3/18/25 - FCPS Governance Committee Meeting

001All right. Good afternoon. Going to call the governance meeting for March 18, 2025 to order. Miss Dixit has submitted a written request to attend this afternoon's meeting virtually due to a medical conflict. is attending today's meeting from Centerville, Virginia. All those in favor of approving Miss Dixit's request. Dr. Anderson, Miss Marin, myself, all those in favor, Miss Seismore. That's unanimous for those in the room. Miss Dixit, please check your audio and video. Miss Dixit. All right, we'll come back for that check. All right. Um, I call on Dr. Reid for item 1.02 policy 21108, human immuno deficiency virus policy. Thank you. Um, Miss Lady, so I, you know, I think what we've provided here is a redlinined uh version of the policy. Uh, there weren't very many changes made really. Um we do at the

002end talk about referring to the current version of the regulation and um we also add the OSHA uh guidance which is on the back as a legal reference um and the current version of the regulation. So, since this one was last updated in 2011, I feel like it's um pretty straightforward, honestly, in terms of its revisions, and I'm happy to answer any questions. Thank you, Dr. Anderson. Yeah, very quickly, I'll just make two quick statements that I think um is my thinking across all of the policies. Um, I I see this, as I've shared before, to be our communication to the public and to the superintendent. So, as such, I think we have to offer as much clarity to the public as possible. And we could we could achieve that by having clear headers and

003having Roman numerals because this is just kind of one big blob of information. And I know we don't want our public to, you know, parents to have to search for it. So one I would definitely advocate for us to have you know section one purpose because we have it on some but not all of them and I think that has to be consistent in whatever the the other subsequent sections are but I don't want to spend all my time on that formatting issue. Secondly, I also want us to try to make these as evergreen as possible. And again, this will show up across the other policies that we'll handle, which is the board is communicating to the superintendent to give directions to create whatever it should be the superintendent or his or her designate. I

004think falling into the trap of identifying specific offices make it an opportunity to have to redo the policies if there's a reorganization or restructuring. And so that's the second one I'd like for us to just be consistent. I don't want to say this again across these other policies. And thirdly, I think we need to come to consensus about the terms that we are utilizing for our families. We've been utilizing families and caregivers, parents, some grouping of the three. Very often it's parents and caregivers. I'd like for us to figure out what is it that we're going to utilize and make that come across the entire um well across all of our policies. So those are kind of my big three overarching feedback points. Um, when it comes to this one specifically, I have one question

005regarding the section that has philosophy where it begins with in red, evidence shows that risk and it goes on to speak to standard precautions entail using gloves. Standard precautions tail using gloves, etc. That's good information, but that's not a philosophy. And if we want to keep it, I think it should live elsewhere, whether it's in some sort of procedure, just something else because it doesn't come across as the philosophy. It comes across as either a definition or just some other title. Um, and I think that is the bulk of what I had for this one. Thank you. So, thank you for the the points related to formatting. Um and I you know I I think um if it's if it's amenable to the to the committee um I think we can get through these but

006also um possibly work on the formatting consistency before we bring them to the full board for the vote. Um and maybe that's some work that I can do offline with Dr. to read and team. Um, and then I think the other thing was um I do agree we need consistency related to the terminology we're referencing in terms of parents. Sorry, just point of order mystics that can't hear. So, there's something technology going on. I just want to apologize. Thank you. We'll fix that. We'll pause there because I don't know if that's a problem for the entire public. So, let's pause and check that. Miss Dixit, can you hear us now? Yes, I can. Okay, thank you. Um, I think we came to some terminology around parent or caregiver. Um, and I just think we need

007to capture that and then try to use that terminology when we reference that moving forward. Um, and and again, We'll make that a priority. Okay. I think next up was Miss Marin. Oh, yes. The question about uh does the standard precautions entail dot dot dot belong in philosophy. Dr. Reed, if you don't want it in philosophy, we can take it out of philosophy. Right. It's simply a statement of fact. Well, for the good of the group, I will read a definition of philosophy. It says, "Philosy is a systematic study of general and fundamental questions concerning topics like existence, reason, knowledge, value, mind, and language." And so, in in theory, depending upon the definition and what part of that, something like that I think could live in philosophy. Um, I'll leave it at that. I I

008we'll see if others have have have the same question. Uh Miss Marin. Yes. So I agree that we shouldn't do formatting. I actually just sent to the governance committee and clerks the running document I've been keeping about um formatting. And so it's got and so it's got things like um well it's actually not just formatting, but it's talks about some of the things that already been accomplished like having a memo for the board and what that should entail. But at the end, it's basically the style guide. And really, this could um move over to like the whole board, right? All of our communications, we want to make sure when we talk about our governance manual and our emotions and all those things. So, just pertaining to parents and guardians, that's what we used in the

009boundary policy and grading policy, parents and guardians. So, I would put that in that bucket of when we do the final review, you know, we do those kinds of things. I mean, philosophy, purpose, that's another one. So I definitely am eager to figure that out but um also eager to do the content work today. So I thought this policy was fine to go. My only comment was that perhaps there could be an umbrella policy about bloodborne illness under which HIV is included. I don't know if we have other policies about bloodborne illnesses um or again is this a thing that makes sense to roll into others but for now to have put you know our thoughts on it I am I'm fine with it and I prefer this version than to the VSBA sampled version.

010Do you want to respond to the Bloodborne overriding? Do we have any other policies related to that? We have hygiene practices. We have health services, school health related needs. I'm not aware of a bloodborne illness policy. That would be umbrella pol. I mean, we could write one, but I'm I'm not personally aware of one. I mean, I I guess the other thing that I'll add is that this policy um you know, came about when AIDS was new and HIV was new, right? 1988. We don't have a policy just for COVID. We don't have a policy just for flu. So, I think the discussion of the prior board had been is this necessary? If the question is a bloodborne illness, then that's you know a whole other bucket, but are we going to have a you

011can see the date when it started. So I think it's fine to do it now. I I just don't think it's really as I don't know either it could be more robust and talk about bloodborne illnesses or Yeah. So that's my thinking and what the previous board thought. So seeing no other placards, it sounds like really the only question was related to whether or not the one statement belonged to philosophy. Um I'm my hand is raised. Oh, I'm sorry. I looked up there a second ago and it was not. So now it's up. Okay, Miss Dixit. Uh so I agree with Miss Marin too. uh that I was when I was looking at it I was like why this policy is only for HIV and uh even bloodborne like we have no other you know

012there are hundreds of other diseases or infectious diseases which are uh do have a separate policy for each of them and then I was looking at the list of all the 200 thousand series and this kind of odd they're like sitting there's a should be like a health uh I know bucket so is there a reason that this is under the 2000s where others are still like in a similar in nature. I guess this is my question for how we categorize them. I don't know who can answer that. Well, I think it's categorized under health and welfare. Okay. So, and under special services because that's the department that oversees health and welfare. So, that's why it is there. I mean, it doesn't mean it needs to stay there. Uh but that's where it currently sits.

013I mean it does make sense to be in their health uh for sure. Um again it I mean these numbers sometimes I guess don't make sense to uh how we have bucketed them together. But uh if everybody is okay with it, I'm okay with it. I'm just it is just seeing all of them and this was like little bit of a like it was different than the all the other list of policy we're discussing today. So that's that's all. Okay. So I I think we got an answer to why it's in the 200s. It's under special services. It is health and welfare. There are others that are special services that are in the 200s. I think the 200s is one of the ones with the most policies. Um, I'm comfortable bringing this to a vote,

014seeing no other placards to just accept it from staff. Oh, Miss Mayor. Okay. So, and I know how much you want us to get through the content and I do too, but I do think figuring some of this out is helpful at the outset. So, I just Googled what are the series of accounting numbers and what is the name of the 2000 series? Like what are the names of each of these series? I don't see them on our policy page. Like it's not 2000s or this and because this is going to matter later when we get to the policies that have been misnumbered for some reason. And I do think again this policy was created at a time and a place. It would seem to make more sense to roll it into what makes sense

015now which is bloodborne illnesses in general. Um it doesn't seem urgent that we pass it right now. I mean if it's something but I think it relates to what are the purpose of this series and if it's health is there another category that's more health. Do we have the list of series numbers? So, in accordance with regulation 1104, the 2000 series is special services. And so, it's anything from admissions, residency, and attendance, counseling services, health and welfare, promotion, retention, grading, and graduation requirements, psychological services for students, uh, social socioulture. I'm I'm sorry, I can't comprehend all that list. Where are you reading? regulation 1104 and it lays out where the title of each series and then the subtitles that go under each series. Okay. I wish regulation 1104. This would have been great for us

