4/1/25 - FCPS Governance Committee Meeting

001a later posting. Hopefully people had a chance to look at it. Um, we will now vote to approve the minutes of the March 18, 2025 meeting of the governance committee. Do we want to push that to the next one? Okay, it was a short turnaround. So, let's just push that to the next the which I believe is the next meeting is is the end of April. Okay. So, um I include like I don't I'm sort of unsure of what order I want to do this in. Um but we did throw policy um 1104 in for discussion just because we're working on revisions of policies. I don't want to spend a lengthy amount of time talking about this. I think that some of the questions that have been shared are good for the creation of the

002cover sheets that staff are giving us and also thoughtful when reviewing policy. Um but having said that um I I guess I um could pose the question to Dr. Reid for policy 1104.13 which is the formatting guidelines. Do you I know you didn't take it to staff to do any with because that's obviously our thing, right? But do you have any comments or thoughts in terms of how it's currently [Music] written? Are you fine with it? Because one of the things is it doesn't have a philosophy section. I will tell you I'm in and um and others I think have heard say do we need a philosophy and a purpose or are they sort of one and the same? Well, I think they're different. Um the purpose often describes what it is intended to do

003and the philosophy perhaps is why do we think that's important to do maybe um I do think um which we're talking about [Music] policy 11 10 not you all didn't prepare it 1104 which is the the the format right it's actually a regulation so that's I'm sorry that's I was confused. It is a regulation. Thank you. Um, Miss Lady, there's a policy and a regulation. We have both. We have both. Yes, there is a policy. The regulation spells things out in detail. The regulation is where the purpose lives. The policy just says to establish a standardized format and method of distri distribution for school system directives. Right. Yeah. Was so I guess we we would be discussing your regulation. Yeah, I'm trying to find the policy. Oh, policy 1104, right? [Music] So, it looks like

004the policy was reviewed last in 2021. Um, correct. So, the regulation is much more detailed and that wouldn't be something normally that I would bring here, right? Yeah. But I guess the reason I put it on is because the regulation is what we've been in the weeds around when it comes to formatting. So, I guess we'll have a brief conversation, hopefully brief, um maybe productive, hopefully productive, um and then move on to some of the policies. So, I I'll start with Dr. Anderson. I actually had some clarifying questions when you were asking for feedback and I thought maybe this there was a red line somewhere like what was the feedback you were asking Dr. Reed about? There was no red line. But was it just to the policy as it currently exists? To actually I

005was mistaken but it was to the regulation as it actually exists. Okay. Um because I didn't review the regulation. I just looked at the policy. Um I also do agree that purpose and philosophy are two different things and I think we need to be able to separate the two. The purpose just gives a reason why we're having um the policy. Like what is it that we're trying to accomplish? I think the philosophy gives a little greater insight as to the beliefs and values of the board and again I will restate that the policy is our communication to the public. It's also our communication to the superintendent. It's pretty much like the what the boundaries are or as Dr. B likes to say the swim lanes. And so I I think that needs to be there.

006One of the things I I wonder because I also took a look at that sheet that you sent yesterday which kind of lives outside of this and I I think there's some work to be done here to merge the two. One of the things that this policy states is that there should be a standardized format and method of distributing directives. Um we have not yet accomplished that because going through these um policies they're kind of all over the place. I think we'll be heading in this direction. Um, just to summarize, do I believe that we need to perhaps articulate a little bit more specifically what that formatting could look like? Um, I would say yes because that's been the conversation that we have here and we need to submit that somewhere in order to not

007have every iteration of the board just have a different procedure accidentally. Um, but I I don't think we should do it right now because that might prevent us from getting to some of these other policies that we might be able to get through. Um, so I would say defer this one just so we could flesh it out a little bit with some of the other floating conversations and the multiple notes that we've had over the course of this year. Thank you, Miss Marin. Hello. Good afternoon. So I agree that this particular policy 1104 is um pretty basic but the the larger question is about how we format the policies and not just you know what font and whatnot but I actually think the regulation is super pertinent. Um and you know we did raise it

008last time and it has some things that are like tactical which is fine but other things like special services should that and counseling services is that academic or is it health should the promotion retention grading and graduation requirement be in special services or in instruction which we raised during grading or you know special education. We've had a discussion and this really gets to the organizational chart um about special education being in special services or transportation in facilities in the 8000 series. The superintendent has now separated those two offices. So there are things um in here that you know sure the superintendent could look at um but I think some of them is you know listing the the categories and I I do think that there's merit in looking at the regulation and I think it

009could help us answer some of the questions about how we review the policies. I do think though whether there's a section that's purpose or philosophy to me it's semantics. The goal is that we have a section that states why this is important to the board and what it's intending to do. And whether we call it philosophy or purpose, I think it it doesn't really matter to me. But when I look at some of these um policies, it just it seems silly to have a thing that says, you know, the purpose of this policy is to have a dress code policy, right? like so can we just commit to having some intro section right that states so the value to the board um because then too I think that will help the superintendent and staff be

010able to craft stuff and not just give us suggested edits that say things like the purpose of this policy is to have a dress code policy. So I'll leave it at that for now. All right. So again, because we only Oh, sorry, Miss Eismerheiser. That's okay. I'll just be very brief. I agree. Um, I think what might be most helpful since this is a regulation perhaps if Dr. Reed can take it back and sort of craft what she thinks would be the outline based on the conversation she's heard in governance and then we could give her feedback on that. So, we're kind of giving feedback to something, right? that's um her suggestions of how she would do the outline and the of the policies going forward. I also agree I think we need to have

011whe it's one section or two a purpose and a philosophy right that shows our value system as well as the specific purpose of that particular policy. So those are the two things I wanted to share but maybe we can bring this back after Dr. Reed has updated it if there's updates that she wants to do to give feedback. Okay, thank you for that. Um because I I guess what I was going to say is um and then we'll move on to to what we're reviewing today. Um if we want a purpose and a philosophy then we're going to have to put in the policy that way is my thinking. That would be a policy change. Um and then you know andor it's a regulation change that we can live with but it's not doesn't mean

012that under a different leadership it could revert back to not having a philosophy and a purpose. That's why I bring that up. I do think that we've talked also about definitions and I think there's some policies that warrant definitions and some that don't. I think that's more operational that you know if it helps a layman person read the policy that there will be definition section but we don't need them in every one of them because people um you know I think can understand what most of them are saying. So um those are my thoughts. I'll go back for go back to Dr. Anderson. Yes, thank you. I just wanted to piggyback on what Miss Marin had said because I had that written all over my notes with the policies that we're going to cover today.

013the ones that say we're going to establish a policy to establish a policy, I it's fruitless. But there have been a lot of other good examples that I did pull that actually have some sort of robust explanation regarding the purpose of the policy. I I also Oh, I lost my train of thought here. Um, one of the things that I think in the outlining of the components, there are some components that are going to be across all policies. Purpose is across all policies. Summary of changes as required. Responsibilities may be as required. I think um the philosophy or the beliefs as it shows up in a number of policies must also be across all policies because again it identifies the board's position of that for that body of work but any of the others whether

014it be responsibilities definition etc etc there are a number of other um topics headings that I have seen across many policies not all of them are applicable for everything it doesn't mean that we shouldn't have a bank to draw from so we could be consistent for when it is applicable to that policy. So that's personally what I would like to see. We have the basic ones that will show up everywhere and a bank of headings that we will select and infuse or include when it is necessary. And as a point of clarification, are you suggesting that bank would be on the in the policy versus in the regulation? Again, this is where I I will go back to what I've said before. The policy is the board's work. The regulation is the superintendent's work. If

015we don't articulate it in the policy, it gets to be subject to superintendent desires and preferences. So, it would have to be in the policy if this is what the board wants to see across all policies. I guess. Yeah. I guess I'm just I I would have to see how a policy would be written that indicates a bank of options and not a mandate that these beheadings that are included. That's where I'm stuck. Okay. Okay. Miss Marin, did you want to go back? Okay. Missheiser, did you want to go back? I'm good. Thank you. Dr. Reed, do you want to add anything? Okay. All right. We are going to um I will call on Dr. Reid for discussion of policy 2401 academic placement of students in grades K8. And I will say that um let

