001We can begin the policy and curriculum committee meeting for May 4th. We have uh some items on the agenda with curriculum one high school acceleration and then we have several policies for review and some for cons consideration of revision. So we'll start with curriculum high school acceleration. >> Recently we've had specifically a couple way grade families and a nth grade family request high school course work over the summer and county meeting. I had brought this up to see the number of schools that do allow acceleration over the summer and high school level. uh at that meeting there was only one school that did not then sent out a survey which was only seven school misters were involved in answering those questions but there were a couple more that stated they did not offer acceleration based
002on the information obtained through those two means it seems about 75% of the school districts do offer acceleration for high school students over the summer they all do require families to pay for it there's really no There's really no system that's that's uniform across the county beyond the fact that families pay for the courses. Some are offered through egeneuity or imagine learning which is be better than we utilize. Couple school districts use their own teachers but again there's no uniform system with it. So the question that we wanted to bring to you tonight is whether or not that's something that we're looking to entertain as a possibility. Again, there's different ways to go with it. Could be some of our own teachers who offer courses that we would then possibly pay them then have families
003pay for those courses. Could be simply the the vendor based Imagine Learning courses that we use for KBA. Uh in that case, we would have families pay just like other school districts do cover the cost of that course through that vendor. And we could set up that pay structure many different ways. Some of the school districts give a stipen to their teachers, others do it based on the number of students in the course um and and pay the teachers per student. So So again, it's kind of all over the place. We only have data more in-depth data from seven school districts like the state everybody else assembly meeting form said that yes they they do offer acceleration courses. So that's where we are with it um as an issue >> and I would just would
004reframe it as that you know we are I would say we're recommending the committee that we approve a a structure to do it not so much to just gather feedback because we do end up work when it has happened historically the question we have worked with families to make it work and we're currently working with the families who have requested it we really feel like in that instance we should just formalize it as a process and this is then it's available to everybody in theory and not just um families who ask, right? Like that's that's sort of the the goal of making it. And then to start charging families, we would, you know, start doing that for that charging for a service, you know, and then from there there's all kind >> So what is
005it exactly that they're gaining from this acceleration? >> Yeah, I mean oftentimes it is a course like they, you know, they took algebra 1 and seventh grade. they would like to take geometry over the summer, feeling like they are students who have a strong grasp on that content and then they can take algebra 2 in ninth grade and it helps them advance further further in as they get to the end of their high school career. >> Um I think one might be a language that is that correct that that is requesting it. >> Language has been requested in the past. Yeah, >> math math is big. I think some of it is simply to be able to focus on that course without interference of some other courses. I think in other cases it's a way
006to truly accelerate to where you can take more math courses at the high school level um just to get one step ahead. So I it's kind of like uh I remember discussing KBA and why why families choose charter schools and why they choose KBA. There's many different reasons and I think this is the same case. many different reasons. We had situation where student was considering um as a junior not being here being overseas um student exchange program. So how can how can we get courses in now that allows that to happen then we're still on track as far as working well being. So that that's another situation that they're they're all unique circumstances. The school districts that I did talk to, most of them stated that it's not used very much at all, but it's
007an option. Gifted education, a lot of the students are gifted. And again, it's a way to simply take more courses in that way. Could also be a rack course that's been done. Wilson had mentioned that that rack's involved with their program. So, a student could go to rack and take a summer course or two. Um, so you can see that also maybe a kid. accelerating it. So, so again, the reasons for it are all all over the place, all across the board. >> Yeah. Well, I mean, I don't see any reason not to formalize a process if it's an accommodation we've been making anyway. And then just it's few and far between, but it's just, you know, with a this is probably the most requests we perceive in any one spring. So, we can see