016to No, no, no blame assigned. It's just like these are the kinds of things that when we think about refreshing this system, we have to know exist. So, are you Well, I you're just reading the regulation. Yeah. I mean this one I think is this one I think is more unique than the other ones. When I look at special services I mean that's also where we have special education right now and some of us don't believe that special education should be in special services. We feel like it should be in instructional services but it continues to reside here. So like that's one thing. We've also got grading and graduation requirements and promotion and retention when that's really I think should be under instruction. So I guess the question is as we go through this exercise

017today, what are we willing to kind of put on the the side for now and what needs to be decided and this is just a tough one to start with but it kind of lays bare all of it. So I will defer to you madam chairwoman because you've spent a lot of time framing this. Well I appreciate that. So I mean I'm hearing two I'm having two thoughts as I'm listening. One is do we sunset this all together? Right. Do we need a policy on bloodborne, you know, um, diseases or do we sunset it all together? Um, I mean, that's, um, Miss Seismoreheiser, you can finish your thought. I was just going to raise my hand to say, I mean, I I think it's kind of our work is bucketed in two ways, right? We're

018looking to try to catch up on some of these policies, which I think the superintendent and you have done a great job of kind of getting us some of these policies to catch up on. And then there's a need perhaps to reorder the policies, create a, you know, a template for what the formatting looks like, right? I would personally at this point recommend that we right now try to catch up on some of these policies and maybe create a task force of the governance committee members to come back with because I could see this being reordered to better match the reorganization that Dr. Reed has even done in some of her of the leadership team and the work that each team is doing. But I would almost say let's put creating a template and reordering

019this into a task force that can come back and be a standalone governance meeting. But in the meantime to get through some of these policies, let's maybe folk that would be my suggestion on that. As far as sunsetting this, I think trying to figure out how to say this. There's a lot of things changing right now with the change in the government and I think I would be nervous to sunset anything without seeing how things play out would be my thought on that especially things that were controversial at some point because it seems like things that history's come back around. I would just leave it at that. So I would not be comfortable sunsetting it at this moment. Um, but I do think perhaps a task force to kind of work on some of those

020things and do a standalone governance meeting might be good and then that we can go back and reorder those in that. But right now, I'd like to kind of personally for me get through some of this backlog. That's my two cents. Miss Mayor. Well, I'd like to make a motion to adopt the proposed changes of policy number. It's the policy number. 21108. 21108. I will second it. Okay. Second. Would you like to speak to your motion? Motion to adopt it. Thank you. Sorry. I think that at this time we can update it and as we discussed, we will continue to figure out the um overall framework of our policies. Great discussion. Thank you. Thank you. Miss size would you like to speak to your second? No, I'm good. Thank you. Okay. Dr. Anderson. Yeah. Just

021a quick question and I'm not sure if that's the same question Miss Dixit had asked. The hygiene practices 4415. Um it's just made me wonder because I was having the same thoughts. Should this be sunset? I I have not looked at 4415, but I wonder if that would be better to live under there as well. That's all. Sorry, I didn't follow that. 4415. Yes. Madam clerk, can you tell me what the 400 series is? Human resources. I don't have that policy in front of me. Is that uh hygiene practices? Is that related to um employees? Likely if it's in human rights, I could look it up and confirm that, but it would be my guess. That's my guess. Which means they they don't they don't go together, right? They're they're exclusively separate things. Um, seeing

022no other placards, can we call the question? Okay. All those in favor of adopting this as written, please raise your hand. Miss Seismarheiser, Dr. Anderson, I'm going to give a clemp. Miss Marin, Miss Dixon, and myself. I think I have tears of joy. All right. Um, before we move on, I I I I will say this, you know, and this is what I what I don't know, right? If we were to have a task force and we were to look at numbering, we were look to at naming because we we came across this in grading where we wanted to change the the the the headings, right? Um I guess any change like that would then have to still come back for a vote. Um even if we move something to a different number, right? because

023we found maybe we need more than you know you know you know maybe we need a 1200 series I don't know I think these are all good questions um but I do think for the good of the group it's nice if we can get through some and then revisit uh with a task force some formatting uh I mean I'm be honest I'm not averse to using even you know um AI in some ways to create the structure we want tell AI what that structure is and try to expedi like so it's not manpower um but machine power. So okay we're going to move on to 1.03 um 1.03 which should be on the agenda agenda item 1.03 03 which is the policy 2115 child abuse reporting procedures and I'll call on Dr. Reid again. Thank

024you Miss Lady. Um again in this uh particular policy there was some clarification around um reporting obligations. But beyond that really uh and the code of Virginia adjustment numbers as well as current versions of other policies. Um but these are minimal amendments uh based on uh you know change in uh numerate num in numbering. Thank you Miss Maron. Yeah, I I would make a motion to approve it, but I'll hold on that. So, this was one, as Dr. Anderson knows, that I worked on personally. It was like one of the first policies we had, and we really worked hard to make it super clear what the steps were if a staff member or someone suspected child abuse. Since then, we've done a lot of discussion and work around putting the processes of work into regulation.

025So, I would be comfortable passing this today in the vein of we're trying to make sure that it's still relevant and correct, but I would put a note on this as when we define what is policy and what is regulation, I think this needs to be reassessed. And so I also wonder like I'm I'm putting notes on my notes today on all right we passed this polity policy and these are the returning questions and and I als yeah so I'll stop there but I do think that the content is relevant but I would also like to hear if the sup I guess the superintendent agrees with the content being correct but I do the content is correct. um it is regulationish because these are procedures but that's what's currently sitting there. So you know if

026you provide me direction that would just want a purpose and a philosophy and then refer to regulation we certainly can do that. I do think because this particular topic can lead to dismissal uh for staff members and there's a legal u mandate, it is an important policy. Not to say other policies aren't important, but um I'm happy to go either way on it, but this is what we revised given where it sits at the moment. Thank you, Dr. Anderson. Um, thank you. I also just looking at this, I'm like, this is fairly straightforward and you know, my other description stands with let's identify the the buckets. We have to say where the purpose is, etc. Um, and my initial thought was this is very much a regulation, particularly part C. And then when I looked

027up the regulation 2125, it's actually duplicative. Um, and I know we're trying to get through it, but I also know we need to fix some of the things. While we may not have outlined fully, you know, the regulations and and the policies, I also cognizant that some of our policies a way to um scant like they don't communicate anything. Um, I think we can communicate what the board is looking for out of um, this reporting without the how to which already lives in the regulation. Um, we could take the time to do it now or we could not, but it's going to be a point that continue to be a sticking point with I I don't know with many others, but definitely this one like part C is almost verbatim one, two, three. I'm looking

028at the regulation and it's almost exactly the same thing. So, so as a point of clarification, there are two there are two C's. There is the big ABC. So, under reporting procedures, you're talking about that C on which would be on the on page two. Yes. On page two under reporting procedures, letter C and one, two, three. It's exactly the language of the regulation. And I don't think we need to have that duplication. um I see space for that part to to to go that whole section C everything else could stand um and not have it be a big deal but that's the really all of the procedures which we don't outline here thank you for that uh Miss Dixit so um I wanted to ask why did we change the added line and official

029capacity if uh Mr. Foster Dr. Reed can just read. Is it the legal um language to be added to be compliant with something? I'm sorry. Where where are you referencing on the red line version of this? Oh, or official capacity. Thank you. Official capacity. Yeah. Well, I mean, um let's see here. So what it did say was all FCPS [Music] employees who in their professional have [Music] reason I'm I'm not sure why we added that phrase. John, do you have a sense of why we would have added in their professional or official capacity? I um my uh assessment is that that change is um based on um drawing the line between what FCPS employees information they obtain in while they're at work uh in as said here is in their professional or official capacity and

030what they may come into in a private capacity when they're you know not at working right and not acting within the scope of their uh employment. But um you know, we may need to follow up with um the uh uh policy uh uh consultant who's been working on these revisions. Yeah, I'm personally not in favor of this addition because when you're mandated to report child abuse, it is it's becomes the part of like you do and uh I'm a mandated abuser uh supporter of child abuse as in my organization which I am doing um not FCPS but it doesn't mean that if I'm an FCPS and I see child abuse I will not report it because I'm not an official IAL capacity there and it was not in the policy before. So it's added. So

031that's why I'm trying to understand maybe there was a reason it was added. I think there was it. John, do you So I've had a chance to pull up the Virginia code section that is quoted in the red line 63.2-1509. 2-159 and that language referring referencing professional or official capacity comes directly from um the language of that code section as a point of reference. It's also in the VSB sample policy that was also included in your documents. I do think to your point Mystics that uh there are many of us for example hourly employees myself that we're not on a particular I mean like it's 247 right if I become aware of Mr. Foster Mr. Lambert, if we become aware, we must report. So, I understand your point. Um, but it is interesting that the

