we have completed the installation of all of the brosers necessary to take the assessments and we are following up and the schools are finding issue and sometimes the schools are bringing in the donated equipment and so we are following them and to see if we can get the browsers on the equipment and as we were initially planning for an april 7th start time for the window, we are running tight, on when the equipment is going to arrive and most of the equipment is going to arrive this week and so we will be fiercely, figuring out the last, 2 days of this week and what equipment needs to go where. and the school sites are currently developing what their schedules or their testing schedule are going to be for the next few weeks. and because, they were not aware of what they will be testing until monday, that the state cannot release what they are testing sml monday and so we have a short time frame to figure out what equipment needs to go where and we are confident that we will figure it out and it may be bumpy next

week and after that we could get on with it. and then, another challenge that the school sites have expressed the concern in and we only have a limited number of support staff and we have nine staff to support 104 sites, and so the way that we are going to work around that is that rpa is going to have the staff available on the phone and the help desk will be trained on how to answer the questions and plus, we will take the advantage of the help desk and we will do the best that we can to support the staff but we do expect that we will learn (inaudible) this year. and the final challenge is that we are running low on the equipment that we have now and we have eight years worth of equipment and many different operating system and so you know that we will be, a great opportunity for us to figure out what is the best fit for the svac assessment going forward. >> so we do expect it to be a bit rocky in the beginning but we will learn and it will get get better after that. >> good evening, commissioners.

i am michelle dawson and the educational technology supervisor and i am going to talk to you about the school site observation protocol. of course as you guys are well aware that this here is about learning. about how the technology and the students will take the svac exam and so our observational tool will actually what we want to do is we want to measure the pipeline between the state, and the district to see what issues there are between the state and the district. but we also want to look at our end and what our end will be look like and what our problems are on what our successes are and develop a best practice protocol for schools. so we are going to take a deep dive with four to five schools and look at some of the data points that we want to observe. and we will have a team from rpa, and ed tech and it going

out, and we are developing the protocol that looks at the student accommodation feedback and teacher feedback and really looking at the technical issues. after that, we will be able to develop a best practices, and take a deeper look at what our issues will be and how we can address them before the test next year. >> so i want to thank our staff, and i think that what you see in front of you is the dream team, the four folks, that are really burning the candle on both ends to make sure that we have the resources in place. and so that our teachers, and our students can have a real world experience of what it will be like to take the svac assessments. so i want to thank you for all of your hard work and i want to thank you for all of the pushing that we are doing, but i can't emphasize enough for our parents and our community

that although, the state of california is not assigning consequences to the results of the svac this year, we are testing the test and we are taking it out for a trial run and kicking the tires and i can't think of any other analogies and it is incredibly important that we take it seriously because we are going to learn the important lessons about what does the technology look like when all of the students are taking these assessments? the teachers will learn about this is a different kind of test, and it is no longer filling in the bubble with a paper, pencil test and it is adaptive so the students have to be able to be comfortable on a computer and the students with disabilities have the built in accommodations that they are going to have to be able to access on a computer--based assessment and so it is critically important as a musician, how you practice is how you perform. and this is practice, practice, practice. and so i can't emphasize enough

that it is important that we take is serious and there are no consequences. and no negative consequences. and so it is important that we take it seriously. >> thank you. >> commissioner haney? >> yeah, thank you for this. and we appreciate the update and it is something that i have been getting a lot of questions about and people want to know, there are new test and what are they and do they count and all of that, and so thank you for the update and thes helpful and you may have mentioned a bit about this in terms of the observation in the feedback and what we are trying to accomplish with that. but, is the information that we want to garner from our students and teachers and sites is that feedback kind of standardized? that is coming from the state and is that something that they kind of want to bring down to us and is this all tools that we are developing ourselfs in terms of feedback that we want to get in and is this all about the implementation and all of the feedback is focused on how it worked or actually how like what they thought of the tests

and all of it, and what sort of deep, level of knowledge and how much of it is for us and how much of it if any, is for us to share back with the folks at the state level who will work on it throughout the test themselves. >> you know, they say that assessments, give meaning sometimes to standards. so, let's look at it from that lens and so as we move to making instruction shifts you also see the shifts in assessment. and this is our opportunity not only to get used to the format of the shifts, but also the content of these shifts. so, how does the content of the assessments changing? how are the instruction be changing and challenging? you know? to address that? so i think that there is more of curriculum-based to this, that you know, we cannot

ignore, both with the students as well as for the teachers, and as well as for the districts. and but at the same time, there is also, the technical issues that go with it, which is, you know, drag and drop, within the computer. and how can we hone in on those skills? and so the state did release this last friday, of what was set a skills that are technically needed, and we will be looking for this but i would say that this is a component of the bigger, larger package which is primarily around curriculum and instruction and assessment. >> commissioner norton? >> so i have a question just about the accommodations, but we may not know the answer yet, because i know that this is a work in progress but under the old system, there was like the certain categories of accommodations and some more standard, that did not render your test, you know,