008this being a growing demand and we have a process for it. Um, our recommendation would be that we charge them what the cost is. I mean, just so it's at no cost to the district, just to a vendor. Um, you know, to that point. I think we also would work with um the union to see, you know, if they wanted anou, I would my recommendation would be that that teacher gets paid whatever the cost for them to take theuity course again. So, it's not an additional cost to the district, but you know, it's probably not going to be advantageous for most teachers to do it for one or two kids, but once you start getting to three, four, five kids that it might be um I just I think we want to make it cost
009neutral to the district is would be minding for it, you know, so it's not overburdening the family who wants to do it, but also no. It really shouldn't be a general fund expense just for those who have the opportunity. >> So the students will be taking a course and can get credit. >> Yeah. So it's acceleration is just another term where they're able to take a course in the summer and get credit for that. >> Yes. Would we cap it that they can only do one course during the summer? In the draft that I have that a maximum of two credits is what I've looked at. you know, I think um it's it's we don't want them to accelerate. It's not developmentally appropriate to accelerate take six credits or such. I don't think that would
010be advisable. So, you know, my my first gut is to say up to two credits and kind of see how that plays out over a few years. I think most are going to take one. We do it. But >> would we also limit the type of classes they could take? >> That's a discussion we had. you know, do we do we select each do? I just if we if we limit it, I suspect and somebody's going to come and ask for something different and we'll be looking at oneoff questions that I I suspect the ask will make sense at some point, right? Why does this why does a student want to take um I I don't know. I think the constraints might just not feel right at some point. That was our gut initiative too
011is when we limit certain courses. Uh so we're open to that. What I mean I get want me to ask them like more detail. >> Well, I'm thinking like if they want to take chemistry or something like that, they really won't get the lab experience and all that type of stuff. So that's not a course I would recommend accelerating >> like if they want to do a math or an English. >> I think I agree with that in the philosophy. But in practice, the only difference I'll say is we do have students on occasion. If a student or family comes to us in the middle of the school year and they say, "I want to take this one course online," we allow them to do it. So, we basically let students do that during the
012school year, even though I would say it's certainly not as rich or valuable than experience to not have >> less would be a course or it could be a K would be a lab. >> So, so again, the type of courses there's a there's a variety of ways. So part of the structure would be essentially the course offerings that and so that would what I'm hearing is it sounds like that would be what essentially pre-exists what we've done up to this point with the any exceptions that we may come up with. >> We have two options. I mean we can create a catalog that's specific specific for this or I mean what happens now if somebody wants to take the course online we basically show them in the catalog and any course is their name.
013>> Yeah. Um but again that's what students can do during the school year and at that point it is that district cost again it's replacing something in a week they're entitled let's say to a full schedule during the school year to help some that's so those are sort of the two paths is we limit the choices or do we allow the choices where we protect the hands of make decisions for themselves. Our learning courses are 24 weeks. So that was another thing about if it's an NCAA course, which it could be, might want to accelerate in summer because of NCAA. You're a division one athlete. That's another reason for it. This is an example. Um And that's where it becomes difficult as far as getting those these weeks in over the summer. So we have
014to play with with some of that see what's possible which is also raise a limit course design for that period of time and you're cramming it into the summer where you might spend a couple hours per day on it and that's okay but if you're trying to take four courses in that manner that that becomes difficult too. So again, different ways to think about it. I I think school counselor being involved is a big piece of it, too. If there's a reason to take one, two, or three courses over the summer, let's plan it out. Look at it. Look at the pros and cons as to why you're doing this. And and that's that's one of the one of the uh major things that school counselors bring to high school level. So they've been involved
015with this a little bit because it's come come up lately and that would be a big to me a big part of the process. >> I mean so we would like to put something on the agenda next week. So if we have the committee support to put this all in a draft that would be on the mail agenda. That would be next step for us. Anybody have concerns here? Excellent. Thank you. >> And then that brings us into policy then and we are on policy 004 membership and looks like we're picking up where we left off last week. I guess the first question is just does what what was added does that does the committee feel like that accurately represents where we left behind pretty close to word for word where conversation ended I'm a