032code is this explicit. Uh, but it doesn't necessarily mean that for folks who um are in many positions in the division. I mean, if you're aware of it, you do. We are mandatory reporters. Yeah. Personally, I don't know about the court. I just feel like if you are uh seeing child abuse, doesn't matter what capacity you are, you got to, you know, you report it. Um and so and I did see the VSBA sample policy too. And they have u some additional things which we don't have here um which um could be added, I guess. So I'm I'm fine with if everybody is okay with add keeping it on. I I am just personally not um okay with that. And um there is a line in VSP policy says including any child who may be

033abandoned in the reporting requirement. Um I just want to know if we we are we could add that or are we covering in an any way including any any child who may be abandoned. I think that um that's in the reporting obligation requirements that would be neglect. Um okay. Um but abandon gives it a much different feel for sure than neglect. Okay. So are you suggesting then in in under the description um the second line where it says child abuse and neglect to say child ab child child abuse comma neglect and abandonment. Yeah. Sure. Okay. I have a second for that friendly amendment. Clerks, have you captured that? Is that it missed exit? Yes, ma'am. For now, I'm good with this. Okay. I I just won't support the policy as if it says in their

034professional or official capacity, but that's just me personally. I am I'm a mandatory reporter of child abuse in my organization. So I take that as a role wherever I go. Um because I'm an official of the organization. So again it may be different for employees but that's that that's that's just one just my personal opinion not that it is wrong. Yeah. And I think it was clarified that it's codified in the code. So I think we have to use the language. I can tell you that I think at every single person who works with in this industry finds themselves mandatory reporters 247, right? This is an FCBS policy. U Miss Maron. Well, hold on. We I don't think should have a habit of changing things because one board member has an opinion. This is how

035we get into trouble. I'm looking at the document now and the legal references that are cited there and at the end of the draft. I don't see if the title of the actual code is that see that's something that staff should be recommending. So when I look at the transmitt memo all it says is the policy was reviewed and updated by the office of the chief academic officer staff. Well why right a better explanation would have been this is updated to reflect state code about this and we were just talking about how it's kind of HR related. So, it's interesting that it's the chief academic officer. So, you know, again, I think we got to be really laser focused on what we're trying to do right now and not add in stuff off the top

036of our heads. I think that's something. Can we ask a question about it and come back and verify that it reflects it mirrors the state code and also as a format should at the bottom of the policy include the title of the state code? You know, I don't know. But I am not in favor of just adding things in on the fly right now. This is clarification for me. Are you talking about the word abandonment? I am. Okay. Okay. Thank you. I So I don't support the motion. Thank you. Dr. Anderson, Mr. Faucet, this is a question for you just again just to wrap my mind around how this is going to be interpreted. If we write official capacity or professional capacity, I'm so sorry that chair is cutting off your face right at the

037position of under your eyebrows there. Um, if an employee were to be in a grocery store and was witnessed to something that happened and did not report that, would that be considered not in their official capacity and would not be subjected to some of the other things that are outlined in this policy? Yeah, I mean, I would need to take a deeper look at that. I will say my immediate um thought is that it would not apply because the employee in the grocery store is not in the grocery store in their official capacity. They're they're there in their personal capacity to do their personal grocery shopping. Um that is of course that minimum statutory compliance is separate and apart from what the right thing to do is. Um thank you. Thank you for that. Um

038and then I'll have another motion, but I'll wait for this one to finish. Miss sizeer. So just to clarify the the motion on the table is only to add the abandoned part. It's not to take away the phrase official capacity. I just wanted to make sure I was not missing that piece. So currently unless there's a separate motion that comes on the official capacity section is staying in the policy. Um yeah and I just saw that it mirrored state code is what what I saw about it. My question was more on the word immediately. And I know state code also uses the word immediately. But when we don't define it, then it makes it more difficult to um enforce. And I've sort of anecdotally been told 24 hours is considered the immediately. But I'm wondering

039if whether we need to specify in the policy or maybe in the regulation what immediately means. So that's that was my question. I believe it's listed in the policy under penalties D on page two and I believe it's also in the regulation. That's what I was maybe can bring it further up because it seems odd to have it in that spot but if it's in the regul I think I go look at the corresponding regulations I wanted to make sure that it's in there. Um, I find it interesting that the code only says immediately without defining it. Um, because to me the within 24 hours under penalty doesn't really make the immediately clear. So, I think it'd be good to put that further up. Instead of saying immediately, say within 24 hours because we're just

040really talking about what Virginia law requires. It doesn't to me. I think the reason why that didn't jump out to me is that talks about what Virginia law does for 24 hours. It doesn't talk about our immediately, right? Because there's internal um you know consequences as well for not reporting. And so I think we need to make it clear that that 24 hours also applies to our internal not just to Virginia state law. That would be my two cents. I would I would perhaps either ask you to add it to your regulation, Dr. to read or take a look at the regulation or add to the front where it says immediately um all must you know must immediately you know within 24 hours. I'm not making a motion yet but I was asking to take

041a look at that in the in the regulation. I'm trying to find the word immediately. So it's on page one. Page one I'm reading page one trying to figure out it's under um in the red line under reporting. Oh sh immediately. Yeah. I I would almost say shell within 24 hours, but when I read that under penalties, I looked at more the state penalties as opposed to our penalties. So, I'm not making a motion yet, but I just Is that something, Dr. Reed, you'd consider in a regulation? Yes, ma'am. I would. That seems like that would belong in a regulation, but Okay. Miss Maron, we're still, I think, talking about adding neglect, adding abandonment. Abandonment. So, two things, and this is the learning process that we're doing as we're getting better at the superintendent giving

042us the analysis for policy. Definitely, you know, there's a certain definition of abandonment. And so, we've got to understand, you know, is this just how it relates to code? But also the penalties piece. I mean, I think when you're reading these, I would like your recommendation on like this section could be moved to regulation or this section should include a 24-hour, you know, like I I think that would be good for the future. So, and I don't know how comfortable I am dicing it up right now further and we have other ones too. I don't know. I just want to share. Dr. Anderson, I have a motion, but we have one on the table, so I wanted to wait for this to be dealt with first. Oh, I saw your placard up, so I thought

043you were speaking to this. Sorry. No. Okay, Miss Dixit. So, I just wanted to say that the word abandonment came from the VSBA model policy. It was not something I just thought of it on my own. Uh, it it just says there on the reporting. um and also in the the if you look at the VSBA um it's just it's a very small policy so what they have written up and it's it's it's addressed there so I as we are trying to like information from there uh and make our policy more aligned with you know some of the VSBA policy as well that's the reason I mention that um that word abandon because it's used in that VSBA policy um and And I'm rethinking about this of professional official capacity. I feel like it is

044giving more of a strength of a it's coming from a place of giving power or empower the school employee um that they can report it without the fear of any uh you know any kind of action against them because uh so it's not that so it's a it's a different way how it's written. Okay. So I'm I'm I'm good with that now. So I wanted to just verify that I kind of reread it and I think it's just giving more power to the employees to that to be able to report it and it's not that they cannot report it if they're in a grocery store. They can but it's in their official capacity. So, um, but anyway, I I will say that, um, I'm I'm fine with whichever, uh, way we want to move forward.

045Thank you, Miss Maron. Um, I appreciate the reference to the VSBA sample policy, and I just looked it up and it it only says child abuse and neglect reporting. So, again, my again, just wanting to not create words that have certain legal meanings. abandonment is not in the VSBH. It's that one that starts with GA AE-ch child abuse and neglect reporting. Is there it says abandon for those if you're looking at the sample policy under notice of reporting requirement under uh dot one it's the third line be abandoned including any child who may be abandoned. So it's embedded it's embedded in the sample policy. Okay. In in the document that starts GA- child abuse and neglect reporting. Yeah. Look at the title right there. I'm just telling you where she said the word abandonment is.