016me flip to that one. um cover sheet indicated um that there was not a sample VSBA policy, but I I think that there is one. I think it's this IKE So I don't did you coate these the first one. We're we're in we're talking about I believe the policy academic placement of students in grades K through eight. and I'll pass it on to Dr. Reed. Thank you, Miss Lady. There are really minimal changes. Um, we didn't have a philosophy statement and because my notes reflected an interest in philosophy statements for every policy, we crafted one. Um, and then there was a responsibility section. Um, or we titled it responsibilities because that's what who was responsible. Um, but that's really all that we're that was added. It's a pretty straightforward policy. Thank you, Miss Marin. I

017I thought I have some questions about it. I think that this is one of those where the purpose and philosophy can be one and the same. I think it's really vague. It doesn't state a consistent process. Like sometimes I'll get a parent that'll say, "Well, my my child I want my child to skip a grade." this policy could indicate that what the board thinks about that or say the superintendent will set a regulation about skipping grades. Um is the policy trying to clarify our academic transfer policy and I also think that this should not be special services but rather chief of schools. Um, and then for students in seven and 8 that may take secondary courses, what's the implication given that the policy separates it to 9 through 12? And should this speak to AAP

018placement? So, I think right now it's written to be really obscure and pretty slim, but this is one of those ones where now that we've seen it and we can discuss it, are there other policies that speak to some of the things like that I just mentioned like skipping a grade or like this could speak to how students are placed in AAP and at the very least should it refer to that policy because that is about placement or what about even special ed like so again I think this will be one where if when we look at the whole series maybe it makes more sense but I I don't I'm not ready to approve it and I think it's got some questions for our discussion. Thanks Dr. Anderson. Thank you. My general comments around this

019one, um the purpose again to establish policy does not sit well with me. I I think we are trying to definitely um determine the procedures for academic placement. So that's my first comment. My second comment in the [Music] um the philosophy which is academic placement for students to provide opportunities for learning. I'm not sure if it's providing opportunities as much as determining those opportunities because you receive different things at different grade levels, but that's a a a small semantical change. Um, responsibilities I I think I'm looking for it to be a bit a little bit less vague because it seems to speak the way that it is written. It seems to be at a whim of whomever is making that decision. I'd like to see some reference to whatever criteria, not outlining the criteria, but

020just some reference to that this is not going to be an arbitrary um decision. And I would also like to see if we can hone in on a decision regarding the caregiver, guardians, parents nomenclature because that continues to show up here. And for section five, placement progression and exceptions, the last sentence that says, "See the current version of regulation 2410." I believe that needs to be removed. It's throwaway because again, we're communicating something. It doesn't need to say see something else. And secondarily, it should live at the bottom as a reference, which it is already there. So we don't need to reiterate it in the body of the language. That is our communication to the community and to the superintendent. And I think those are my points. Not I think those are my points. All

021right. Not seeing Miss Seismore Heiser's hand. I'll take a turn. Um, I don't know if you all I I I I read the reg I read the regulations that go with every single one of the policies and I I I feel like often we're asking to put what belongs in regulation in a policy and I don't want to do that and so I personally don't have any problem with this policy. Uh I do see your point uh Dr. Anderson about the notation in section five because it already is duly noted on the back, but perhaps that was overkill in case somebody said, "Well, I need more information on this." And didn't turn the page. I don't know, but I certainly could go with or without deleting that. [Music] Um, but the policy is clear. This

022is not related to AAP. It's a different policy. I don't and I don't I don't think I'd want to put them all in the same one, especially when I personally hope that we're we sunset AAP centers ultimately um because we can take care of it in one's base school. So, you know, I I don't have any problem with the policy. I think the regulation explains the policy. Um I did have a question about the regulation though and Dr. I don't know if you know the answer to this, but uh the in uh 4B of the regulation where it talks about students with disabilities participating in the in the VAP program may be promoted to grade 12 without meeting the requirements outlined in section 4A by IEP team decisions. um and students who are promoted to

023grade 12 without meeting the require I guess my question came down every year when we do senior survey and I don't know if this is a state reporting thing and maybe it's not the right place to ask this question but when we would do senior survey we had all these students that were in 12th grade that were IEP special education students are step kids that they showed up in our senior survey data every single year and we couldn't move on without them but but but there was no way to not have them in there I think because they of the coding we we tried to get them coded as P something like post I don't know we don't need to get in the weeds on this right now but but it came to my brain

024because I didn't know if this was something we did or the state did if it might be in this policy but I can but I can ask a question but but that's not going to trip me up. I I I'm fine with the policy the way it's written. Um Miss Mayor. Yeah. No, I appreciate the reference to the regulation and I'm glad you were able to read that. I haven't read here. Check regulation. And either I did and I don't remember or I didn't get to it. But um I I don't think it's in the weeds to say something like the board has a position about skipping grades or the board, you know, just like we did with the grading policy when we said, you know, about um grade waiting and retakes and you know,

025that will all be done in regulation because I think where that has helped in that grading situation is now there will be a response to it where there hasn't been because the board didn't set it. So, I the only thing I've ever seen about grade skipping is that generally FCPS does not do that. I can't recall if it's a regulation or a policy. Should there be? I don't know. It seems like a good conversation to have because when parents ask us, I'd like to be able to say, you know, that's not our practice or here is the process that you'd have to go through to determine if your child should skip a grade or redo a grade. And so I I do think there can be a lot more in this policy that doesn't state

026all the how it's done but does say even with AAP whether we have it in centers or not the process by which students are identified. Yeah it's a regulation but a lot can impact how that's done and we know that right we know that things could be done a certain way to be more biased or not. So, I I think this is a a really big opportunity. Otherwise, I'm not sure why it's here. Like, what is this actually really saying right now? We're going to put kids in grades K through 8. Well, yeah, that's what we're legally required to do. What does this policy say that makes it the way that we want it to be implemented in Fair County Public Schools? Right. again, not just the legal stuff, but I I just think there's

027a lot more to be considered on this one. Dr. Anderson. Yes. I'd like to have a comment regarding u vernacular. Where are we heading with that? uh are we going to commit to it or leave it here because it we're we're becoming highly inconsistent because all the newer policies have parents, guardians, caregivers. Is that going to be a norm that I could stop raising? I would love a decision or not. So, I could also stop raising it in here. Uh are we leaning into one way or the other? Because I I think we leaned into it being a norm and I think there just needs to be a reminder to staff. Got it. So then I don't have to speak about that. And where just where where in the policy are you pointing to it?

028Um section five. Yeah. It exceptions shall be made after notification and explanation to each student's parents and so we've gone with we definitely have added caregivers. You want to speak to that? Yeah, I I have it documented in this running list of vernacular that we've yet to discuss. So, I would propose that we will come to it, but I could pull up what we did in the whatever we did in the grading policy. That's what we said that we would do. So, if we want to adopt that for now just to not have to raise it again. And I think we did the same in the boundary policy. So, if we could just bring that in and just let that be a thing that does not come up anymore. Um, so that's first one. I'm

029sorry, second. That's first and then one. Okay. B, I'd like to um make a motion to remove the last sentence in section C, which is see the current version of regulation 2410, promotion and retention of students in grades K8. Section five. Section five. because I also see this as this is our opportunity to just get this right. Let's get some sample things going in the way that we'd like and I don't need to speak to it. Okay. I don't either. Um does anybody want to speak to that? May I call that question? Is everyone okay if we delete the last sentence of section five? That objection. Yep. Okay. Miss Marin, Dr. Anderson, myself, Miss Seismheiser. Okay, there we go. We've deleted the last sentence. Thank you. Um, and then we're not just a point of

030clarification. So, it's not a motion on the table to do we need to formally make a motion on the table to change parents to what we're pulling up. So, made Okay. Yes, I found it. Um, parents and guardians. This was used in the boundary policy revision and the grading policy revision. Parents and guardians. No, it has to be a little bit different because I remembered I brought in a motion at the table that had caregivers be part of the conversation and I think that was one of the things that was voted on the night that we approved the boundary policy which I which should be posted. Um, Madame Clerk, can you confirm please? The only reason why I remember is because I brought I thought caregivers was in there as well. Yeah. So maybe we