016little I'm not sure on this. I think we're opening ourselves up for disputes down the road in the the number four. Up to number four, I am okay um with how it's written. Um I think it's a good recommendation. I would prefer if after three it said or and provided an alternate path something along the lines of the president of the schoolboard may make a motion written down here. Somebody asked me to do that last time. President of the school board shall have the authority at any time or for any reason to make a motion to elect a candidate to fill the vacant board position. So whether it's not there's more there's two paths. It's nice that we set up guidance or you get the ball rolling, but 20 years from now for whoever's sitting
017here, they get to make their own decisions on how they want to do things like James, right? Not what happens. Just like this last time, we just kind of got thrown on this. So, no, you're not going to go preemptively change policy. >> Sure, I guess you could. There's lots of could do, would do. >> You'd have to have emergency. I mean just for the timing I mean you'd have to have emergency meeting very likely but correct say it could happen just >> Mr. Meuzo would also say that given enough meetings and votes, there's also suspension of policy options. Like there's a series if you want to say what could happen. And there's all those possibilities that just as far as um I think if you change it to my recommendation, it cleans it up
018and makes two paths. You're giving you're giving a good start. If the board chooses to continue down that path, that's their prerogative. Um they disagree. There is another there is an alternative that they the majority of the board can use at that time. >> But where do you want to put the or in here? >> After C. So one, two, three. Then there would be an or and there would be a one. So the applicants meet the qualifications, applications are required, interviews of prospective board in the or would be in place of one, two, and three. Obviously, they're going to have to meet the qualification set forth in school code. Um that's got to be somewhere else in this policy, I would imagine. But uh So, you want applications and interviews or the president of
019the school makes the motion? >> Yep. I don't like that. Okay. >> Well, let's move it to the full board like you'd like to, Mr. Maniac. I'll support his motion. I will vote no full meeting. But we spent five months on this policy. It's time to move forward. Never talked about it every time, but we have to establish time. I guess I'm confused in that um the or is placed in such a way that you don't have to have the interviews or is it after the interviews have taken place? >> You don't have to. It'll be for that board to decide. By putting this process in place, I would and starting it the minute that >> applications will have been accepted. >> Correct. >> Irrelevant of the board of which process From an administration standpoint,
020the second that we received the reservation, we would post the anticipated vacancy and applications would then be accepted. Um, no matter which process was that process will start like you folks want it to start. >> Yeah. >> But you are not constraining a board to do it your way. You're still giving them an out to do it the way the majority sees fit. And a board is supposed to govern itself. not not a board 20 years earlier governing the board 20 years later. Board's supposed to be able to govern itself. >> So interviews would not have to take place. >> Well, they won't have to. But I once this my feeling is once this pro if this process gets started right away, most likely in 99 out of 100 chances it's going to happen. But
021you just never know what somebody's going to run into 20 30 years from now to but that's already in there. It says in number four if they fail to make it to an elective um in le of the out process then the president can make a motion. And I'm just making it clearer, very concise, very clear. >> But it is clear. >> I don't think so because when you say time limits limitations exist, I everybody's going to have a different opinion. >> Okay. So why don't we clarify the time limitations then? So >> I'd rather I'd rather go with what I what I suggested. I think that's best. That's what I'm that's what I'm going to go with I think this time. I think we made I think we made a lot of concessions um
022to listening to to your side on on where you want to go with it. >> Whose side? Well, I mean, let's be let's be honest. I mean, this is here because it we didn't like the way I handled it in December or November. So, um I I hear you. I and I'm telling you that it would have been a lot easier to go this route had it you followed the path that this if if this policy is here and it sets that in motion, it makes it a lot easier to it sets it in motion. So, it's going to happen. And had it happened, had it been here before, probably would have it probably would have happened because it's would have started the clock running, right? >> Yeah. >> Okay. So, we can agree on