automatically marked down and there were othersing that you could take the test but you would not receive a valid score on the test, is that the same sort of level that we see here, are these non-embedded accommodations basically ones that would render your score invalid? >> so, the difference before was a modification, that would modify what was being tested and as a result, the score will not count the same as without the modification, and so none of these reached that level and so these are all, they only reach the level of accommodation that says that they are testing the exact same contents. >> okay. >> so even though in the ones in the green box, have to be in your iep in order for you to receive those during the test. they don't change the content of what is being tested? >> that is correct. >> thanks. >> i have one question, so, is the lcsf money, going to pay for some of these device to

ramp up? or... >> so the common core states one time common core state funding is being used to pay to ramp up and the board approved it about a month ago. >> thank you very much. >> president fewer? >> yes. >> could you, you mentioned that we may not have enough head sets. how far are we in the whole need? >> so we did get a donation from plantronics so 500 head sets which was really good and then we have bought 500 head sets, and another 3700, yeah, 3200 from it and 500 from rp. and so we have around 3700, and 543 under or available for school sites. >> that are needed? >> to truly, thanks for

everybody. >> yes, and we have written a letter and if you have some influence that will help to unite them, and i just... >> i would be to the number that we need,... >> and it says that we have 3700, but we actually need. >> it would be lovely to give one to every kid to just take it home. for giving the test. >> yes we need 20,000. >> head sets, needed. >> yes. >> and that the average cost of the head set? >> so, if we wanted to disposal they will run $2 per student and run every single year, what we are purchasing is 200 this year and we will purchase a balance and my brain is not working right now, 5400 next year and that will need the one to ten students, every device that we offer for the testing next year will have a head set with it. sh year, i am actually not significantly concerned for a

couple of reasons not the entire school is going to take the entire time to test. many sites have head sets available and we are encouraging the students to bring their own head sets, not so much as a cost saving measure but the people are particular about the head sets and there are a couple that are used and they will have a much better experience and i think that a combination of all of those and i am not significantly concerned. >> i understand that. but the head sets that you purchased, were how much each? >> i apologize. >> ended up being $12.95. >> so 20,000 for $12.95. >> well i am sorry >> 5400, but they are reasonable from year to year or we could get the cheap ear buds at $2. >> but is sounds like $15,000. or under? >> yes. >> okay.

>> superintendent? >> yes. so there is a question as to so we are starting to roll out these practice assessments so why are we talking about this now? i just want the public to understand that this has been a moving target, as the state has become clearer and clearer about what the roll out is going to be. and i think that it was mentioned earlier in the presentation that we still don't know, we will not know until next week. and are we assessing english language arts or are we assessing math and that is assigned to us by the state and so this is a work in progress. and the good news is that it is agnostic in terms of the head sets and so whatever students are using, as you walk to your free muni bus stop and you have your head sets, you can use those and you can bring those head sets, but i do want to caution that it does not mean that you bring your parents'

dr. dry,, $300 sets. we will have nice head seats for you, but it is not important right now since we are practicing how to take the test. so if you have your head sets, bring them. just don't bring the expensive ones. >> we will have some of those for you here. >> any other comments or questions from the board. >> thank you very much. >> thanks. >> and now i think that we have an update on vision 2025. >> is there a powerpoint for this? >> there will be, and i will move. >> so president fewer, i would like to ask the chief of staff to come forward and bring the update on vision 2025. which will include a short video clip.

>> we have been working with a board with representatives from youth, our teachers, represented by uesf, and uasf was jan link, and also, georgia from the pac. and so, where we are now, is we have synthesized all of that feedback and we have another draft and we will be working on the plaintiff as best as we can with all of the great input that we got this friday night at our board retreat. and with the executive leadership team, and then we will be again, sharing that, with our guiding coalition and so what we are hoping to do is after that version 1.0, is

document it and in a good format, and we are going to invite the guiding coalition, to get back together in mid april, and celebrate the work and talk about our next steps and how we will use the vision and in particular, the new profile of the high school graduate to guide our work as we move forward. and so we did create just as if working we did create a video trailer, that we could use to share with people because really a big part of the next step is that it was great that we had so much representation at the stake holder council but we want to engage more people in the conversation and get more ideas and inpiet of how we bring this all to life and so we have created this short video that we would like to preview publicly and it will be on our website soon and so it can tell the story of the process for those who were part of it and this is long with the first draft will be used along with the first community and so, let's roll.

>>[video]

>> thank you. >> we are excited to take the next steps with all of you and i think that we are both excited and looking out at responsible vision and how do we make sure that we can operationize this and bring it to life and continue to build a broader stake holders to support the direction and i look forward to giving more updates and looking closely with the board and superintendent who have sponsored this great initiative.