046Yeah. But again, the phrase used throughout though, I mean, that's kind of not clear on that part. It's abused and neglect. Abuse and neglect. And the section at the bottom of page one is abuse and neglect. So, I just want to try and keep it as similar to the models as we have to keep us out of confusion. I'd like to call the question. Thank you. Okay. So, um right now what's on the uh what we're voting on right this minute is the addition of the word abandonment in the description uh where it says in compliance with the Code of Virginia section 63.2-1500 2-1500 through 1529, child abuse, comma, neglect, comma, and abandonment. All those in favor of the way it's written of the way it's shown on the screen with the edit of of

047adding the word, if you're in favor of adding the word abandonment, raise your hand. Okay. Um, Miss Lisarheiser, Dr. Anderson, Miss Dixit, all opposed. Miss Mayor, and myself passes three to two. Dr. Anderson. [Music] Yes. I would like to motion for us to remove section CC essentially under reporting procedures. Section C that says where and whom to report numbers 1 2 and three. Um the reason is this is exactly verbatim in the um regulation. Everything else should stand. I'll second that if I'm allowed to. Um Dr. Aner, would you like to speak to your motion? I think I said it. I I shouldn't have said it, but I said it. I'm just going to clarify which section you want to remove. It's section C. three. It's exactly in the reg C which would then make

048penalties the new C and immunity. It would not make penalties the new C because if you look at the how it is section A Oh, you are correct. You are correct. My mistake. My mistake. It would just be removal. Thank you. I also do want to say it has to be reordered. We can't have C and then a subsection is also a letter. It has to be a number, right? There's something funky here. What's the The item is there's section yeah section A says description B says reporting C says reporting procedures the I'm sorry the first one was obligation requirements and then reporting procedures has a reporting obligations B confidentiality C where and whom to report which is like the how and it's exactly the same language and regulation Misberhiser. Um, I just wanted to

049ask staff perhaps what their thoughts are about removing this section from the policy. Either Dr. Reid or Mr. Foster. Um, I the where and whom to report. Yeah, I honestly the reporting procedures period could probably all sit in regulation because they are procedures. Um, so I I I'm comfortable. I think everything in C point C is in regulation. Um, so, you know, I I'm fine putting it in regulation as long as the regulation is cited, which it is. Uh, really C point A and C point B are also probably in regulation because they're all procedures. But anyhow, I'm fine with removing C point C. Yeah, I appreciate I was just asking because I was curious why it wasn't suggested to be removed and you may not know why it wasn't. I didn't suggest. Yeah, I

050just it's I I think what I'm trying to do in asking folks to work on these policies is some of these policies have been policies for a very long time. In this case, this one since 1986. So for some reason the board for the last what 45 years has seen yeah be 45 years ago. Well 86 would be not 45 but 40 years ago that this I mean I know and I don't know how much of it was or wasn't here or wasn't wasn't gone. So, I'm trying to both be respectful to the work that I've inherited and update it with legal references and where appropriate philosophy tweaks here and there. If you're asking me to fullon say, do I think all of this should be in a policy? Probably not. But again, I you

051know, I don't know how far you want me. It's sort of like set me loose with pruning shears in the backyard and some bushes I'm going to trim. I I just it's none of this is wrong. It's not inaccurate. It's not going to cause confusion. It's just legally updating the policies. So that's what I was trying to make sure we could just move through these policies, make sure they're legally appropriate, better frame them, and I think we can do some formatting, Miss Mayor, as Miss Marin pointed out, that is more consistent, but just getting us on a path of maybe a little more routine. No. And that's I just wanted to make sure there wasn't some reason that I didn't think about to have this in here. But if there's if there's no reason on

052your part, I'm fine removing it. That was my main reason for asking. Yes, ma'am. Dr. Anderson. Yes. Just more of a quick comment. I I know we're looking for as much information from staff as possible, and that's important, and we should have that, but we also have the work of working through these policies. So, I don't want us to get ourselves too much into a corner to not give ourselves a flexibility because the policies they're based in regulations and codes, etc., but it is still the board's communication to staff and to the public. I I hope we don't lose sight of that. Okay, I'm going to call the question. Um, so before you is the elimination of CC in its entirety because it is completely duplicative in the regulation verbatim. So those in favor of

053move removing CC, please raise your hand. Miss Marin, Dr. Anderson, Miss Eismerheiser, Miss Dixit, and myself. So we will remove CC. So, if I may, um, because it is, I think, an easy fix in terms of, um, formatting, uh, I'd like to make a motion that that description be changed to Roman numeral 1, reporting be changed from B to Roman numeral 2, reporting procedures be changed to Roman numeral 3, And then penalties be changed to Roman numeral 4, immunity to five and retaliation to six because most of these policies purpose is Roman numeral one. So, if we could just have the purpose be Roman numeral one and then just move everything down, but I have no objections to what you've just outlined. It's almost you could almost miss it. I don't see purpose. Yeah, it's

054Oh, I see what you're saying. Make that a Roman numeral one and then bounce everything. Yep. I got you. Okay, that's fine. Which means we go one, two, three, four on on page one. Get to the back. We're Roman numeral five, six, seven. Okay. Any comments on that? Reporting procedures that C becomes three. No, I'm sorry. That C becomes four because we added Roman number one as purpose. Thank you. Correct. Immunity six, retaliation seven. And I believe that's reflected on the screen by the clerks. Seeing no hands or placards, can we bring that for a question? Everyone in favor of what you see on the screen with those edits as we just indicated, please raise your hand. Hold up, Miss Lady. Who is the second? Dr. Anderson. Okay. Um, those in favor, Miss Marin, Dr.

055Anderson, Missheiser, Miss Dixit, myself. That [Music] passes. Any other comments on this policy? Now we'll bring the entire policy to a vote. Those in favor of the policy as reflected with the two friendly amendments. Please raise your hand. Miss Marin, Dr. Anderson, Miss Seismore Heheiser, Miss Dixit, and myself. Right. Thank you. Now call on Dr. Reid. Agenda item 1.04, policy 2220, admission of postgraduate. Miss Lady, who seconded that we're voting on the policy as amended. Who was moving and seconding it? I'll second it. Dr. Anderson. So, Miss Mayo was moving. Dr. Anderson was seconding. Okay. Sure. Yes, Dr. Reid. Admissions of post-graduate students. Yes, ma'am. Um, this is a fairly straightforward policy, um, which I don't believe we made any changes to. Um, so we're just bringing it as a review. Um, [Music] and there

056you have it. I think Dr. Anderson is up. It's quick. Just one question. I'm trying to understand. Um it says under under what circumstances would we need to have the admission of post-graduate students? Are we talking about students who are allowed to remain in our system beyond um age of 20 beyond age of 18 or is this a student who is fully graduated? I I'm not grasping what we're doing here fully. This is a student, I believe, who has fully graduated. And that could be either from a Fairfax County school or from a school outside of country or from a school in another state. Uh, but this is somebody who is fully graduated and is a postgraduate student. And what would they do? Like what? I'm guessing it would be similar to an audit of

057the class. Um I have not since I've been here. This is year three been have ever I've never enacted this policy to my knowledge. No one's made that request. Okay. But if I may one question for Mr. Foster um because you may have some insight as a counselor. But just one more question Mr. Foster. Is there a code that is related to this policy? What what does it say in the code of Virginia? The section that has referred here. What exactly does it entail? I'm I'm checking. I would ask I could circle back to you hopefully momentarily. We're on um policy looks like 20 2220. Okay. So, while you look that up, I would love some insight from our resident counselor if you have some because I'm trying to figure out the circumstances under which

058this would occur. I'm going to work on that. I'm thinking this could be STEPP, Davis, some of the transitional programs we talked about. I I feel like there's been occasions where we've had students who actually had earned their diploma who participated in STEP. I'm it's it is okay because that's why so then I don't because it's either you stay through the age and then you receive it at that time but this is a fully graduated student. I don't understand the parameters. I will say that we on occasion in a prior life would have somebody who perhaps was here on a Rotary exchange program or some type of junior state department exchange who would have been fully graduated was not an exchange student uh but may come to attend several classes at a high school space

059permitting uh maybe for a quarter or something. it's not a it wouldn't be connected to credit. Again, I have not been asked that here, but um I have experienced sort of these unusual exceptions. And really what this creates is the possibility upon principal recommendation and approval of the division superintendent should that odd occurrence ever arise. Dr. answer you. I guess my last piece is Mr. Faucet when he has it. It does reference a Virginia code of Virginia 221 through5. No, she could go. Yeah, Miss Maron. Okay. So, so this is an example of where We need the rationale. Dr. Reed, if you're saying you've never encountered this, well, in three years here, but I have in my prior work. Well, I'd like to know why. And we have a policy that does deal with it

060references uh foreign exchange students. It's in the graduation policy. I just we we got to be more robust in this. Um the reference to the state code. I have no idea why we have this policy. And if you can't tell me, I don't think we should have it. Um, with evidence, you know, why is it needed? What are the circumstances this arises from? We got to like kind of callull these policies out that are, you know, this is almost 10 years old. Um, so that's what I'd like to see as as we go forward. Um, otherwise I just again I feel like I'm making stuff up with no practice to base it on. And I do think perhaps having a form for the memo that says like is there a VSBA sample policy? What's the

061VA code? Like so we know that we're checking off all the things. You know, has the superintendent seen this in practice? Otherwise, we're going to spend time asking these questions here. So, right. But I I not every policy am I necessarily going to see in practice every year or even every three years. I just I don't know what exceptions this specifically spoke to. I can only speak to what exceptions like this I've dealt with which I've already described, but I you know I this was written originally in 1986. Again, that seems to be a year a lot of these were written. Um and I I don't know what issue they were addressing. So, I do think again this is the first time we're trying this new review format out. If you think that things are