023that. Now, I would say that I'm still not going to dictate to a future board that they have to follow the process that me that I or you or anybody else wants them to follow. they have to follow their it is their their obligation and their role to govern themselves. So there's it's one out, >> but but the board is still going to vote on this. Like the the vote >> Okay. The board >> I I see your point. I just think that I think that it should be very clear that the president has the ability to to nominate someone. You can disagree with me. Um >> Oh, no. I agree. He should >> I just don't think there I don't think that we need to put any constraints around. Just leave it as an
024or you'll get the process started. But if for whatever reason the board sitting in these seats at that time doesn't want to use the process need to use the process or sees other issues that we don't know they have the ability to go another route immediately not after they've wasted three weeks they get to do what they want to do when they want to do it. >> Okay. >> I mean that's really all it is. like I want to make sure that that board has control over their board. >> And again, from the administration standpoint on this, what the policy tells it to do, tells the administration to do is then irrelevant of if it's A or B, however we're listening, right? the interviews happen the way that they're dictated in here or if the
025board president makes a recommendation the board at that point will have a list of applicants assuming somebody applies because the administration will have collected that and that will then be available you know for the board which just you know what what does a list of applicants mean if there are not interviews I mean it still gives you know it still gives you a sense of who is interested it gives the um board members all board members an opportunity to say okay this is the candidate tool we have versus the board president's recommendation or you know whatever like I think it does still provide more to the whole board in that you now have a list of people who have indicated interest >> yes and my guess is more like I said more times than not
026it's still going to follow that exact one through three >> y I would bet on that that's the way it would go but It's a clear the board can govern themselves which I think every board should have the ability to do that. school code is written as it is because it's not meant to be restrictive and weighing whatever concerns that are, you know, at the foundation of what you're trying to come across are trumping in every way. you know, without balancing out efficiency and the ability for governance to happen on a on a level where, you know, we can we can just we can continue without festering. So, I I agree with Mr. C on this one. I don't have a problem giving this to a full board and voting on it, but if we
027can, you know, I think we had a a great collaborative collaborative effort to to adjust language. Um and if you know we can't meet with the suggestion then I have no problem vote how it is but I won't be voting on how it is. I won't be voting to move that >> just so one last time where is the or specifically going to be >> right at the page break coincidentally that's not not because it's just so >> 3C after it says as a committee the whole then there will be an or placed after that >> an or yeah then that we'll have to give that a title I think okay yeah some kind of a title and then that would be under probably to do something with indenting because the appointment should not look
028like it falls under that. It's actually a separate section. It's just the editing tool. I can live with it in there. >> Um yeah, I mean maybe because it's it's not an it's not a sub set of interviews, it's a whole other thing. So maybe it needs to be something like vacancies on the board of school directors shall be filled as follows. Option A, one, two, three, option B. >> Yes suggestion. >> Um I have a little group reading for that. >> Okay. Um under vacancies, the added um language in the second paragraph um just says um advertise inviting qualified individuals to complete application and apply for the vacancy. I think we could just say individual to apply for the vacancy and then it explains how they apply for motion to add the amendment as
029stated page break there with or rather than or I think we would I think suggestion how to organize that you know will work better just that it'll be two different options. It'll honor the or which is what I'm an A and B options have move it forward in either direction at this point which >> ultimately the board has to vote. So I feel it it gives a little extra power to one of the electives of the bills but >> well they all majority >> and really the only reason I said that is because I'd be fine if it was any member but I felt that it might be more um agreeable if it was just the president not just because I'm sitting in that seat just because there's one person instead of nine that could
030circumvent the You have a motion for that. And that's brings us to policy 00 organization >> 005. We adapted the committees on page three. Student Achievement Committee was previously a name subcommittee. However, the uh the topics included that's what we talked about during the April meeting. Um so under the students achievement committee it is all topics of curriculum athletics activities student services and experiences educational technology student policies and other student related concerns. And then number two is the finance property and operations committee which includes the office of finance property operations information technology operations and governance focused board policies. So like we talked about last time it would be separated from edtech and operations and governance focus board policies will be separated from student related policies. Along with that we would have a negotiations committee and