031could stick a pen. Yeah. Until she finds it. Um I I would also like to see for section 4 responsibilities professional staff members shall place students at the level best suited to the students academically, socially and emotionally based on set criteria which gives a reference to the criteria outlined in the regulations but it doesn't leave it so open that it appears to be arbitrary. So you're offering to extend that sentence. Yes. You're speaking to established criteria so it doesn't come across as at the whim of whatever administrator happens to be at the school. Even though we know it's it's going to be subject to, you know, students needs, but there's still a criteria to be followed. But you're not going to find that that's vague. I I think I'm satisfied with that because it's going

032to say there is criteria and I don't want to get into listing all the criteria here for this one. I think we are we've done our job as communicating to the the public and to the superintendent what we are requiring. But I don't know if it's going to I feel like you're kind of if I can have a back and forth with you. feel like you're kind of we just took that out of four out of five, but it's exactly what you want to put in four without saying it's written in the regulation because the regulation spells out the criteria very detailed. Maybe I'm not articulating it well. I just don't want it to come across as if it's only subjected to whatever the staff members want to do because I think part of this

033is also and Dr. re please chime in is this idea of kids are not meeting maybe benchmarks for advancement but socially and emotionally they needed to they need to stay with their kid with their class where then you have some kids who are academically you know like I had a young man when I was at Chantilly was in fifth grade he was taking AP bio and AP calc BC at Chantilly um so I so I just so I guess be specific of what what you're wanting to add to the end of that sentence. What I want to establish in this sentence is that staff members who are making those decisions to place students at the levels best suited for them is not doing this just out of the blue like they need. No, I understand.

034Can you write the sentence? Oh, I'd like to think what I said um was articulating that, but clearly it didn't land. So, let me just kind of come back to that. [Music] Um, and I I'd like to also in philosophy to change a term provide to determine because we provide all kinds of opportunities no matter where you are, but we're determined some specific things that are available at specific grade levels unless there's any objection to that I'm not sure I understand how you determine opportunities. Well, we're not just providing opportunities because we're provide maybe both are the wrong term because it seems to me like academic placement to provide opportunity is not necessarily quite there but we're determining. Do you want to put to do you want to put the word determining in front of

035academic determining academic placement? Yeah, I think that gets there. Yeah. And then I I don't have language ready for the purpose, but I think we need to have a purpose beyond establishing policy. But that's that is the purpose of it. Sometimes the purpose just states it it's you know it might be a black and white photo and you want color but at the end of the day it's this that the purpose of this policy to establish academic placement for students grades K through eight. That's the purpose of it. Well, maybe that's what we just add. Maybe to establish academic placement and just take everything in in the middle out. You take out so read it as the purpose is to establish academic placement of students in grades K8. Yes. And take out policy regarding Yes.

036Can you please repeat that one more time? I'm sorry. Under purpose, take out the word policy regarding the words. Miss Maron, so I I feel like we're doing the thing that our chair had asked us not to do, which was to word smith every word. And you know, I had asked at the outset if we could just have the purpose or the philosophy be the thing that is the board's statement. And I I heard one chair, one person say they didn't think it was necessary. And now it sounds like we're reworking the purpose. So I just it sounds like if we could get some agreement because we are words smmithing and this isn't the way we need to go about doing this. We really need to have a more holistic bigger view of things. Does

037this policy do we want this policy to express more than it currently does? Could people raise their hands? So Dr. Anderson, Miss Lady is fine with it. I I'm not fine with it. I would like to see us continue to review some of the other policies in the 2000s. See how they connect to this and then you know maybe even that's a good way to go in all of these discussions since we're looking at the series as a whole each meeting. Let's go through them and then maybe at the end we could make some decisions. But doing this word by word is we're going we I just don't agree with that approach. Um I also had shared and Miss Lady shared again suggested prompts for our policy review. Um I you know I get the

038importance of saying is it parent or guardian. I got to tell you I've just researched and we weren't consistent not surprisingly. So that's still TBD but I feel like that is so down on the list because whether or not like like so one of the prompts was does the policy currently have a philosophy section? If yes should it be substantially updated? If no should it have one? Would you say the policy leans more towards having the type and amount of information that should be in a superintendent regulation? Would reviewing the regulation be helpful when considering updates to this policy? So, we got to stay elevated here. And what I would propose is to move on to the next um the next one which is about commencement activities. And let's continue through these 2000s to see

039how they integrate together. and then we could come back at the end and do like a wrapup of what is actionable today and what's not. Um, and also while I have the mic, I do want to say I would like the committee to uh confirm that at our next meeting we will review policy 8240 about facilities because that is really important so that the superintendent and facilities manager can continue on with some of that work. But we need to review that. So, um, I just wanted to put that out there, please. And we don't need to talk about the policy today. I just wanted to confirm that we're going to put it on the agenda for the next time. Thanks. Yes, it's on the agenda for the next time. Um, and I'm just going to

040say and we can move on to the next policy that when I put together my prep and and I you know, did we did we not share regulations in the folder? Yeah, we we shared regulations. I I I print my my folder just so you know how I prepare because you might want to do it is I have the memo. I have is there a uh sample policy from VSBA? Then I have the policy red line and then I have the regulation and I read them all together and then I fi then I ask myself do I have any unanswered questions but when it comes to the policy and the regulation so we can we can move beyond this one and move to commencement activities. I'm fine with that. Um so I'll turn this back

041over to Dr. Reid and have her talk about commencement activities. Thank you, Miss Lady. So, going to commencement activities. Um, the um purpose was clarified. We added a philosophy statement and that was really it. Um, it's a again a very straightforward policy that most recently was updated in 2021. Miss Marin. Okay. So, um I actually just got this question about if a student began their high school career at one of our high schools but perhaps finished at an FCPS adult high school or a center, can they still get their diploma issued from their base school? And while that might not be totally in sync with commencement, it is a connected thing, maybe it's not totally connected, but the other thing is I don't a high school special education center. I don't even think we ever

042talk about are some of our buildings like that. Is that the Davis Center or is it a center like Bryant? I I don't know. Um, also what is a certificate of completion? Um, do we want to also add information about how graduation speakers are selected or that the superintendent will issue guidelines? Um, especially during an election year, there is some or maybe it's just a custom, but that candidates running for office are not per permitted or it's frowned upon, but it's not a rule that they not speak at a graduation. And I think it would be wise to put something in there about that. Um, is there anything about the program um about the commencement that should be mentioned like allowable clothing? I've had some people talk I I'm just giving you feedback from my

043constituents. Some people say, well, you know, some kids have, you know, got this the the the ribbon because they did this club, but now lots of people can buy ribbons for things. So, does that devalue the other things? What's the permission? What about political statements? I mean, these have become things that I know have been um an issue. What about costs or tickets? And just saying, not that this whole policy has to include all of that, but it could say the superintendent shall set regulations regarding ticket ticket distribution, you know, allowable attire or what have you. Because these are things that um I am I've observed through my five years of um going to graduations. So, I'd love to know what people think about these ideas and if these kind of things should be in

044there or not. Dr. Anderson, thank you. I can't say this enough. These policies are our communication to the public and to the superintendent regarding our expectations. So, we have to set it up in that way. In the same way in other policies we've said you shall create consistency. We didn't outline what that necessarily looked like. I think there's some space for us to do this here to the point of the decoration of waterboards because right now that's a piece that I've had many students they've been writing for quite a while because their school doesn't allow it but yet school X allows it. that shouldn't be how we are working as a school system. So I I do think that there's some space for us to articulate that we are looking for the superintendent to set

045consistency um around areas A, B, C or D. So that's in response to what you've articulated. I also think it is very important because we do have this unspoken rule of uh folks who are running for public office to not be able to speak at graduations even though the student body may have voted them for it. We need to say that because again the superintendent can't say that. That can't be in regulations. That has to be in the board's communication to the public so everybody knows. Thirdly, and lastly, I I'm struggling with, okay, let's keep it high and yet where is the space to share the things that may be smaller that are still things that I I'd like to introduce to better the product that we're putting forward. A and so again, looking at