062not relevant, I would really like to know. Um, it doesn't make sense on its face how we would use this. So, I just we we're going to need more of your recommendation if we're really going to start calling out things that are no longer really relevant. So, so I think that Mr. Foster is researching the code that's referenced. Is that correct, Mr. Foster? That's correct. So, can we move on to the next policy and just move this one to the back at the moment? Are folks okay with that, Miss Dixit? Yeah, I'm okay with that. But I do want to add some uh question of mine. Okay, go ahead and add your questions now. Okay. It just me. I wanted to know if there is a military family who's move who have the ch the

063child has already studied till the 12th grade in their other country but then they want to have the American graduation or they want to finish the school high school here as well would this one allow them because they're not foreign exchange students either they are family of military uh affiliated family like right uh children of the family so I I want to say if this is like those kind of cases where they're not foreign exchange student but they're American citizens just coming back to America or foreign service uh you know state department families like I'm I'm just that's my question I am not sure if that I mean if I guess they would be postgraduate um if they had already graduated but they wouldn't be I don't believe this policy enables further credit or a

064new diploma that would be covered under I believe a regulation around diploma and graduation. This is really would they be allowed to attend high school if space permitted and I'm guessing there must have been some exceptions. Again, I go back to maybe it's a military student who wants to just attend to meet I like I don't or it's somebody who's come uh who's already graduated from another country who maybe wants to attend school. Again, I I just don't I don't have a good sense of the history here. So, I don't know what we used it for. I'm trying to pull up the regulation right now to figure out if that gives me a clue here. Sure. Some some countries have um 10th grade as they call it graduation. Um some countries so not everybody is

065doing K12. So uh it could be that they finish 10th grade. So I'm I'm I'm just trying right trying to find a reason of this policy and that's why asking those clarifying questions and if doesn't serve the purpose I'm okay with it to be sunset like you know like my colleagues but I'm just thinking maybe we are we shouldn't do that very uh in haste miss Miss Seismarheiser I think what I'd recommend is I think a comment was made earlier about not wanting to do things quickly. I I don't know why this is here. This it's very good questions about why it's here or not, but I would rather either put this aside and bring it back next time or pass it and bring it back because I don't want to assume that there is

066or is not a reason for it, right? Um you know, if there's if if Dr. Reed's seen this in her previous division, perhaps there is something that's been implemented here before three years ago that we weren't aware of. I mean, I can think of maybe somebody coming from a different country who earned a diploma at the end of 10th grade there, but wants to go through 12th grade here, right? Like maybe a a country has different requirements for a diploma and they've technically graduated high school there, but there may be other requirements they want to do here or learning English. There's I could just think of reasons why it might be valuable and I don't want to not pass something or get rid of it when there might be reasons. So, Dr. read. So I'm

067reading the regulation and the regulation under requirement says on the recommendation of the principal and with the approval of the division superintendent, post-graduate students may be admitted to enroll in a specific high school course in Fairfax County Public Schools that leads to a professional license or credential in which he or she was enrolled and made satisfactory progress in the academic year immediately preceding the post-graduate experience. So that's what it looks like. So applications for post-graduate enrollment are due prior to the start of the school year immediately following graduation. Those requests are considered on a space available basis. Um, so it looks like, um, so I feel like in my tenure at Chantilli, I may have had somebody who did this in one of our auto courses that they didn't get through level three, for example,

068and because there was room, they were allowed to come and sort of sit through that course for certification purposes for that test, but not but they'd already graduated. So I think that's probably what the reference is. And it in the regulation also talks about tuition paying. There's a collection of tuition that goes along with this. Thank you. Thank you. That refreshed my memory. Mr. Faucet, did you find anything that you wanted to share? So the Virginia code sections Thank you. that are referenced. Um 22.1-5 and 22.1-6 are silent down to this level of detail that um we've been talking about with a post-graduate student. They don't expressly permit it. They also don't expressly prohibit it. So there's no reference. Not that I could see. So how are we making it a legal reference if it's

069completely silent on the matter? I I don't know. I mean I think this policy has been in place as I understand it. Um and carryover. Yeah. Well, one, I think we need to strike the legal reference because none seem to exist as per Mr. Foster from this document because it's it's not such. Um, I will say that there was also language in 22.1-5 that did um contemplate or authorize students up to age 22 being enrolled. Um, and so I think that is something that could be pointed to is, you know, that would authorize what um, Miss Lady outlined a moment ago, right? But this doesn't speak to age. This speaks to um, having already obtained a diploma and returning, but you're saying there's nothing that speaks specifically to to that in the code that you

070were able to find. I mean, I I'm not going to stand on a hill on this. I just wanted to understand why this exists, but it does concern me that we have a legal reference that is not really a legal reference. Um, so I think there's some opportunity for us to consider striking that. I'm going to ask a quick question. In the regulation, Dr. Reed, does it reference up to the age of 22? Because then that would in turn align with the legal reference, which is up till the age of 22. I didn't see that in the what I read. I what I read was it was only available in the year immediately following graduation. So I'm guessing if somebody was 21 and the immediate year after it would, but if they were 18, the

071immediate year after obviously would be 19, right? So I think it was more so the immediate year after, but we will check again. Thank you. So just as a point of clarification, Dr. Anderson, are you asking to strike that? I am because that's not because uh Mr. Foster says it doesn't speak to obtaining a post-graduate degree just attending school to age 22 which I know we have another regulation about I'm sorry another policy about is anyone is there a second for that. All right I am not seeing a second. though. Um, Miss Marin. Okay. So, two things. Maybe it's three. Miss Seismar Heismer Seismar. I agree that perhaps we should I mean this is a great discussion to have, right? And so we've had it and now maybe we set this aside so that we

072um can reflect on it and see where some of the um gaps are. I also did look back for the minutes and this policy the furthest back it goes is the board docs goes back to 2004. I don't know how to obtain previous minutes they're probably in paper somewhere I'd hope but that 2008 one says there was no change. So that also has me thinking when we do review policies in the future. And this policy, if you look at the bottom of it now, it says adopted, revised, reviewed. So I have to think that the last time it was revised was actually 2003, but we could be clearer with our language going forward and actually put like was it a change, you know, no change or revised. This way we know at least. So really,

073um, I would I would prefer to put this aside for now. It's been a good discussion, but clearly we've learned some things and I don't want to pass something until I know exactly why we need it. So, so his clarification, are you suggesting that Dr. Reed come back with further information about why we need it? Um, it wouldn't be my top priority, but I think it's needed. Well, I I think I can explain why it's needed having read the regulation again. I just hadn't read it. I wasn't prepping necessarily for this one, but I think it's if somebody, for example, is looking to finish a credential and they graduate like this spring, it gives them the ability if they apply to do it and there's room and the principal recommends it that they can be

074a tuition paying student to finish a course that would lead to a license. I'm thinking auto body, maybe mechanics, um maybe firefighting. I don't know what things would lead to an absolute credential or license, but it gives that student that next year and only that next year to complete that. So, that's the purpose for it. And when you go to the regulation, there's actually a form to fill out um a request to enroll that requires, you know, information the principal to recommend superintendent to um review and so forth. What's the date on that form? Um, June 6th, 2018. So, I certainly don't want to remove any policy because we don't know the implications of it. I also wonder, is this something that should go in our adult ed program? I mean, we're talking about having

075a a adult in with the general ed student population. Seems like there's some safety issues, you know. I feel like a and should this be in another place like in our career in tech or again this is like one of those things that maybe this little paragraph can live somewhere else and being instead of being one standalone policy especially since there's no linked code but I also would suggest that when we do review policies that the regulations are also reviewed at that time that's your you know realm Dr. read, but I wonder about I don't I have no idea the status of the regulations of in any way. Well, the regulation I won't address the regulation till the policy has been changed and the policy drives then my work with staff to change the regulation.

076I wouldn't change the regulation ahead of an approved policy. No, I agree. But I'm thinking just as a matter of how we get the full picture of the implications of this policy, you know, I don't want to change something and then all of a sudden now forms are defunct and people can't get stuff. And I think, you know, when we review these things, these older ones that we're not as familiar with, it will be important to think through like how is this actually happening in practice now? So that's what I was talking about. So I want to capture everything. Was that a motion to that? Was that a motion? I would make a motion to set this aside for now until the end. Pause. I would set a motion to lay this on the table.