031then we would have two committees of a whole which would be budget and finance and personnel. >> Well I don't think this was discussed in all these conversations. I think it was assumed that our budget finance committee the whole during the budgeting season would still exist outside of the even though we would have some finance discussion throughout the year after finance property and operations. That's what we believed was the kind of assumption was stated to continue continue with our process of having separate budget meetings for people of interest and the personnel committee is essentially executive So if we change to this one minute, excuse me, are we looking at having these committees meet on different nights the same night and then limit them to an hour? Because my concern is like last last meeting we
032had here for policy and curriculum, the curriculum part took up the majority of the meeting as has happened at numerous meetings before. Then if we put the athletics, activities, and student services underneath that, I feel we'll never get to that stuff. Um, I did look at what Dr. Myers had sent us earlier and what other school districts have done. Um, just a couple notes like exit, you have them broken out into different committees. They actually meet as a committee of the whole and then have I would love to know how they do it because they actually have committees listed with personnel. They have three people per committee and somehow they have that in the committee as a whole. I don't know how they they do that. I think oftent times when I could find out
033them specifically oftentimes when districts do that they have the committee will like meet before the public meeting because that's smaller group and then they all bring it to the committee as a whole and those committee members have already met the administration at a separate time >> private the way that it's listed on the agenda they actually are meeting at the same time as the committee the whole so they have so how we used to have our workshop meeting and then the regular board meeting that's how they have they don't have a committee meeting night >> and you know which I mean if we want to do a committee of the whole for everything and bring back the workshop meeting then that's what we do but you know uh Conrad Wiser their committee meetings are only
034half an hour long. >> Yeah. Uh and then like I said some of the other ones uh Skooko Valley they hold their committee meetings two nights during the week. So you know I just am greatly concerned with combining these and certain topics not getting to because you know depending on time of year the athletics part of it can take up 15 20 minutes and you know yeah it can I think you know if those a lot of times those athletic updates you know functional like they're valuable but they're almost more superintendent for type content where it's just reporting out >> than the committee studying a topic that they can you know they can get. So um I think all your concerns are valid and and could play out. I would like to see how this
035works kind of just adding you know where us being allowing us to be a little bit more strategic about what we bring to each committee every month. um you know from we may not most months we're not going to need to hit all of those topics but we will be able to structure them plan to structure an hour and maybe there's some times where we might have to say it's going to be a little bit more so I think under our current one time a month hourlong meeting I would like to give it a rather than go to a second night or you know extend the meetings to longest. Yeah. >> So then we would limit these to one hour meetings. >> I think we try. Yeah. >> Yeah. I mean and but again this
036is board organization and government. If you if you prefer to see them be two separate nights. Um that's fine too. >> I don't think historically we have worked in the IT >> and edtech items edtech usually was underneath curriculum then it would fall in different places but as these items come up in the past we we blended them in here. They're specifically listed as topic areas. in in those cases we just blended blended them into the uh the agenda we had. So I I do see that I mean currently sometimes we can't get to policy at all because of >> so now we're adding student activities to that but I I do see also some of those some of those reports that Mr. provides could be presented when you're making the set. Would it be
037beneficial just to move policy to under operations all the policy or do you like having policy split into two committees? >> I think I do. I mean under the structure that you know the the policies that are that are student focused are all curriculum or extracurricular. So I just >> yeah ultimately in the end these committee meetings are for the administration to get the information out to the board right as long as I don't feel like I have a big opinion as to how that's being done as long as you're doing what you need to do. >> Yeah. And I again you excited by the opportunity to do this a little bit differently. I think structuring that way and just my recommendation is we give it a shot for us next week and see how