046purpose, I would love for it to see that the purpose of of this of, you know, P whatever is to establish commencement activity procedures, just something. So, I I'm not trying to waste the time, but this is the only time that we have. Otherwise, we're going to be introducing ticky tacky amendments when we're voting for these, which should really just be on consent. So, I would love to hear when is that space because if I just introduce this to you on the side, but if other people don't agree with it, I don't know where to go there. But um I would like to see some language that speaks regarding the consistency of uh tire motorboard expectations um and a couple of other things that you've articulated that I did not grab. And there should be

047some language here about the elected officials being graduation speakers. And I don't even know if we want to go as far as determining um because we've seem to have gotten consistently more consistent regarding location of um pro of graduation ceremonies. Is that something we want to consider? Not married to it, just a thought. Uh, we that we don't have a regulation with the same number. At least I can't find one. Um, Miss Lady, Miss Eismore has her hand up. Miss sizeer. Sorry, didn't see it. No worries. No worries at all. Thank you. Um, I'm just wondering if we can sort of synthesize some of these comments cuz I heard many of the same things around consistency in various ways around graduation ceremonies um, and commencement ceremonies. I'm just wondering if we can add a sentence

048or two to this policy maybe under requirements that says the superintendent shall issue regulations promoting consistency of commencement ceremonies to you know include um ribbons you know decorations all you can list them but just say promote consistency of requirements and options and then there's a regulation that gets issued that has some of those details cuz I think the points brought up good, but the details probably belong more in a regulation, but perhaps the requirement could be a higher level. We're requiring consistency. Um, and consistency doesn't mean everything's the same, right? Like in some ways, you know, we do have different places for graduation for different reasons, but at least there's consistency of expectations. So I would and if you want a motion I can make a motion to add under a um the last sentence

049is a superential issue regulations promoting consistency of commencement ceremonies. Um I'm going to take a turn. Um, I'm going to tell you that um, if if we want to add something about political speakers um, in an election year that we have an election year every year in the state of Virginia. Um, so then I think you're just putting out there that you can't have a political speaker, you know, a politician at your graduation. Um um but I also am going to say I don't think that we're going to put in policy anything about dress code. I think when it comes to courts um that's why I'm looking for desperately for the regulation because we have having done this for so many years. we have directives around these things that are already in some type of

050regulation and maybe it's in multiple I don't know if I can't because I can't nothing marries up to this exact number so I'm happy to to push this and and come back to it um but you know there's a certain amount of I know that when I attend graduations I observe different things because schools have different traditions okay Chantelli We never invited an outside speaker cuz they the the feeling of Chantelli is you're not you're outsider. You don't know us. You don't know our you don't know the Chantelli pride. We want internal speakers. You know, there are certain schools where it's like getting that, you know, name, right? I mean, you know, I've I've watched Hillary Clinton. I've watched Tim Kaine. I've watched, you know, lots of famous people speak at graduations for some schools.

051That's their tradition. Um, but I honestly and have wi-i when working in Fairfax County seldom I can't even think of a time somebody complained to me about how we did things at Chantilly if someone at Oakton did it differently. I mean, like I said, we we have uh, you know, you can't I'm going to tell you this with 700 graduates, you can't police chords. We have regulations around chords. Students are told, you may not do the following. You may not wear a cord that's not from a an in a um what's the word I'm looking for? A verified honor society of sorts. So, you have to be in TSA. You have to be in you know um you know uh music honor society. But when when people show up with a cultural Hawaiian lay, I'm

052not taking it off their neck and I'm not going to ask faculty to do that on a graduation day. I think we have to think about what we're we're talking about here. And I mean this it's an exciting day. You set the groundwork. You set the rules and you do you do your and for the most part people comply. I mean, you know, people comply. Um but I just think we need to be careful. Um I mean, I'm certainly be fine if you want to put something in here about political speakers and um you know, decorum on caps. I mean, we don't we didn't allow it anywhere I ever work. So, if they allow it somewhere, well, again, but I also think I I'd hate to see somebody not start commencement on time because you've

053got 30 kids with decorated caps on that you're not going to let walk. Um, so anyhow, I'm I'm fine with the way this policy is written, but I also hear lots of consternation around it. So, um, I'll go to go back, Miss Marin. Yeah, I'd appreciate it if the things that I bring to the table that are experiences aren't like dismissed just because it wasn't at one particular high school that you saw. Everything I spoke of were complaints and things that I saw with my own two eyes and people told me with my ears. So, there are issues. Okay? And maybe in 10 years that school will only have outside visitors. This is the problem with Fairfax. We do everything a lot of things by tradition and then it becomes a problem. So, we're trying

054to get consistency here. What I suggest is why don't we continue going through these and then each of us get assigned doing the edits. So, for this one, it sounds like perhaps a red line could be that one of us says I will do this update and write in a sentence that says promote the consistency of requirements at graduations or whatever it is. um because some people do find certain cultural things offensive and then they wear it to graduation and then it ruins their graduation. So, you know, we're trying to be mindful about it. But the point is is just like with academic placement, maybe that's one one of us could say, "Hey, I'm going to redline it." So now the superintendent has done the review. I think perhaps there could have been more to

055that one, right? But now the board takes it and makes it ours, right? And so at the end of this meeting, we could give out who's going to edit what and then we come back. Otherwise, we're going to be word smithing here till the end of time. So that's my suggestion. Dr. Anderson, thank you. You've become Mr. Fresh as soon as I have something in. I am not against that idea. Excuse me. I'm not against the idea of us, you know, after the conversation for somebody to take, you know, that policy and do some redlinining, making sure that we're incorporating what everybody in in the room has said. I'm not against it um at all, but I I just want to make sure that we have some sort of space for that work. I I

056I'm actually pretty drawn to the idea of the superintendent gave feedback. It went as far as it could if we feel it's gone as far as it could and then we take it over making it our own. Because if you did not hear me say this again before, I'll say it again. This is our work. This is our communication. We have got to put our stamp on it. Um, so if you're open to that, I'd be happy to support it. If not, then we have to make the sausage in the room. That's what committees are for in in some ways. I know we have a a list we're trying to run through. So maybe this is a way of Yeah, I'm absolutely open to it and I would be open to it in two by

057twos or at least in tandem, not necessarily simultaneously, but because we're allowed to do that, right? Melanie and I could perhaps work on commencement together, right? and then share it with with Dr. Reid and and staff and then bring it back to the April meeting as opposed to me doing one in isolation and Melanie doing one because I think it's it'll better encapsulate the thinking of all the board all the members of the board that are on the committee. But I would also avoid not running it through the members of the committee because then we'll get right back here where people who were not the two the pair the the single say wait what about this what about that and we get into this exact space again. All that would take is, you know, a

058quick phone calls. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Absolutely. Yeah. So, are we moving on from any more comments about commencement? If you could identify what we're going to do at some point, I don't know if what sounds like the policies we don't get through with about, you know, 5 to 10 minutes left, we'll go back and we'll decide who's they're going to be delegated to. And there's only four of us in the room. So, okay, next policy. Dr. Reid call on you to share thoughts on policy 2660.8, voluntary uniforms in public schools. Thank you, Miss Lady. So, this policy um is to authorize individual schools to adopt voluntary school uniforms. Um, we created a philosophy because there wasn't a philosophy. Um, and changed school uniforms to responsibilities to follow the consistent um, formatting

059and took out the guidelines because those really belong in regulation. Thank you. Any comments, questions? Miss Mayor. Well, again, I just think the purpose could be like why this might be a good thing, like uniforms can be supportive of student learning. Maybe something about being consistent within the school, financial help, how where's the money going to come for these things or how they're selected. Um, given that I have had no one ever raise this to me, I'm not inclined to hold it up right now. But I do think again having something about and I would like the word policy that is one thing on wordsmith because it says a uniform policy at any school. It's not it's a practice. It's an implementation. We just need to not use that word haphazardly. So I'd be fine

060to approve it, but I do think it could have more in it about why it's even a consideration for children's learning. Dr. Anderson. Um, just very quickly, I just want to highlight that this purpose as written, I would love to see all of our other purpose sections be written in this way. It has an action verb regarding exactly what is going to happen rather establishing a policy. So, I like this purpose. [Music] Um, I didn't have any comments because I I'm fine to go with that and I'm glad that we took out all of the language that speaks to the how because this is not the how. This is the what, the why, and that it must happen. Um I I could see space for section um four to have the other piece of what