>> done? >> yes. >> okay. >> sorry. >> i just wanted to ask if the video that you just showed is available on-line, anywhere,? >> well, we actually will put it on-line and i did want to say that we also have a few other pending video and we have one actually featuring our teacher and parents about the parent engagement and another one on tech and schools. and so we have a few we had so much great footage to you honest with you that is was hard to cut down and so will be, and we wanted to show it to you and make sure that everyone was okay and we will be posting it on the website with more updates about the process. >> any other comments, commissioners? >> no. >> thank you very much, laura. >> thanks. >> and consent, item n, consent calendar resolutions. none tonight. >> vote on consent calendar. >> move to second under section

f. >> none? >> okay. >> and content calendar resolution severed for meeting actions? >> yes, we have one item that was pulled, 0, vote on the consent calendar, you are right >> roll call. >> wei. >> yes. >> logan. >> yes. >> haney. >> yes. >> maufas. >> yes. >> mendoza mcdonald murase. >> aye. >> norton. >> yes. >> wynns. >> aye >> fewer. >> yes, except on 143.11 b4. >> is that a nay vote?

>> that is abstaining. >> yes, i am sorry, i teach at usf >> thank you. >> okay. >> thank you very much. >> thank you. >> item p, consent calendar resolutions and i believe that one was severed by commissioner wynns. >> yes, this is the mlu with the sara williams foundation about the ido project and so i am *f i have a couple of questions. one, i appreciate the memo that we were sent, which made clear that the reference to the design of the food program at willie brown does not imply a change in the architectal designs and so we are not talking about redesigning the building which is good but i am

interested in where the two pilot projects are or two or three and i am interested in the issue which, of course, is always an issue and so there is an reference here or was in the memo that and it does say that here too, because we are, this is simply a grant for the staff people to work on this. however, and so, it says, you know it is not going to cost us anything, and so i am wondering about our obligation to or our commitment to actually do what they may present. and what it may cost. and actually i am kind of concerned that we are, that as we do, and still i think that we need to be aware of that as we knew that it was likely to happen, the support for the food program and this is without changing, you know, we went to a more expensive provider for better food. i totally for that, but i think

that we should be aware of the cost and this is potentially a whole new set of costs so i am interested in that. >> thank you, commissioners. and so, in terms of the first question which i think is valid, the two additional sites and so what we are hoping to do is work with the schools that are going under bond renovations, and as those renovations are happening at the school site to actually work within that environment to create the model dining experience in those schools, so in other words, work with the existing budgets and the time lines and changes but infuse into it, the principles and the design features behind the dining experience so we have notified those two or three sites yet we have been working with the project managers for the program and looking at some of those schools and what we are imagining is going to happen is as we are working

with the ido team and the brown project, team, the lessons that we learn from that, we will be able to apply to all other sites, actually that are going through moderization project sos we can get as many of our schools renovated as quickly as possible. so that is in terms of the two schools as they get identified we can update the board and then... >> i am a little concerned about that. that sounds great, except that depending on what we do to the schools and so like obviously we have all seen the presentation and know what the model dining experience is supposed to look like and so if we are going to buy new furniture for the schools that are being remodeled and we buy roundtables, for instance, we have not addressed the issue that if we go to that model of serving food it is going to cost us more money and staff. and so i am concerned that we are up front making a decision that we are going to spend more money, running food programs in

certain schools. and you know, that does not mean that please, i hope that everybody understands that i would like to move to those models but i also, you know, we have this ongoing tension about the cost of staff, verses the cost of more and better food, and the cost, the escalating general fund support and so, i am a little concerned that we are kind of building that in, right here, without discussing this or thinking what the implication might be. >> so we are not assuming an increase in cost for staff because right now with our staffing model there is actually an under utilization that we will be able to maximize the opportunities and also moving to athlete meals a day model and having breakfast lunch and super that will create the clear and change how the staffing will work in a way that is really positive for the employees and creating the clear opportunities, and at the high school level, the secondary level, the middle and

high school level, we actually see that our plan is to move further away from foods and more towards sfusd produced meals for our students and about 40 percent of our students at the high school are eating at foods that are produced by the sfusd staff and that is actually a much more cost effective model and provides more choice and opportunity and so we are hoping to move in that direction and so with the increased revenue from the participation and the increased number of meals, we are going it see the cost going up but the revenue stream going up significantly as well and we think that it is going to be our estimates are that it is a more cost effective model when they are all rolled out. >> we see, some of those estimates? because that is what kind of questions that we asked when the designs were rolled out is exactly that. and i would be very interested in that and, i mean that i understand that with the... which is i want all of these things to be piloted and tried, but i understand that we are ac