038we do. >> I just looked quickly at exit or two and it looks like they have their committees meet one week and then they have a voting meeting another week. So they're like two meetings apart. >> The stuff that I saw was all in one night. >> Well, I see underneath their workshop. Yeah, >> I see all their committees meeting. >> Why missing does it as well too where they meet as a committee of the whole >> it doesn't matter. We're not really following what they're doing. >> I'm just saying this was the information given to us and I researched it. So >> I know I'm I'm looking online now and I'm seeing two voting two two meetings a month, one with committee and one as the board voting meeting where they present their consent
039agenda. >> Yeah. So the other one's a committee of the whole with subcommittees. >> Well, I think that might be all starts with an S. Um >> yeah, but I think that's what it comes down to a lot. this. In the end, the administration is going to put they want to address where they want to address it and they've got to figure out a way to address the things that need to be addressed. >> Yeah. >> And so what happens if we get say into April and we realize this isn't working then why? >> Well, I mean I think the the first thing to do is look at times, right? You can go to an hour and a half each meeting and advertise in that way. I mean that's that's kind of the first thing
040I think is the extended time of the whole meetings versus adding another type and both will be on the same night that spreadsheet that was sent out to school districts in April. So >> that's how they self-report but >> yeah there were a couple of stuff >> I think Twin Valley was at the bottom. I don't know where exitter is on that spreadsheet. They're at the bottom. >> They're third from the bottom. >> So, I could have there were a couple that I had to research myself. >> Yeah, >> because they did not respond. >> Well, they on the website it does have individ committees how you have it. >> Yeah. >> But if you dig into it a little bit more, like I said, they meet as a committee of the whole. >> Um,
041>> yeah. I mean it's you know it is what it is but >> yeah but probably I think of like 14 or 15 self-reported for that spreadsheet. I then found the rest from the website. >> Everything is primarily done through the committee the whole process. They rarely have dedicated community. Yeah, >> I mean that's what I said last a month ago. I really don't I don't >> I think as long as all the information gets out there that we can get up there. I'm not sure that it's >> Well, that's what I'm just wondering. Like should we just go back to the workshop committee meeting how we had it before? Just eliminate the committee meeting nights like we have currently and just have two meetings month. one's committee the whole that is not non voting
042>> I don't I don't hear it >> other than it provides more flexibility as to what is handled when versus hour to hour you're still going to be presenting the same information in the same evening >> it for us it's essentially the same >> then for you who get to decide whether you leave at 7 o'lock >> and and people can still do that I mean if you have a commit and you only make an hour and you got to go do something that still can occur. I I mean like tonight I'm leaving it by 7:05 even if we go an hour and a half. I so I don't I don't see a and committee the whole works fine for us as well. I just >> Yeah, I do. When we have the divided one,
043the benefit for us with divided committees is there are times throughout the year where we communicate with Dan or J. >> You could still have a dedicated point person by topic. >> Yeah. >> Believe that's how ex throws the ball completely in your court as to what you want to do when you want to do. Yeah. They have a different chairperson for each committee. Y >> and that's honestly kind of how we're doing it already. I mean, we don't have strict committees where only committee members show up. So, it's much more how we're already doing. >> Sure. I again I don't I mean I can do either way. I think I prefer the committee of the whole and just say there's balls in your court. Can we meet here for two hours from 6:00 to
0448 on Monday? Whatever. And all members are alone. Anyway, the voting meeting separate. >> Yeah, a separate voting. I could support that. Okay. That the you know, we'll put it >> you still you still can have your committee chairs here. >> We're still going to have to committees are so you could name the president can name chairs in December and then that would be our point. Yeah. Okay. >> Any opposition to policy the full board as is. And so the only thing I'll say is do we want do we want to have let's keep committee the whole add committee the whole but keep these as the two designations for chairs rather than have yeah rather than have four or five chairs still have two chairs okay we'll reflect that in everyone agrees we'll reflect that
045in the revision for >> I just don't see that it makes that much It's just that moves to the full board then review. There were some concerns brought up regarding committee attendance voting. >> Well, good. We just killed two birds with one stone. >> Yeah. Sounds like committee the whole process eliminates any anything any questions about that committee the whole everybody can >> I may have have that there was one thing that I thought we may need to clarify. Um so with the the chair um so does this this this resolve the issue that we would have had then this past time where it's the one kind of catch where some people can show up if you have selected members in a committee even though it's as a whole and then when you're selecting the