061um Miss Marin just talked about being that you know there'd be financial support ex you know the because again this is the board's expectation if we don't put it here we are leaving it up and when I say put it here if we don't articulate that we have an expectation around that area it may or may not show up in a regulation so it's just broadly stating ing that these are the things we would expect to see in the regulation um regarding financial support. But otherwise um I don't have any other questions on this one. Misser, thank you. Just very quickly, um I appreciate taking out the guidelines. I think that makes sense to put them in regulation. But I would recommend if we're going to do that then under the philosophy section where it

062says the Fairfax the second sentence the Fairfax County School Board permits the initiation of a voluntary uniform policy. I agree the word policies uniform practices or guidelines for any individual school when the guidelines for implanting school uniforms is followed. I think that word guidelines needs to be regulations and we need to refer to the specific regulation. So if you're taking section the section of guide that says guidelines here and putting a regulation then I think under section three we need to either refer to the specific regulation or say when the regulations because I think this is what happens here is we get policy regulations and guidelines confused a lot. So we just need to be clear which guidelines under section 3 need to be followed to establish this voluntary uniform practice or policy. And I

063say this because in section four, we reference that our local policy should be consistent with the school board of education's guidelines. And so I don't I just think they need to be clear in that section. That's it. Thank you. M Dr. Anderson, did you want to go back? Yeah, just one quick thing. Um it came to me earlier, but I forgot to share it. I think we have to be mindful of the sequence of how these things are developed and that's the frame of mind that I bring into this work because if we have a brand new policy for example that we are outlining we have no reference to a specific regulation because that is not yet written. So I'm always taking a look at it in that way because the policy comes first and

064the regulations come after. So how we refer to it is important because it may not be in existence. And this is again looking to be consistent across all of our policies in an evergreen manner. Missiser my hand. Okay. So just to summarize what I think I hear under section three, we want to work word smmith the word policy to make it more accurate because it's referencing something outside of a policy. Uh I heard something around perhaps a section five on financial support. I guess if a school was to adopt um uniforms, what would the financial be support for those who are in need? Okay. And then we need to make sure there would be a reference to the regulation because it's not it's not duly noted already. Did I miss anything? Please note there is

065currently no regulation. Okay. So there is no regulation on this. Miss Lee, I don't think we need to constantly make the refer reference to a specific regulation. Again, this is saying to the superintendent, whoever they may be, that they must adhere or create something to satisfy what the expectations are here. I just what is it that we're looking for consistency about or to develop? We don't always have to say a reference to a regulation because Miss Seismore said, "Oh, okay. Sorry. I'm summarizing. I didn't take a turn. I'm fine with the policy the way it's written. I believe Miss Seismoreheiser said something about a reference to a regulation, but if there isn't one, we we'll take that out. Miss Seismoreheiser. Yeah, just to clarify, I did mention reference to regulation. All I was trying to

066say is that right now it's confusing what the they're supposed to follow because it says a school can do voluntary uniform um when guidelines for implementing school uniforms is followed under philosophy. I just think we need to clarify what guidelines we're referring to. Is it a regulation that needs to be created? Is it like where are they? What are they? Um and I'm just saying this comes from some history where and I'll be honest, the grading policy was a big example of this. We had a policy of regulations and we had random guidelines that no one knew how they were really created or updated. So I just think we want to be clear under philosophy and maybe this is an update after the regulation is created but we need to be clear what they're supposed

067to follow. Well and I have a question Dr. read because it's I guess the reason this policy was so lengthy is because there was no regulation. So a lot of the what has been removed is is it is it assumed there will be a regulation written or should the policy just be so help me out. I believe it's because we uh would intend to move this to a regulation but we would need the policy first before we could do that. All right. Any further discussion on this particular one? I have my hand up. Okay. I was looking at it to see if it came down. Yes, you do. Go ahead. Thank you. I appreciate it. I guess what I'm trying to say is the part that was removed is the guidelines. The title of the

068section was removed said guidelines. That's why this policy now is confusing when that's removed. And I don't think we can move forward with it. You know, it's like saying follow these guidelines in this section and you remove that section. I understand we have to pause before we complete the regulations, but the policy is written right now makes no sense cuz it's telling us to follow something that doesn't exist because the guidelines section was removed. And I agree it's a regulation, but you can't then tell say in a policy to follow guidelines that have been removed and don't exist anymore. That's the point I'm making. It's it's fine if you want to do that, but if I read this policy, I'd be like, well, where are the guidelines and there aren't any because there going to

069be change of regulations. I don't think we should have that kind of inconsistency or confusion in our policies. I I understand what you're saying. Then if we're going to be assigning these to different people to Wordsmith outside the room, then that will be Wordsmith. Is that Are we in agreement? Yeah. Okay. Absolutely. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure it was clear. It's hard sometimes when you're in virtual want to make sure it's clear what I was trying to get at that I don't think we can move this forward with the way it's written right now. If you can't hear anything, sorry. No, I'm just making a note. Okay. Any more comments on the uh policy 2660.8? Okay. We will go to policy 2671.1. I'll call in Dr. Reid. Okay, this one is multi- agency

070placements. Um, and the purpose again is to establish procedures for multi- agency placements. Um, and so we added a philosophy statement because one didn't exist. Um and then we updated um language based on the review by the department and legal and that's it. Thank you. Any questions, comments on this, Dr. Anderson? Yeah, just small just for us to tighten up the purpose if we are landing on a um kind of template language rather than to establish the policy. Anyone else any other comments? Seeing no hands, can I offer uh a motion that we take out the words the purpose of this policy is in under purpose and start with the word to perhaps vote on the policy. Miss Heismanheiser, I was just voting to agree with that. How about second my motion? Yes, second, sir.

071Thank you. I don't need to speak to it. Do you? No, I'm good. All right. Can we bring that to a vote? Can we all vote? So that the new language is under purpose. It says to establish procedures for multi- agency placements from for students with disabilities. Otherwise, we accept the rest of the redlinining. All those in favor? But Miss Marin, before I call the question, thank you. I am in favor of what's written, but just thinking about the policy. I mean, do we want to put in there that it's to strive for the least restrictive environment which and do we even want to say which some well do we want to say that you know again like that's our purpose. It's not just so that the procedures are clear. It's the point of this

072again is or like why do we I mean someone of the public might look at this and be like why are we I guess I guess it's under philosophy but again that's why purpose philosophy can we just have one I just think it's duplicative so you looking for a specific response. Well, I'm looking to see if we can get some agreement. I mean, I think having a purpose section and a philosophy section is redundant. This policy is titled multi- agency placements for children with disabilities. The purpose is to establish procedures for multi- agency placements for children for students with disabilities. I mean, why don't we just change the title then to procedures for multi- agency placements? I mean, it it's just I guess I hear you, but we've waxed and waned philosophical since I took

073this chair um around these types of things and we've come to the conclusion it seems that we want a purpose and a philosophy and I've heard people reiterate that and there's times when you and it's not an eitheror and at the end of the day even though it's dually stated and obvious it's consistent and I I just we'll never get through anything if you know. So any other questions or comments on this? All right. I I would like to call the question with the We already pass the edit, correct? Did we vote? No. Okay. We need to vote on the um elimination of the purpose of this policy is to and just start with the word. All those in favor of that edit. That's unanimous for everyone in the room including Miss Seismoreheiser. And now

074I would like to call the question. What? Okay. Um, all those in favor as of adopting the policy as written on the screen, Miss Marin, Dr. Anderson, Miss Heismer, myself. Woohoo! Miss Lady, I'm so sorry. Here's something like super super tiny. Um that philosophy statement, it says when FCPS is unable to provide um an appropriate public education to a child with disabilities directly with its own facilities, should that be within rather than with that doesn't seem to flow. I know we just voted on it, but it just caught my eye. I'm not going to claim to be an English. It sounds better, but I don't know without having grammar check on a word document. Um, because you can't do with its facilities. It has to be there in. So, what's that? Okay, votes done. We'll