077I think that's the correct terminology. That's my motion. I will speak to it. Is there a second to that? Missiser. Okay. Would you like to speak to your motion? I I'm even up for voting on it again at the end of the meeting to see if we want to direct the superintendent, but let's see where we again. I don't know that this since it's the superintendent hasn't seen it in three years. I don't think this is at the top of our urgency list. Miss Eismerheiser, would you like to speak to your second? No, I I just think we need some information about this. So, I'm happy to take this up and I'd like to get through the other policies. Any other comments on the motion on the table? Could I get some clarity on what

078other information we need for it when I bring it back? I think just situations it's it can be used in more than what I've shared already. Just a point of order. The motion is to lay it on the table. It's not directing the superintendent to continue work on it at this time. Those are two different actions. So, it's just asking colleagues to put this aside for now. Any other comments on the current motion to put this aside for now? Actually, I think I'll withdraw my second because I think I I'm good with the answers that I have. Okay. So, now does anyone want to second putting this on the table? Not seeing any. We're back to discussion about the policy. Any comments on the policy, Miss Eismerheiser? I'd like to call for a vote to

079adopt the policy. Okay, hold up. I may have jumped ahead of Miss Mayor in finishing a comment. Okay. Do I have a second to call for the vote? I'll second it. Okay. Um, so we'll call for the vote. All those in favor of adopting the policy as it exists and is written, that's the question, right? Yes. Okay. All those in favor raise your hand. Okay. Dr. Anderson, Miss Eismerheiser, Miss Dixit, and myself. The policy passes. At least it'll go to the board. Miss, did you get that? I I don't think anybody actually ever put it on the table. The motion, she withdrew that. So, it was not put on the table. No, the motion to move the policy as amended. I don't know that anybody actually ever made that motion. Okay. Right. Okay. Okay. Just

080a point of order. Isn't it an option for the chair to say without objection we move this forward? There was an objection this time, but yes, she can do that as well. So, if she wants to do it, that's an option for the future. Okay. Okay. So, that was a vote to call the question and then we need to call the question. Okay. We're good to move on. Thank you. No, it was not unanimous, right? Miss Mayor and opposed. All right, we are now on to 1.05 governance item, student attendance at school. But prior to that, Miss Mayor, did you want to make a comment? Yeah, I just you know me, I love my format and my process and I'm writing down all these things about you know what the process should look like and

081I'm just kind of confused because we've had comments that we don't want to act on things we don't fully understand but we just passed this policy through and there were questions unanswered like I just feel like there's not a consistent rubric that our board members are using and I think we should think about that uh maybe for the next round Um, we just passed a policy that has a legal code that doesn't exist, but I heard one member say that that was problematic, but we passed it. So, how do we get colleagues? How do we get to consistency? Because I want to try and collaborate and build consensus, but I can't do that if people's opinions change on how they decide on things from policy to policy. Miss Eismerheiser is your Okay. Dr. Anderson. Yes.

082Um, as the board member who raised the concern about legal code, I couldn't even get a second for us to discuss it. So, I figured it's not an issue that for everybody else. Um, and frankly, I needed to understand why this policy exists. But I be and I think I got that is frankly since no one thought the legal reference was not a problem, I had to let it go. That's not I didn't vote because I didn't think it it was going to satisfy my an me enough to vote on it. So again, why don't we use this as an opportunity to learn about how we're going to continue through this process. So all right, I'll just comment. The reason I didn't second it is because I do think that the reference to the age

083does lay within this, which is why I didn't want to get rid of the legal reference. And I was satisfied because I recollected that I had a similar situation when I was a director where we used this policy for a student to get a professional certification. Okay. Now back to Dr. Reid and the next policy 2232 student attendance in school. Thank you Miss Lady. Um, again, we really I think we elaborated a bit. Staff did it on purpose. Um, and then clarified language around um, attendance, unexcused absences. um added some new uh couple new sections and um then cited um the current version of policy 2601 and policy 3330 around driver's education. So um happy to take any questions. I think Miss Mariner was up first. I do. So, I think this is a really

084good example of how we can make a meteor policy because we've had so much work recently around how important attendance is and that's not reflected at all really in this um let me just pull this thing real quick. So, um I see that there's a second second and third sentence at the top, but we know like the chronic absenteeism and how important it is and that's part of that philosophy purpose thing. So I do think that way more needs to be added into that. Um I also think you know illness medical procedures could be in like the same catchall as you know mental health conditions. Um military visit I I think we need to write that in a way that addresses all the ways in which a student could be excused for that. Like it's

085a visit of you know family member from the military recent return of someone deployed and enga. So maybe something like engagement related to the deployment or visit from a family member serving military duty. That would be something more specific. Um the definition of unexcused absence actually is not accurate. It's it's saying that um where is it? Yeah. It does not have prior knowledge and that's not true. An unexcused absence is when you're doing something that's not like medical or family related. It's going on vacation or I don't know maybe it's even going if you're an athlete going to a meet. I don't really know, but it certainly doesn't say that there. Dismissal precautions. I think that it needs to be clear that we're talking about students physically departing school, not being like dismissed from the

086school system. Um, the writing is also weird. There's double negatives. It's unclear. Um, also alternative secondary schools attendance procedures, like are these instructional programs? I I don't under I've never really heard that phrase. So, I think this needs more work and to to definitely infuse the vision of the board about student attendance. So, I would be in support of sending it back to the superintendent for another round. Is that a motion? No, not yet. Not yet. Okay. Thank you. All right. Um, I'm not sure who was second. I think it was actually Okay, Dr. Anderson. Okay. I think Miss Marin looked at my notes, so I won't leave them in the middle of the room. I think this needs a lot of work, and again, I take very seriously that these policies serve two purposes.

087One, for the board to communicate to the superintendent, which means we need to infuse something a little bit beefier into the purpose, which is up to us to do. I'm not looking for staff to do that. So, I'd like to make sure in this conversation that we're highlighting what those things are. Um, and for me, one of those things is chronic absenteeism because no matter what the absence, whether parents know or do not know, parents called it in, did not call it in, it still counts towards chronic absenteeism. If you're not there, you're missing instruction. So, I think that has to be part of the purpose. So, for me, that's the communication as well from the board. The second piece, it's communication to the public. If I picked this up as a member of the

088public, I I would be overwhelmed. It's one big lump of unstructured information. We have to break this up to make this manageable and digestible. Um, we need to have section one purpose, section two, attendance and school. The sections have to be outlined with Roman numerals to be consistent with the other things that we have had. Um thirdly, one of the things that I see here that I do have a question for staff. This is under student attendance at school where it says um suspension is not excused. I have to find it if anybody sees it. I thought suspensions were part of the excused absences, but something here said it was not necessarily so. So, does anybody did anybody see it? I didn't circle it. Hers. Oh, under under a under a. Yes. So, that's Thank

089you. So, that's question one. And question two, which makes me really uneasy. Under unexcused absences, this is again B is labeled as is labeled as unexcused absences. And yet C talks about said unexcused absences which I know is a formatting problem which should not be. But that last sentence says other reasons unacceptable to the principal or his or his or her designate. It this makes it really subjective and we might run the risk of an excuse that is allowed at school A is not permissible at school B. The regulation should be very clear what those are. So, I'm not sure if my hesitation is in the language or whether there's really some subjectivity built into this, which I'm concerned about. So, I'll pause and hear answers to my two questions. Well, I think the suspension

090is considered excused except for certain violations and that's in the rights and responsibilities. Those are outlined and I would have to pull that up to tell you what the exceptions are, but in general suspension is excused. Um, the unexcused, you know, I don't know that it's possible to enumerate every possible unexcused absence topic. Um, sort of falls into the other duties as a sign um type of an answer, but it is going to be somewhat subjective, I think. I mean it I don't I think you're reading it correctly. Yeah, thank you for that. Um when this goes back to you, which I also agree with, I think this has to go back and just kind of be cleaned up and tightened quite a bit. I would love to also have that information and regarding the

091circumstances under which um the suspension is not excused because I'm interested in that. And I'd like to see if there's some way to tighten up the language so it doesn't appear to be this subjective. I that causes me some concern. I think that's my time. I'll take a go back. Miss Seismariser, I just have an additional question. Why are we talking about suspensions of driver's licenses as part of absenteeism? that concerned me in this policy that it's a may which has its own questions and concerns in terms of we may ask for a suspension and the um and it says that you know DMV thinks she may suspend it and I don't know why we're talking about what the DMV may do because that's not under our purview but I I do wonder why it's

092under report for suspension of driver's license on page two. Well, I think it's here because if a student has 10 or more unexcused absences, the principal may notify the court which could take action. I sorry, I apologize. Well, you asked. So, no, I understand what it says. I just don't know like is that typical that we ask for suspension of a driver's license for unexcused absences? Is that something that we have to do or we require to do that? It just seems if someone can't it's if they're unexcused if they can't get to school, why are we to take their driver? It just seems a little odd of a thing as a punishment to for unexcused absences. I'm trying to understand the reasoning for it. It's just allowed. So it says may it is something

093it is a I think it's in indicated here because it could be a deterrent. The way if I may we we don't take a driver's license. The system doesn't juvenile domestic court. No, I I understand that. I I I'm just asking why are we putting this why are we flagging like like there's lots of things in SRNR for which we have in pretty severe, you know, behaviors that for which we have consequences. I've just never seen for any other issue a consequence of reporting to the juvenile domestic court to to suspend a driver's license. I understand we don't suspend the driver's license, but why in this particular thing would we want to suspend somebody's driver's license? It just doesn't make a lot of sense to me. If you're having trouble getting to school, taking away