046chair. So I thought it it might be advantageous to then have the if we're if we have chairs then the entire board vote on the chairs if that makes sense. >> Well, with moving to committee of a whole I think yes. >> Yeah, because we're not signing committees. >> Yeah. >> Committee of the whole. So that just goes up. So, does that need to be in language somewhere or where? >> Oh, rework would consist of naming chairs. >> That would make sense. Rather than naming a committee, naming a chair. >> Yeah, that makes sense. >> And a negotiations committee would still be named. >> Yes. That's it, right? >> Um, >> so policy is that in not in this one, is it? >> And is there something I got to look back in? Oh, well,
047policy five talks about the reorder. There's something about if these are all going to be committees of the whole something about them being advisory. >> Yeah. >> Committee, right? >> We want to maintain that. >> Yeah. That Oh, yeah. That is So that's under so under 005 organization under board committees the president himself president may appoint at the organization meeting or as soon after as practical practical members of the board to the following standing committees where they will serve one one year term. We'll have to change that to say that they the designate committees that will be named committee of the whole and where chairs. That would be a change we would make to align policy. >> So, does the committee support us making those changes and bring into the meeting as well on >>
048Yep. >> Anybody oppose that? Okay. So then we can add that additional change to 005. And then as far as 006 then that's taken care of that's not addressed in this policy and is there a motion to move this one to the full board. >> Which one? >> 0 back to 006. >> We changing anything. >> There's no change. >> I don't think there's any changes yet. Okay. Then that brings us to 121. >> 121. The issue here with trips school board jurisdictions trips policy and we would recommend some exclusions to that which we until recently we haven't been practicing that way like for example FFA well they would present to you every year about their trip to Indianapolis we wouldn't get that trip approved. It was a part of their program, right? Like that
049was an overnight trip. It's also an out ofstate trip. That one out of state trips we should continue to approve. We should approve all of those. But overnight trips, um, pardon me, we should approve overnight trips. Some outofstate trips we should not necessarily bring all the time because there's times where we where we might leave the state temporarily for um a part of a schedule that is that is routine. Uh it doesn't happen that the FFA is probably the best example that happens routinely that's still overnight. So we should get better. Um, trying to think of my examples now. I'm going back a few months. I guess if it is if the trip is a part of a team's schedule of a group's routine schedule, does the board want to approve that if it is
050out of state? >> Out of state or overnight? That's not even in the language because this is integral to the curriculum. So does that include extracurriculars? Um field trip is defined as any trip by students away from school pro premises that is an integral part of approved planned instruction that would not apply extracurriculars but have a lot of liability. We send kids out of state >> even if it is extracurricular. I believe the AP gov is going to Washington DC >> like within the next week or two. >> So >> they've done that for a few years now. It's funded by the foundation. >> What do you what do you want the policy to say? >> Yeah. Um >> I mean quite frankly I speak for myself but I support whatever you think we need
051to do here to uh >> you know do the proverbial make sure we don't get put ourselves in a sticky situation. I mean, by us approving the curriculum, we're probably really approving the field trip as well since it's part of the curriculum. >> Yeah. I mean, if it was always a part of it, right? And that's that it's rare that a curriculum trip lives forever. that this has been one that was like this example has been one requested I think three years ago by the teachers and the education foundation specifically donor wants to support that as long as they find great value on that. Um but it is not something that we have budgeted for and uh we I believe we should be approving overnight trips because of the extra liability. >> Sounds like it
052makes sense. >> Yes. >> Can we change it to include trips? Yes. Okay. >> Yes. >> So would we also include the out of state trips then too? I don't think we necessarily need to approve an out of state trip settlement just because we could cross a boundary. I mean, you know, across the board, we go to Jersey and back pretty quick. So, I would say we should edit this to say the board overnight trips for both curriculum and extra We can ask uh Mr. Fu and I talked about this recently. Maybe we get some potential trips approved at the beginning of a season if we think they might happen down the road just to know that that's a part of the season. Um even if it might not occur, >> right? >> Like a