075move on. We But if it's not a change that is substantive, we didn't have a mover and a seconder or you could do it without objection. Okay, I'm okay. Well, friendly. We didn't have a mover and a seconder. So, we've add asked to change with to within. Clerk's do you have a second? I'll second that. Like to call the question. Who's okay with the word within? It's unanimous. Is it coming? Wait. So, Miss Lady, back to the original where you guys It's under philosophy statement. It's not under summary of changes. No, no, no. the wrong within. And then adopting. Are we back to adopting the policy as a whole? Yes. Okay. Yeah. So, I'll move to call the question. Is there a second? Dr. Anderson, we'll call the question. All those in favor of the

076policy as written on the screen, Dr. Anderson, Miss Eismerheiser, and myself with Miss Marin away from the table. It passes. Okay, we are now in the 3000s. So, call on Dr. Reid to speak to operational guidelines school libraries policy 3012.4. Thank you, Miss Lady. Um, the purpose obviously is to establish libraries as an integral part of the total school curriculum. Um, additionally there were uh added cross references added. Um, but essentially um we added a definition, we added a philosophy um and then just updated the uh current versions of regulations. Pretty straightforward again. Thank you. Any questions, comments about this particular policy purpose? If you can just do that without objection. Friendly amendment that we're going to start the purpose with the word to. So I seconded Dr. Anderson's amendment. You want to speak to

077your I do not need to. Can we call the question? Seconded by Dr. Anderson. All those in favor of the friendly amendment, Miss Seismarheiser, Dr. Anderson, myself. Any other questions or comments about the policy? Not seeing any. I will make a motion to call the question. Do I have a second? Second, Dr. Anderson. All those in favor of adopting policy 3012.4. Missheiser, do you have a question? No, I was just voting. Okay, that's what I thought. Okay. So to vote for the policy as it's written on the screen all those in favor Dr. Anderson Mismore myself that policy passes. Where are we now? Next. All right. Call on Dr. Reed to talk about policy 3280 controversial issues. Thank you, Miss Lady. um this policy um summary of changes. There was a philosophy section added um

078in the definition and philosophy as well as responsibilities um procedures were taken out because they would be in the regulation and there is a um updated policy uh cross reference with non-discrimination and regulation. Thank you. I'll make a motion that we start the purpose with the word to and eliminate the purpose is to. Do I have a second? Dr. Anderson, would you like to speak to it? I don't need to. All those in favor. Missheiser, are you there? Yes. Missiser, Dr. Anderson, myself. So that friendly amendments made to the policy. Any other comments or questions on the policy? Miss Heismeriser, just briefly under the commitment section. Um I agree with the commitment section, but we have hate, discrimination, racism, other forms of bigotry. And often I will just find in my experience sometimes abbleism doesn't

079get included in that list and people talk about it. So, I'm wondering if we can add the word abbleism under that list or um or other forms of bias maybe. I certainly hear you. Um I have not in my experience seen abbleism being seen as forms of bigotry or understood that way right. Um so like perhaps between or after the word racism like where where would you put it? I would form yeah hate discrimination racism abbleism or other forms of bigotry or bias. Now the bias may be difficult because people had different biases and controversial issues but so you're offering two you want to add the word abbleism and or biases you want to offer both. I would just offer abbleism. I think biases can be difficult with controversial issues because people walk in with

080biases but maybe bigotry or hurtful bias. I don't know but I would offer abbleism and there racism. I'm going to get um council to weigh in on that. Can you Yes. I think we're under commitment and it would if if if I may, Miss Meiser, I believe it would read, "Staff shall affirm the dignity and belonging of all students and shall oppose hate, discrimination, racism, abbleism, and other forms of bickotry when engaging with controversial issues." Yes, that's that sounds good to me. Thank you. U Dr. Anderson is Mr. Oh, so sorry, Mr. Foster. You're right there. This is one of these policies that has shown up with every governance committee iteration that I've been on and we've never been able to bring it over the finish line. But I remember, if you could maybe recollect

081with me, Mr. foster. We had a lot of conversation regarding what this means for protected classes. Can you that's the thing that's sticking out to me a little bit. Can you kind of and I don't mean to test you on the on the spot. Can you just maybe share your understanding of this or your recollection of this as it applies to this policy that you have so well articulated before? I just can't recall all of it. Yeah, I um I appreciate you uh noting that um I it's been a while um and I I do recall having discussions, but I am am not remembering the uh the detail on them. Um, unfortunately, yeah, I'll just keep listening and I have something else. So, there's still no second for abbleism right now. I'll second. Okay. Miss

082Marin has seconded the addition of abbleism. And so, I guess the question is, do we have to because this is so wrapped up in legal I would think. Does that need to be does that would an edit like that if passed need to be checked? That's my question because it's because I is is abbleism a protected class. Yes. Yeah. Um is disability? Okay. Yeah. I I I think that it is. Um and I I I mean I'm comfortable with a change. I don't think I need to do further research on it. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Foster. So, we have a second on the on the table. Um, any more discussion on this before we call the question? Miss Maron, I'm sorry. Yes. Do you want to speak to your motion? Thank you. Miss want to

083speak or Miss Seism, do you want to speak further to your motion? I think I spoke to it earlier, but I I'll save it in case there's any questions that come up. Thank you, Miss Mayor. Yeah, just to be clear, is it the legal words, right? It's no one will be um discriminated based on their ability, but in this phrase, we're talking about not in incurring abbleism. So, that would be I think what we're trying to figure out and make sure it's accurate. So, I just want to make sure that that language is accurate. if the council could confirm that we're using the right word in the right place. I I think that a ab ableism is a is a term that could be used in the uh in the policy. Um it's an understood

084term. Um and so I don't I don't have any legal concerns with it. Okay, great. I have other comments, but I'll wait till after this motion. Any more comments on the motion? I would just comment I fully support the motion. Seeing no other hands, we'll call the question. If we are comfortable with the amendment to this section with adding the word abbleism after racism common, comma, and before the word and other forms, please raise your hand. Miss Mayor and Dr. Anderson, Misser, myself, that's unanimous. Miss Mayor, other things you want to speak to in the policy. Yeah, thanks and thanks for bringing that Miss Heismer. Um, I actually just finished the autobiography of Judith Hume, which I highly recommend. And there's a youth version. And if you don't know who that is, that's your first

085assignment. Okay. Um, I think that this is fine. I'm wondering the regulation is also from 2015. So, what are the superintendent's plans to um to review that? And I was actually just wondering how often do the regulations get reviewed? Is there a set timeline or only when things seem to come up? Uh generally we review them when things come up or legal changes or the policies change. All righty. Um I wondered if we should put the word facilitation in there somewhere. um you know the the role of the school is to facilitate the thoughtful and the thoughtful discussion but well I I don't know that we need to do it but I just actually was talking with a staffer today about our we need to do more to facilitate discussions that are difficult because when

086there's a void it gets filled with other things and so um you know I guess I also wanted a commitment that we will educate our students about these and it's in there but Um I think teachers might have fear that you know they're going to say the wrong thing or they'll be liable for something and so saying that they are facilitators perhaps further you know ensures that we're not saying you know they're indoctrinating which they aren't but um anyway just happy to hear any thoughts anyone has on that. Um I'll take a turn. Would you be comfortable with the purpose read to establish guidelines for facilitating thoughtful teaching and learning about controversial issues? I like that very much. Okay, I'll offer that as a motion. Seconded by Dr. Anderson. I don't need to speak to

087it. I think I did. Do you need to speak to it, Dr. Anderson? Anyone else? Okay. So, under purpose, it will read to establish guidelines for facilitating facilitating thoughtful teaching and learning. So insert the words facilitating thoughtful after the word for anyone else want to comment on that. I'll call that question. Do I have a second? Miss Mayor, all those in favor of this particular the rewarding of the way the purpose is written right now. Missheiser, Dr. Anderson, Miss Marin, and myself. All right, back to further discuss discussions around the policy. I think it's Dr. Anderson's turn. Yes, thank you. One of the wonderings that I had was regarding the segment, the section um that is commitment and again I see that as part of the beliefs and the values, hence therefore the philosophy again