094their driver's license isn't going to or asking for the court to take the driver's license isn't going to help them get to school. So, I just want to understand about why for this particular thing we have this and maybe there's others I've missed it, but I I don't recall seeing this for anything else. So, I think it's here because it is a strategy or a possible consequence to having 10 or more unexcused absences. And I suspect a school might say if they didn't have a car, maybe they could ride the bus um and get to school and not leave campus. I mean, I I don't know why they might use it, but they have a choice to as part of an attendance. Do we have other consequences that we're allowing as part I just feel

095like Yeah. I mean, I just I feel like it's an odd thing to have here. This for students who don't drive. What if they don't drive to school? But do it just feels like a very odd consequence to have here. And I'm to be very specific. I'm kind of uncomfortable. If we're going to have that kind of consequence, I think it should be in the SRNR and not in this policy because it would be unclear to somebody maybe in an SRNR. And maybe there's a cross reference in there. I don't know. But I I' I'd want to understand a little bit. I mean, it does refer to this SRNR, but I don't know if the SR lists this as a consequence for absences. I'm very uncomfortable with this without understanding why for this for absenteeism

096this particular consequence was selected versus others. I just I'm very uncomfortable with it. It feels a little bit like 10 20 30 years ago when we when the state the school system suspended driver's licenses for a variety of things which actually had a more negative consequence you know for other areas of of concern than it did for the actual issue for which the license was suspended. And it feels a little bit like that was also thrown in here for this reason. And I I want to make sure that it is actually a valid consequence that's related to improving absenteeism as opposed to just kind of let's suspend somebody's driver's license. So I would not feel comfortable moving forward with this without getting a much deeper understanding of why for absenteeism this particular consequences specifically and

097if it's still best practices even even if they had a reason for it whenever it was listed. I mean it's redlined so I'm assuming it's new, right? So why like what's specifically for absenteeism is a consequence of reporting someone's driver's license important? I just I would like to understand that better. I don't have an issue with having consequences. I just this one concerns me. And since it's new, I assumed your staff may had a reason for adding it. Well, I think they added it to list as part of a comprehensive response to 10 or more unexcused absences that this is something the principal can do. Yeah, I I get that they can do it, but why would we want to do it versus something else? It's a philosophical question I'm asking here, right? Like if

098the staff added it, why is this the particular thing we want? I feel like I'm talking in circles. Um, I want to understand more why we'd want to potentially risk someone's driver's license for absenteeism when we wouldn't do that for some when it's not listed for something else and there could be other ways of dealing with absenteeism. Like why is this particular thing recommended? Just because we can do something doesn't mean we should. Okay. Sorry. I thank you, Miss Dixit. I actually had the same thought when I read this about I know in the previous iteration we did have if there's a further excure absence attendance officer will file a complaint with a juvenile and domestic relation court but it did not address a suspension of driving license. Is it automatically when we report somebody

099to the uh juvenile domestic relation district court and they're under 18 that the court uh decides to suspend student driver license? Is it like um I don't know the the law behind that? It is because it was written that we could you know do it before but it did not say specifically the license suspension. It's not automatic. That's a a principal may notify the court and the court may take action to do that after 10 or more unexcused absences from school on consecutive school days. I I see two issues. One of the issue could be that student is not going to school but they are taking care of u a family member or they're out of school for uh you know making a living wage for for any reason and they're not able to go

100to school for some reason. I do not want them to have an additional uh you know you know a punishment of taking their chance of getting their license uh taken away. Um so on just a compassionate grounds uh like like I I won't want to put it on the policy. It could be under SNR SRNR or regulation. That's fine. But I I'm just not comfortable either. Thank you. I'm going to take a turn. Are you done? Okay. I'm going to take a turn. I'm going to make an assumption. Uh I I am in agreement with my colleagues this need to go back because there's some formatting issues and so we have some other questions. But I'm going to make an assumption that when this the 10 days is reported to juvenile domestic court that this

101has to have happened to somebody. Okay. And that they're just putting it in the policy so parents can't you know that that's the only reason I can think of. However, I have written in my notes that we would like an answer to why this was added. we need some historical context to why this was added if we're going to actually send it back. Um and and the flip side of it is we again are not making the decision as a as a school system. We are not doing anything with children's licenses. It's juvenile domestic court who we have no control over. Uh what we do have control over is whether we make the report. Um you know in terms of the absenteeism. So, I again I just want to reiterate I have notes here and

102I think I've captured what folks have had to say and I'm in agreement with sending this back to staff to revisit and bring back to us. Um, I'm seeing additional placards for a go back and I'm going to try and do them in order. Miss Marin, Dr. Reed, do you think we should take students licenses away if they were absent 10 times or suspend them or do something or whatever that is? you know, I I'm not sure that, you know, again, we're trying to provide you with a policy that has all legal citations as current as possible. Um, I don't know. There must be some rationale for this in some cases. I think it would be a rare case, but it could it could be something that could be helpful or not. I mean, I

103it's just a tool that's out there and therefore noted. If the board doesn't want that tool noted, we will not include it in the policy. So, I'm looking at the memo for this one, 2232. It doesn't say who on your staff reviewed it in comparison to the triple20 memo, which says the office of the chief experience officer reviewed it. So again, I think that a form is needed to be sure that the appropriate offices are reviewing it and you're telling us who reviewed it, but I guess I have a hard time thinking that the superintendent would think this is a good policy given the tremendous investment we've made in um absenteeism. And I'm looking for your best suggestions on what to put in policy. I think the more that we sit here and debate things,

104I think, you know, if the memo had said we think that this needs to have, what were my comments? Like, um, we think you should combine all the medical and things. We think that the military language should be clearer. Even just pointing it out might not necessarily provide the actual language. The definition of unscubed absence is incorrect. I I'm I feel like we've made really good progress today, but we can't keep going through things that you personally don't think are have merit, Dr. Reid. Well, what I said is it could have merit in some circumstances, but the actual definition, I mean, on another point, the definition of unexcused absence is not accurate. I mean, it's just literally wrong. and knowing that the old definition the unexcused absence that we've been that we're operating under today.

105Well, that says here it says that an unexcused absence is one for which the parent or guardian does not have prior knowledge, consent, or legitimate reason. So, for instance, when my son went out of town with my husband for a family event, that was an unexcused absence. We knew about it. We had prior knowledge. We had consent, but it wasn't considered legitimate to the school because it wasn't medical or otherwise related. I think it's an and or legitimate reason. That absence met none of those criteria. I got actually got a letter because my son was out five days so far this year and two of them were for sickness and three of them were for what the school considered not legitimate reasons. And so 5 days the practice is to send a letter. But this

106definition doesn't say that. I mean, I think just given that we've spent hours on this topic at our goal sessions and strategic reporting sessions, to not have a really robust definition of why this matters at the outset is just we we need your help to craft these things. And I'm also wondering should you have more staff here to help? I I I think we've crafted it and I I you know we could discuss what and/or means but I you know I'll go back and work to draft a better definition. So I can I can do that. This definition has been there since but that's what we're operating under now since 2011. So but 14 years but that's that's like the worst criteria we could possibly use. None of us were here then. We want the

107best recommendation on what you think should happen. Now, your time is up. I I will go back and write a better definition. Okay. Thank you. Um I I appreciate I appreciate what has been said and I don't disagree with everything that's been said, but I also want to leave this on the table. There are going to be times, and I'm not necessarily saying this is one of those times, but I am saying there are going to be times where the superintendent brings forth her best thinking and we still disagree with it. So, I just want to be sure I definitely disagree with this um on the basis that it's only applicable to a small number of kids because we only have x number of students who are who have driver's licenses. What's that? I weren't

108sure if you're talking to the definition of excuse absence, but No, no, no. The driver's license, please. We have a small number of students who have driver's licenses. Add to that the layer of a principal may or may not do it. So in my school, I have these two with driver's licenses. I don't like Robin that much. I'm going to exercise my discretion and make this report, but I like Melanie, so I will give her the benefit of the doubt. When we have kind of practices that do that, it gives me nothing but palpitations. But I'm not going to beat that horse to death. I think we've been there. The other thing that I see here, there's a lot of procedural things that should be in the regulation. I think as a board, we're going

109to say you must do these things. So, page page two where we start with attendance reporting going down to what principles must or must not do. I think that can be captured in a very succinct sentence or two. Page three. Again, lots of details in terms of how to do it. I don't think that's where we want to live. We want to live in that overarching. The superintendent must make sure these things are happening, but there's a lot of how that is embedded here. So, when you go back to to review, Dr. Reid, I would love for you to take that under consideration. And I'm happy to give more specificity as to which sections I'm speaking about, but I have six seconds left and I don't have time. Okay, seeing no other hands, um I'm

110just going to say in terms of the um I'm going to take a turn. Terms of the driver's licenses, um if it is not, hopefully the may notify juvenile domestic court is spelled out in regulation because I do believe that when I was working at Chantilly, this was a very consistent practice and we followed the regulation. It tells us exactly what to do. So, I believe that's that may is probably clarified regulation, but but but I think we're leaning towards having you take this back. I will go back to the unexcused absence definition. It is an andor. There oftentimes parents have no clue their kids are have skipped school to the parent is not aware of the absence. There are certainly situations where um they have provided consent, but it's not legitimate reason. So, I

111don't have as much problem with that definition because I lived it. um nor do I think we can list every single example because you would be amazed what kids and families will walk in with and there's no way it's going to be an exhaustive list. And so I just want to you know put out there an ethos that I do understand the complexities of trying to define this um and and I do understand it's an andor. Um so any other comments, questions on this policy? I'm going to as the chair make a recommendation that make a motion that we send it back to the superintendent um with notes related to the discussion and ask her to rework it and bring it back. Do I have a second? Second. Okay. Second for Miss Marin. Dr. Anderson.