053playoff scenario or something like that. >> Yes. That makes sense. >> You like that? Those changes. >> And then policies to consider for revision. We have uh 236.1. >> 236.1 has been adapted based on a change in PA school code regarding threat assessment teams and communications with law enforcement officers and healthc care providers. We've had to change theou to include the fact that we have or will develop procedures where we communicate with law enforcement when a threat assessment means that it is appropriate. So that's the basically the change of PA school code. This policy goes right along with that as far as we establish procedures to include protocols with those protocols stated that we'll go through that process. The BCIU has taken the lead on some of the language. They they are not finished with
054process. The FBI has been involved uh in Philadelphia. There's a there's a branch here in Allentown. So some recent meetings the FBI has been there to to talk about threat assessments and protocols and so forth. This is in progress right now. Um we do have I would call them protocols in place but they will be amped up a little bit based on based on this policy along with FBI recommendations and also CIU recommendations. So for now we have theus resigned by law enforcement that states their voting protocol and procedures. We're in the process of updating that to include everything that should be included. So from a safety perspective that's where this paragraph on page one comes into play which again is based on the updates for code. I I will say having the FBI in
055Allentown and their input at some of the meetings has been instrumental in better understandings of how they operate, things that they see and how that communication process should and should not occur. They of course don't want every single threat assessment um lying on their desk. Um they don't want phone calls for every single threat assessment. So some of it is training as far as when to do that, when not to do that. But having, like I said, having them right here out of town is already big benefits to the county. That that is the only change with this the paragraph and bold under authority. That language came pretty much straight from the statute, right? >> Correct. Yes. >> Moving forward. >> I agree. >> There a motion to move this to the full board. Now,
056>> I'll make a motion. >> All in favor say I. >> I. >> Then that brings us to policy 140 charter schools. >> 140 charter schools. There are a couple sentences that have been stricken. Uh that's old language. I utilize the most recent PSBA policy guide to revamp this. So it appears that there might have been something that was created by PSBA that we had not updated. And the reason I state that the most recent update is based on the transportation issue. So there was a recent court case. you know, come back court case stated that while charter school students do have the right to transportation, that transportation does not have to directly mimic the transportation provided to school district students. So, that's the piece here from the most recent policy guide that is under
057revision. Like I said, under purpose, a little bit of that language has been adapted and authority Almost all of this policy with the exception of that transportation clause is in reference to if the charter were to come to this board looking for approval to open up within the district. Almost all of it is governed that because how charters are started is they must they must file an application within the local district in which they reside and then the district along with the state can set criteria for approval. So almost all this policy has to do with something that none of us have experienced to date. >> And and if you look at that sense under authority I think at whatever point few years ago most likely it says the board shall ensure show that each
058charter school application provides appropriate assurances dot dot dot. Well that's kind of inaccurate itself. you can't you can't mandate what they have in the application either deny it or accept it offer suggestions to it. So I think some of that wording was was adapted just because of uh how it read wasn't fully accurate. My piece in adapting it was that if we're going to make that change, which transportation is beneficial to us as a school district, I was just trying to align it with the most recent PSP policy guide. I'll just there is no significant urgency to this if you know in light of the idea that the policy governs something that none of us have dealt with and just kind of I don't know if any of us thought we're going to get this
059on the agenda today either. Um you know if if you want to take some time to look at it we just bring it back in another meeting that's fine as well because it really you kind of have to read it in the context of if somebody were coming forward with a charter application there might be questions transport the transportation piece we are following now where you know it is essentially the law decide the case law decided that transportation does not have to be identical it just has to be adequate. Yeah. And it's some of these charter schools are pretty significant distance like they are not identical to our bus. They can't >> that's fair. >> Yeah, it's seven. Again, there's no significant urgency to this. So, just want to take a look at it back.
060Make a motion to all in >> favor say I.jour.