088not married to it. just just seems to be one of the um title headings that is not a regularly occurring one. And so I I would like to hear if that's a possibility for us to embed that commitment under the philosophy because that speaks to what is it that the the board believes that speaks to what we want to communicate to the public and the superintendent. Um and one of the issues that I think has way laid this policy quite a bit and again where does that live I don't know but I want to raise it is the safety around these conversations as articulated under the responsibility that there will be a a a safe atmosphere and just wanting to make sure that there's protections for both teacher and student when views are non-conclusive. as

089articulated here has always been the case. So how that gets articulated maybe it's in the regulations but there's always a big fear that a student will express a thought that is not the popular thought and that might yield some disciplinary actions or if the teacher engages in the same thing. I I I just have lots of wonderings here because it makes it difficult to have that safe and thoughtful space and also the preparation of our staff to do that work um and just to be able to have the conversations and the places here where it is a um a planned discussion because it's part of the curriculum. I could see that there'll be probably more preparation there, but there's also the unstructured that I believe is referred to here, which gives me a lot of

090heartburn because of where various staff tends to be. So, there was a lot to that. Um I were you making um well I I'll I'll take my turn. I kind of like commitment as a standalone um just because I I because it's not in every policy and I think it's a a firm reiteration. I don't I I'm okay with it in philosophy, but I also like it as a standalone um because the statement that that that is being made by the policy. And again, this is us as a school board making a statement um uh about controversial issues. So that that those are the comments that I have. Uh otherwise, I'm comfortable adopting the policy um as amended by us. Um other questions, comments, I would like some feedback to some of the things that

091I've shared regarding the um information to be included in the regulation. or that's already in the regulation. Um, I don't I would have to go back and look at the regulation. Um, and if the board wanted to put something in the policy to that end, you know, I'm fine with that as well. I think we were trying to work within the current policy structure. If you want to take time to read the regulation, it's pretty detailed. Okay. It's a good three pages. And my last wondering that I am so sorry I forgot is under definition we refer to bias. I almost feel like bias needs its own definition. I'm going to allow time for people to read the regulation. Dr. Anderson. Thank you, Dr. Re. Just a quick question regarding the regulation. Um, section five

092speaks to the role of the teacher, but embedded within are some of the things for which principles will be responsible. I wonder if it's worthwhile to separate those two things to really be clearer in terms of who has responsibilities for which sections. You know, we could certainly look at structuring it differently. I think at the end of the day, principles are making choices. They approve um instruction at the school level. No, absolutely. It's just all under the section of role of teacher and there's some specific references to what principles will be doing in that section. Can you point those out like what letters? I think hold on because I don't see principal and I see maybe under speakers. Hold on one second. It was one with the approval. Did I get the two mixed up?

093Yeah, I I see it under speakers and I see it under distribution of literature. Okay, maybe I did um get those intertwined. My apologies. Um but it did answer some of the questions that I had regarding teacher preparation and being ready to have some of these very sensitive conversations. Miss Maron. Yes. Just give me one second to remind myself what I was going to say. Yeah, the regulation is very interesting and has very I don't know, I guess dated language, you know, how we handle controversial issues. Again, that's a really nice place to use the word facilitate and kind of it definitely needs an update. So um I am eager to get this policy approved. It is time. Okay. Um so again I know uh Dr. Anderson you made a comment related to moving commitment

094to philosophy but I don't have a formal motion on that. Second you mentioned Okay. Can we call the question to vote on the policy? I I did want to ask for a definition for bias though a prejudice. I mean you want you want a definition section in this particular policy. There is a definition section but the definition section refers to bias and I think that requires a little bit of explanation. I guess I'm not following why. what is the definition of bias that Fairfax County is utilizing to help guide this work? Um, because if we're expecting that, again, we're trying to communicate to the public what this is. And if we're explaining controversial issues that are based on perspective and bias, what is bias? I only know like Webster's definition. I'm I'm I'm I'm my

095advocacy is just to add a definition for bias like single that particular word out but not single out. Okay. Is that a motion? Yes. Okay. Is there a second to that? I'm not seeing a second for that. Okay. Thank you. Any other comments or questions on this policy? All right. May I make a motion that we vote on the policy as it's written on the screen? Do I have a second? Miss Marin. All those in favor of the policy as written on the screen, please raise your hand. Miss Marin, Miss Eismerheiser, myself, anyone opposed? Dr. Anderson, it's 3 to one. The policy passes at governance. Next up, we have Advanced Academics K12 policy 3335.2. Call on Dr. Reed to present this particular revision. Thank you, Miss Lady. Um, at this time there were no changes

096other than a philosophy statement was added and um responsibility was responsibilities was changed out from requirements. Thank you committee members and Miss Marin. Yeah. So again, I mean, I wish it would be great if we could get to the point where we have that global agreement because when I think about the grading policy and then earlier the um K8 placement policy, what you know, do we want this to be similar and that we expect certain things that will be determined by the superintendent such as statement about place-based instruction versus center-based instruction? This is where that could go, Miss Lady. And that could be a robust discussion at at the full board table or about testing and placement. And um are there others again in this kind of category? Like to me, so I look at

097this, I'm like, okay, we have one policy for advanced academic programs for K12. Then we have the other policy above about placement for K8. Are we going to have other policies about IB or policies about like what makes AAP so distinct? Is it you know I mean these are kind of like the questions like this is the board's vision and so I think like this policy in particular about AAP could be have a really robust conversation and review. What about you know dual enrollment or ensuring the participation of students with special needs who are 2e who we know are often not able to access this. So again could we pass it and it stands as it is? Sure. But this is our chance to really dig into it. But I know you know we've already

098dug into very two juicy policies this year. But I think this connection between the earlier one on K8 and this one should be something that we really do think further about. Thank you. Uh Dr. Anderson, here's a question. Is this a policy that we require, Dr. Reed or Mr. Foster? I believe it is connected to the code of Virginia as a legal reference. Uh we have to identify what we do for advanced academics or in some cases it's referred to as gifted and talented. Um some states actually require an IEP uh for students that would uh be placed in programs such as advanced academics. It's a civil rights um topic. Okay. Thank you. SM question. Um I think it's fascinating that the sample um policies from VSBA do not have sections. They're just paragraphs or

099or multiple paragraphs. um but I you know to Miss Marin's point there there is naming of some of the things in here more specifically um than is in the FCPS policy. I don't think that it changes the policy. I think that not naming means you don't risk excluding something. Um sometimes we started getting to naming of things and then a new ac academic opportunity comes along then like dual enrollment you know I mean we weren't doing that at one point and then it evolves so we didn't have to revise the policy to add de um right now we don't do Cambridge but who knows I don't know some point something like that could come along so um in terms of my own personal comments I'm comfortable with this um and again I think that you

100make a point also, Miss Mayor. And it's sometimes I think some of these regulations, the rel regulations that are attached to policies we are um um adopting um I think probably should be evaluated for terminology that perhaps has changed like uh like the last one facilitation. Um but I don't when I read the regulation, I don't it doesn't delineate AP centers in it anywhere, right? So I don't know where that's delineated if it's not in this regulation. You mean the policy? Is there a separate policy for AAP centers versus advanced academics? If it's not delineated in the policy because you said regulation twice. I just want to make sure I was following. No, I was talking about regulation. The regulation has the details and the system I guess at some point probably decided to have

101centers. I I don't know the centers were ever in policy and I don't want them in policy. So, I'm not suggesting they go in policy. I'm actually just making an observation that they're not in regulation either. So, it shouldn't be hard to sunset them. Miss Marin. Well, I'm curious what the superintendent thinks. I mean, by way of policy, is this a robust policy? I I you know I don't think it's a robust policy but it's an accurate policy and if the board wants to expand on um their philosophy your philosophy I think you certainly could but this still guides the work that says we have to have one um which we do so I mean I think then the regulation defines the how we do it the policy indicates the what right we have to

102do it. Um, and it's in statute and um, so you could certainly add more to it. Well, this is, you know, and doing a time check. I know we wanted to have a little time to close out, but I mean I I feel like this is really important and we should spend more time on this. I think, you know, we'd have to plan as a board though to review this. This really gets into again what are we assuring that students have? I mean to not mention 2E or it does say ability, intellectual ability, but um I'm not even sure if we talk about intellectual ability if that's a phrase that we use, but we don't need this policy. It it the law tells the superintendent what to do. This is a nothing policy to me.