112I'm just voting. Okay. So, do we have to vote to call the question or can we just Thank you. All those in favor of sending it back to Dr. Reid, that's unanimous for everyone here in the room. Thank you and Miss Dixit. Okay, next up, policy 2301, psychological testing, screening, student evaluation, and placement. Thank you, Miss Lady. Um, I think we made some, um, honestly minimal changes. Um, and the purpose is pretty straightforward. Uh, to establish policy regarding provision of psychological services for students. So, uh, this was last revised in 2013. Uh, so it's newer than the last one. Um, I think it's only 12 years, um, out. So, I'll happy to answer any questions. Miss Maron, there's no mention in the policy that services can be provided by partners in other government programs such

113as our Hazel services. Well, that wouldn't be I guess that one, but um I wonder about that. Again, we're not really saying why we value this. Like what's the board's philosophy on this? And we also should say that it's not a service that can replace private counseling and psychological testing. Um, what about something that says that it's needed to make academic decisions including IEP and 504 and related to the academic. Um, in the fourth sentence from the bottom it says concerns. I don't know if that's the right word. Is it challenges? Is it needs? Should mental be in there? What's the breadth of psychological services? And again, can we say it's standard to include these with an IEP evaluation and reeval, which I believe it is, but I'm not sure. And are there any state

114code references to this at [Music] all? Those are my comments. I think it needs to go back for more work. Do you want a response? I'd like to hear what my colleagues think. I I just I don't think any of those questions or they're able to be answered now. So, I think it needs more work. Dr. Anderson, thank you. This is a space where there's a purpose there, but the purpose is it's to establish a policy. The purpose has to speak to why we want to have the policy. And I think we've done that in some other places a little bit better than others. Even going back to um well maybe it's also the philosophy. I I think there's some space here for us to be a little bit more intentional. Again, this is our

115communication tool to the public and to the superintendent and we're not saying anything to the public on this and that's incumbent upon us. So I'm not going to put this entirely at the feet of Dr. to read because this is the board's intent to communicate to the public. What do we want to say? What is our philosophy? What is our belief around this? So, I'm not ready to move on this because I think it is missing that piece. Um, and some other things that I shared earlier. So, I'm not going to belabor the point, but I'd like for us to be a little bit more it feels empty. I I just like for us to to kind of flesh it out a little bit, but I think that's also our responsibility as board members. missed

116exit. So I agree with my colleagues so far about this and I think this is like a really giant word salad. Um I can't I cannot seem to understand head and tail of this. Um so u I I I just feel like we need to see the regulation which is which is uh associated with it. I'm sure that's like 10 pages long and I really want to look at this uh more in length what this does what what the services means it should be clarified um I just don't like one paragraph policy especially if it leads to so much so much of their parents involved teachers involved services counseling professional government oh my god there's too much here but really no content so this needs to be worked on it. Thank you, Missiser. Yeah, I

117think maybe I understand it maybe having a a broader purpose to explain kind of why we do this, but I also know that generally policies are particularly broad in the way they're written. And my understanding is that a lot of times we need psychological testing that goes with local screening committees as well as re-evaluations for IEPs or local screenings when there's referrals for special education or referrals for other needs. So, I think that's what this is probably aiming at is allowing for the school system to provide those types of consultations with families um for local screening. But, Dr. Reed, is there any is that kind of your understanding of this or what's what would you say the purpose of obviously we want to be able to authorize these services. Is that what would your understanding

118of the purpose of this? I think you've stated it. Yes. I think with you know, that's how I see it. So I think um I don't I think it would be hard to limit it just to local screenings and reevaluations because there might be other things for which like threat assessments for example might be done as through this as well. So I you know and we're also providing access to to mental health services with hazel health or telealth services. So I don't know if we need more than what's here because I think that's in the regulations as the different areas for which we need to provide these psychological screenings and some are required by law that we need to do that the screenings for this reevaluation. So I'm comfortable with this as it is. If

119we wanted to add the purpose psychological services for students as part of identification or supports we could do that. But I don't know how we'd flush out the purpose without listing all the different areas for which we do evaluations. I'll take a turn. Um, my initial thought was a check and I was fine with this. Uh, however, as we've sat here and had a conversation, uh, my recommendation would be we sunset this policy altogether. There is no VSBA sample policy. This is alphabet soup. Um, I don't know why it was ever created. Um, because when you reference what we do with psychological services, there is an SOQ. Um, psychologists have just like counselors, they they're they know what they're able to do when it comes to local screening committees and recommendations for testing. That's all

120spelled out in and and codified in the law. So, I would say that we sunset this um because I I'm going to look to VSBA as a sample and since they don't have a sample, this is looks like something that at some point was created that I don't think is needed any longer. Uh, we're going to do go backs and we're going to go back to Miss Marin first. I I find it curious that there's no state code. Is there not any state code referencing this? I would have to uh confirm that you're correct, Miss Marin, that there's no code listed in the in the end of the policy as there has been in some of the other policies discussed today. Okay. So, I'm not sure what it's going to take to receive a draft

121that we need. I really feel like this is just pulling the superintendent along. This is not a sufficient response. And when I look at the memo, it doesn't explain what do you think? Should we have this? How does it I'm not a counselor like Miss Lady. What does this do? Do we need this? I mean, this is going to be a painful process if we're just getting the minimum. And I I don't understand our disconnect. Um I I just knowing the caliber of work that you do, Dr. Reid, I can't imagine that this meets your bar for excellent work. And I I just don't I don't understand all these policies. I mean, you put such thoughtful things together that we put our name on all the time. the budget, the reports we approve. And yet

122with these policies, it's I I get it. It's our policy, but I don't understand how you can do your job if we don't have the right policies and your recommendation for what you think should happen in the schools that you manage. I don't want to have this conversation every month again and again. Were we also supposed to get a calendar of the proposed schedule for review? I thought that was to be today. Should be posted. I provided it. Yes, I have that and that's on me that if I did not provide it, but I also didn't provide it because we're going to push four policies perhaps to the next meeting that we're not getting to today. It's an aggressive calendar. I get I get it. But again, if we're not going to have some real

123reasoning for why we would want to keep a policy like this presented, I mean, what do other school divisions do? what's the best? I already sent all of those recommendations and shared them with all of you and said, "Here are ideas for what should be relayed to the board." You know, standard information, relevant best practices. If you think our office should do all that, then let's just say it and figure that out. But Dr. Anderson. Yes. Very quickly because we're coming up to the to the hour. I I am very much fascinated regarding your proposal to sunset this alto together. Um and the reasons why is because I don't see any legal reference to this. But before I fully support this in this conversation, would it be possible for staff to when we come back

124to this, which I think we will have to no matter what, kind of check around to see what are the blind spots if this were to be sunset. Um, clearly there's no code attached to it. So there's no legal reference, uh, Mr. Foster, that you can find. So maybe we do reduce down. So, I'd like more information about whether or not this is needed and what this is tethered to. That would be a pothole that we would want to avoid. Otherwise, I would be wanting to entertain the sunset of this. Uh, Miss Seismore for go back. That was just my question is I wanted to get a bit if we're going to look at sunsetting this, I want more information about the impact of that. Do we need in a policy to authorize these psychological

125services? and if we don't have it in policy, what would be the I mean, you've listed a lot of other areas and maybe we don't need it. I just want to have a better sense of that before going one way or the other. Okay, seeing as though it is 5:00 um and I know Dr. Reid has community com conversations at 5:30 and I need to get there as well, we will adjourn and we will reconvene with this policy and the remaining uh when we come back. Thanks. Thank you. Bye-bye.