to get a new license for first through fifth grade. We don't have those numbers at this time. That's just one example. Okay. Okay. Perfect. All right. Um, so without, you know, naming any names and talking about the problem that I think we're trying to solve. And the reason that I asked this from a budget perspective is because we are in budget season. Although this to me is much bigger than a budget conversation. Um this is three years of many board members bringing this up across many different schoolboard meetings and having these conversations related to Chromebooks. Um so I think the problem that for me that I'm looking to solve is screen time in our youth. Um the evidence and there is ample ample evidence and data and research um showing those
139impacts even in education. Um in fact I pulled some up just as I was sitting here. Um, so like I said, lots of peer-reviewed studies. Um, in one peer-reviewed study in the National Labor of Medicine, I won't even pretend to try to pronounce the names of the folks that write them because the it was not anything I think I could pronounce and do that properly, but it states in in the abstract, electronic devices have revolutionized learning, communication, and information dissemination, but recent research indicates that screen media may have serious adverse effects on children's health over the long term, making this a pressing public health concern. That's that's the research. That's the data. Those are to me to me that is the facts. Um, and I can I appreciate all of the teacher input. Um, I
140I don't really know how to interpret that. We have some teachers giving us feedback that this is not appropriate. In fact, here's one I'll read. One:1 is not appropriate for kindergarten. Technology is not appropriate for kindergarten. We're struggling to teach them to read, write, hold pencils, and look at each other when they were speaking. Um you know so there is some question about asynchronous learning snow days but we are talking about our student population or youngest learners up until they're about eight. Um I do think that I looked at the VDOE requirements for computer science. I believe all of them could be met actually without a device. I actually would prefer to see us eliminate Chromebooks in K through five. Um but I I don't think that that's going to be very palatable for the
141board um as a whole. So that was why I had asked about K through um too. And and my I do have another question though. Um are we giving devices to kids in prek? They have iPads. Pre prek has has iPads. Every student Prior to the pandemic, we did not have a device for every single student during the pandemic due to being able to offer minimal amounts of communication with families due to also the backgrounds and demographics of those we were serving. We did purchase at that time iPads to support a one-to-one initiative. Now, I say that cautiously because we don't have one iPad for every child. We provide very strict guidelines in prek regarding the use of um technology and there is minimal use within our pre-k programs and I think you can attest
142to that, Miss Rogers. You've been present during my professional learning sessions. They were used as a resource. I chose not to use them because the behaviors that I saw when trying to take them away were so great, it wasn't worth the resource. Right. Thank you for saying that that it was a resource, not a requirement. It was a supplemental and it was optional. Um, so do we have one to one in the event that we needed it for opportunities? Yes. Is it something that we encourage and use regularly? No. Okay. Thank you. You're welcome. Um, so it is it is my opinion that as a division we have gone a little too far down the technology track and I do think that it's important that our students are future ready but I also think that
143we're looking at what's appropriate for the student. Um, I will also state since I think I am the only board member up here who has a kid in that age group. I do have a seven-year-old daughter and she does have a Chromebook. Um, and I do feel like I I think we voted in not we wasn't here but the Chromebook one to one was that in 2016 that's when we would have started. Yeah. Hello everybody. So uh we did start the 1:1 initiative uh about 2016. However, it wasn't in effect across the entire division in that year. It took us I believe it was like three years before we got to a point that it was in effect across the division. Okay. just because I I recognize my one student who is a graduating senior
144and then my sophomore even a difference between the mode of delivery for instruction for each of them because my sophomore did get a device. So I guess he was in one of those earlier groups there. Um so far as equity um you know people in my district have mentioned concerns surrounding the fees assessed. You know, we give a 5-year-old a computer and they pull a button off. Now, we're assessing a fee to that family when it, in my opinion, is not reasonable to be giving a device to a 5-year-old. Um and so I do understand that the data um here shows based on the collected thoughts that you know many teachers do feel like it's easier although some don't. Um, but I do believe that it's better for students and I think that the community
145also should know that the parent input overwhelmingly overwhelmingly supports that that this is a preferred um thing to not have Chromebooks for these age groups. Um, so with that I will yield to Miss Rogers. Thanks. Um, so a couple of things I just wanted to add is first of all some of the feedback talking about the appropriateness of specific devices. Teachers talked about having a um a touchscreen for kindergarten versus a Chromebook um simply because it's more difficult for kindergarteners to use. Um, and again, I did teach preK, but have my degree in both early childhood and elementary education, and I can see where that would be much more easier for a student who doesn't yet know their letters to not have to figure out a keyboard. It makes sense that we don't give someone
146who doesn't understand what the letters mean something that they can't quite figure out. And that kind of leads me into um the adaptive um um the adaptive programs that adapt to student needs. There have been many, many, many people, including myself, that have had students on these progressively harder um programs, that the student can't seem to get past the thing they need to get past and there's not an adult to support them at that moment. And this leads to a lot of frustration. And sometimes I know that parents and educators who can't be in all places at once find that some of these programs progress to a point that is beyond this the the students ability. And because they hit that mark or caught that thing or whatever they gamification thing they did, it leads
147to the next level. But then the teachers understand they're not ready for this. I I can clearly remember a student on Smarty Ants. That's what we had at the time. And the idea was that the ant goes down the hill and hits the letters, the one letter they're supposed to hit the time. If it's E and A or whatever, they're supposed to tap the letter to get the smarty ant down the hill. She knew none of her letters. But when the aunt somehow got down the hill anyway because she didn't hit anything, she would be like, "I did it. I did it." but she didn't because she wasn't doing something that was at the level she was at. She just happened to be able to get through things. So again, I think that that's something