103Um you know, I'm the liazison to the advanced academic advisory committee. they would have lots they'd love to see in this. And I I just I would rather not do anything on it right now. And again, like look at the totality of where our policies are at and see, you know, we really need to update things with a better stamp. If there's no rush to update this policy since it's been 11 years, I'd rather wait and maybe we can also think about what the next year of work for the governance committee looks like and start to piece that together. But as this is, I don't think it says anything about what the philosophy of this board is when it comes to advanced academics. So, um, and accessibility, you know, we could put in here things

104like, are we going to pay for an AAP? Are we going to pay for IB? Are we going to pay for transportation? There's so many things that we could reference that could go into regulation. But again, I keep thinking about our grading policy work and how much we had in there to answer questions and to formalize things that we hear about all the time. I I just I'm not comfortable with this policy. So, Dr. Anderson, thank you. Just looking at this more in this conversation and I and I I agree with Miss Mayor. I think there's some spaces for us to preview some things that may show up in the regulation, but there also seems to be a little bit of inconsistency I that I just noticed between the purpose and the philosophy as written.

105The last line of the philosophy speaks to providing academic advanced programs for eligible students, which is probably the piece that speaks to the the code that you referred to Dr. Reid. That should be in the purpose because the purpose seems to expand it to all students. And the first part of the philosophy says all students should have access to challenging and enriching rigorous experiences which I agree with. But this one is only speaking to eligible students. So it it is a subset of students and it just feels a little bit muddled and hidden because we're not talking about everybody with this policy. Is that an accurate statement, Dr. Reid? Well, this policy um is for eligible students, right? Correct. And eligible the eligibility is all outlined in other documents about the types of testing which

106I'm sure have been reviewed at the committee, the advanced academics committee at some point. Um but it's for the policy specific for eligible students. So since that's the case, obviously I have my comment regarding the first part of purpose, but we need to highlight in this purpose that we're speaking about eligible students and perhaps there should be an overall um bullet area where we're talking about again not specifically what that eligibility looks like and just broadly whom it may impact because this will not be impacting all students. So, I'm going to take a turn. Um, one of the beautiful things about Fair County Public Schools is they were the one of the front runners in the nation around open enrollment at high school and then open enrollment and at at middle in terms of honors

107and now open enrollment much more to algebra 1. Um, so when you're looking at a philosophy that's K12, the eligible term is differentiated first through sixth grade for a non678 middle school student and perhaps for well actually I'm sorry kindergarten through um well no through 8th grade because of the academic centers right because there are kids that are AAP center placed who I could choose to take honors but not be eligible ible for AAP. Um, so my point is the philosophy is kind of hard to write because in 9th through 12th grade it's all students and in K through 8 there's an eligibility piece. So I just think we have to understand that it's all spelled out in the regulation though. Like once you're in nth grade, it doesn't matter if you're ever in AAP

108or not. You can take advanced coursework as long as you have the prerequisite. But if I'm an eighth grader and I didn't test into AAP at any juncture, I can take honors science in eighth grade, but I'm not in the AAP echelon of that, I guess. So, unless we want to break it down into two policies, one which is K8 and one which is 912, I understand the terminology is my point. Um, and I think that staff probably struggled with that because it's eligible students, but once you hit nth grade, all are eligible. And I appreciate that. Thank you. But again, going back to this is communication to the public. They need to understand it in kind of the way that you've described it. And if we need a couple of more sentences, if we

109need another bullet to articulate that, that has to be what occurs. Um, although I would be remiss if I didn't share with you, honors classes and AP classes, while you might be able to sign up for it even at middle school, they are not the same for a lot of different reasons. Um, they don't have the same feel, they don't have the same rigor for a number of reasons. So, I always shy away from making that, at least that's what I find in my experience. So, I shy away from making that blanket statement. Um, I think given that it is 450, this may be one of these policies that we engage with with a little bit of background work. I would love to hear the feedback of the AP committee because this is the reason

110why they exist to help us move the work forward and what moves the work forward more than the board's expectations and policy. So I I would like for that to be a component for us to maybe have a little bit more discussion to bring in the things that are important to articulate to the public what is it that we're doing and to the superintendent what is it that we are expecting. Again, I'm not asking to bring all of the house and the procedural things from the um the um the regulation. Yes, from the regulations. Um, but I I could see some additional work here. I just want to agree with the statement that you made. I'm not saying that all honors courses are the same either. I was just saying that about the access, Miss

111Seismore. Thank you. And I think I'm in agreement that, you know, perhaps we need a little more work on this. I would just sort of put out in addition to what others have shared, it is confusing. we all have access and these programs are designed to provide for eligible students. I think splitting this up into the philosophy is that all students have access to engaging rigorous learning experiences. Um but to me I look at this policy as a differentiation policy and as Dr. Reed mentioned there is a civil rights component to providing advanced academics and differentiated advanced academics where everybody has rigorous and challenging learning experiences but they perhaps are differentiated for for students. So perhaps we can I would recommend this policy that first sentence is left alone. Then we have something in here.

112So we provide a range of differentiated uh opportunities for students to engage in you know challenging experiences. We do have level one through 4 AP in all the way from through 8th grade or at least through sixth grade um or fifth grade for those schools where middle school starts in sixth grade. So I think then you differentiate it and say we have advanced academic you know programs for eligible students in in grades K through 8. In addition we provide advanced academic classes for all students in grade 9 through 12. That's the point you're getting to Miss Lady about um honors and advanced courses in open enrollment. And um differentiation is important for all students at every you know area of ability and experience. And so I think it's important to differentiate how we provide that

113within a philosophy that we do provide advanced programming for all students to have challenging and enriching learning experiences. So I'm happy if you want to send us like a two person task force to work on this um I'll offer that up. But I do think that philosophy needs to be tweaked a bit to be a little more differentiated from what we offer. Okay. So we are running out of time. Um, we did pretty decently. We There's three we did not get to. Um, so are we in agreement? We we'll push those to the next meeting without objection. Okay. So, um, P3355, High School for Science and Technology, P3415, Len School Day, and P3510 Adult Education. We'll move to April. that date 20th 29th. Okay. Um and then I will work with the superintendent on some

114of the policies from our last meeting that staff are we're still working on and we're not ready for this meeting. Um well and I think we're going to go back and assign some of the ones from here. Um Miss Marin. So, does that finish the review of all of the outstanding 2000 Siri policies? And if it does, do we want to go back and then review the whole thing as a set as we had intended? Um, well, we need to do 8240. Okay. Um, and then I I mean if the plan is to I mean we we we got into the 3000s and we didn't get to the 4,000s, right? So if we push the 30,000s to the next one, I guess the question is are we trying to get in compliance or are we

115trying to review them as a series? Miss Marin. Well, actually I did ask that we review next all of the CIP policies that were from the or the fac the policies that are waiting redlined from the CIP motion. So I would ask that that actually be next. I I I thought we were going to do them all. My suggestion would be we've now gone through all the 1,00s that were over that were due and potentially No, no, we've gone through all the 2,00s, right? And today we just started on some threes. But I also would prefer that we not do multiple series in a meeting. So I I would suggest for next time, can we look at the CIP motion follow-on policies and or do the 8240 plus go back through all the 1000s and

116maybe just tie that up since we've and then we will have one complete set. Yeah. Um I I will work with the superintendent on that to figure out what that looks like. Makes sense. Okay. Thank you. Just great that we're doing the Yeah, I'm hearing CIP and the 1000s or maybe CIP in the 2000s, but the CIP ones are also like another huge bucket of work. And so I will say we do have the May 6th work session which will be all about facilities. So if we want to get our heads really in it, we can, but 8240 might be enough of getting our heads in it. Um, okay. Because I can, you know, foreshadow when it comes to CIP, I'm going to trust the people who redlined it because it's not my area of

117expertise. Um, if it's imable to other people, I'm going to let my my brain wrap around what will be delegated and I'll reach out to people as opposed to doing that here. under me. That's what I'm saying. I want to think about it and then I'll sign to people as opposed to doing it right here. Yes. Okay. Well, you know. Okay. All right. We are adjourned at 457. Thank you. Bye everybody. Thank you Robin. Thank you Rajna.