148we need to think about is whether or not these are actually, you know, providing frustration or supports for our students, you know, in a positive way. Um, and again, this for me, this isn't about budget. This is about what is best for all students. Um, and I firmly believe that having a teacher um, in small groups understanding what's happening with their students and the device when you have a 5-year-old, a six-year-old, a seven-year-old is much better for the student than having them on their own while the teacher is working with other students doing things. And again, a teacher understandably does not have eyes on every computer in her classroom at all times because she can't if she's teaching, she can't be with the students who are doing independent work on a device. And that's how
149things can happen. And again, I think if we're doing this appropriately and the right way, that is one thing. But sending Chromebooks home, I don't think is appropriate for these young students and ensuring that they are using them appropriately with an adult is is correct. Vice Chair Williams. Yes, thank you. just um you know we have to make so many decisions and I've been on this DIS for for a while and I and I always and I will always continue to air on the side of the student and sometimes that comes in a little conflict or a little friction with with perhaps the the teacher or or other factors but I just think the data is so overwhelming for five four now four year old five and six year olds that the that the risk
150of using too much technology. I mean, it the benefits don't outweigh the potential risk of of using too much technology when I know that tactile learning and everything that we've mentioned up here is so important for these for these students. Um, is there do you have any idea and we and we've read about it in the last few years that high-tech parents and high-tech business owners that like have invented like so much in technology or that are in that space. They're opting for no technology schools for their children. We've read about it. or even locally there's private schools who are regarded very academically successful who don't issue Chromebooks till middle school. Do we have any idea of why it's like that or what? I do not have any knowledge of the technology questions or any
151knowledge of the private schools and what their onetoone devices are at this time. Okay. Because I Yeah, it's just kind of interesting how you know different philosophies are. Um Okay. So, and I think too with the parent survey, you know, it's it's close to 70% that parents don't think that there will be any substantial change in kindergarten. I think it was 69% um if we don't have one to one and it was in the 60s. If you combine no you know um no change the last three. Let me see what slide is that on? Yeah, slide. Yeah, slide 19. So it's 69% um no meaningful change to all the way to either positive or no change. 69% first grade 64% second grade 62%. Um those are pretty significant numbers I think. So it I mean
152it's an interesting conversation but I think the data is pretty overwhelming is what best is what best for these learners. And I sure hope we're still playing in first and second and kindergarten. I sure hope well you said we weren't playing. I know. But I sure hope we're playing. I Is it that we don't play in first in second grade? And I'm like, "Yes, we do." I will tell you that my 5-year-old daughters are in kindergarten at Thorogood and they came home yesterday raving about Readers Theater and their play. So, I want to say that they did rave about that. So, I there is play as well. Yes, certainly. Mr. Cummings. Yeah. I just wanted to say that I appreciate the discussion and hearing some of my colleagues uh viewpoints and kind of the things
153that they were thinking about and I think it would be a useful exercise for a board to continue to have you know discussion about appropriate you know Chromebook use. You know I I think in previous conversations with individual board members I've said you know my area of concern is because I I feel like I've been to a lot of elementary schools. I've read to a lot of kids. Um I feel and I I do have what you said what was said earlier about the public health uh issue uh initiative that is something that's on the back of my mind along with these as you were as was said about you know these tech founders not having tech in their schools. I mean it's important to know they're also paying significant amounts of money for small
154teacher to student ratios. Um but there is something significant to why they're not wanting to utilize technology as well. So I do think that's part of the discussion that's in my in my mind and I appreciate that viewpoint. Uh but I do think you know this is a good exercise and discussion and I think it's a I would be curious to have a further board discussion about you know just reviewing and discussion and dialogue how technology is used just in three through five middle and high school as well. I thought it's a very good to read the feedback from our stakeholders from our parents along with our our teachers. I think that was a lot of boots on the ground action and so I just wanted to voice my appreciation to the work that folks
155put in to get this information but also to the variety of viewpoints as well. So thank you. Great. Thank you. I don't see any more discussion. Um so I'm going to turn this over to Dr. Robertson because it says discussion schoolboard budget workshop and I think we had our discussion. So we kind of have that at the end of every for any closing thoughts, but Dr. Robertson, I appreciate the deliberations of the board around the budget and this conversation. Okay, colleagues, do you have any further budget um operating or capital improvement program? Okay, Mr. Cummings. Yeah, real quick. So you mentioned with additional revenues, Dr. Robertson and that I think you said 8 to 23 23 million. So that is on top of the 30 something million and so is that something that your team's
156working to put together a list of priorities or do you looking for any additional direction from the board on utilization of that potential funding? What's actually both both? So, um, once we know what that number is, we're we're thinking about what areas we would make recommendations on. Okay. Um, and I've had conversations with individual board members and one-on-one meetings where they've shared some of the priorities like clearly you guys are going to need to balance competing demands around, you know, the CIP and funding the CIP, maybe PGO. What do you do with trying to get closer to close the gap with the health fund balance? Um the all in Virginia plan sun sets in in June and that provided a significant amount of funds that were really important to the work of teaching and learning.
157So really we're thinking about things on a list but really we're looking for you to give us because it's your budget in the end. We're looking for you to give us your thoughts um as when we get that number. So, it it definitely would be something you'd want to think about. All right, sounds good. Thank you. Great. Thank you. It is 6:23 and we are journ