alexander commissioner fischer. here. commissioner lamb. here. commissioner martin moody. here commissioner sanchez. vice president weizman. here. president bogus. here. thank you . recognize commissioner sanchez . and i think with that, we will transition into to the board going into closed session. and so at this time, i will call to see if there's any speakers for the items listed on the agenda for closed session. seeing none

in person. do we have any virtual public? seeing seeing none. logged in. any virtual participants for public comment on closed session. no hands raised. thank you so much. i now recess the meeting at 7 p.m. and we will start with the readout from the closed session report. in one matter of anticipated litigation, the board by a vote of seven yeses, gives direction to the general counsel on a vote of 7 to 0. the board voted to approve the settlement and federal court

case number. three 918. cv 08177. in the matter of posey versus sf usd, united states district court for the northern district of california case number 323 dash cv. dash 02626-j sc. the board by a vote of seven yeses, gives the authority of the district to pay up to the stipulated amount. in the matter of student m w versus san francisco unified school district, o-h number. 22023070158. the board by a vote of seven yeses, gives the authority of the district to pay up to the stipulated amount, and that concludes the read out from closed session. and with that,

the board will transition into our sitting around a table together. this works now. if you want to turn it on. you don't know how. maybe we should stick with what we were doing. just do what is an option if you need it. all right. yeah, it's right here. you got to press the bottom to turn it on and hold it down a little bit. it's all good to go.

i tested it earlier. okay, well, if we could. so we don't have dueling mike the wireless mike. unless we need to. unless someone feels strongly different , people could pass it around. i already printed it. okay i have . let's see. i'm not sure you this one, but do you want your your survey stakeholder? that's fine. megan hi. yeah. okay. i have that. i this is just the same as the first. yes what was on? okay yes. i i think you can sit here. okay that's right. that's my over here. i know. i'm going to still have i don't have an operator. i have that. i know

it has a cap hour. so go. sorry, i wasn't trying to like but like . oh, my gosh, it's all right. those i didn't purchase those rights. and how much of these costs i didn't buy those. they weren't there before. so it's commissioners already. i'm going to pass it to the super intendant to get us started. we have aj here. that's the first board of. hi. good evening, everyone. it's like, are you great to be here for this workshop on the board. self-evaluation i just want to start. i've been coming to board members board. i've been coming to board meetings for 11 years now. i've been coming to board meetings for 11 years now. and this will be the first time that a board of education has done a self-evaluation at a meeting i've been at. so i appreciate

your engaging in this process and holding yourselves accountable to the work that you committed to over a year ago. and so this is really your meeting that will be facilitated by the goals of the meeting. all right. not moving now. to give it an opportunity for you to reflect on your efforts to engage in student outcomes focused governance and identify changes to improve governance. and so i'll do a brief overview of the evaluation process and the time analysis we did. and then aj will lead you in the self evaluation discussion and then we'll talk about next steps and. so you're familiar with this, but just so the public knows that the council of great city schools have been working

with on student outcomes, focused governance has a self evaluation tool. you completed the tool yourselves. the results of the individual assessments are shared with the entire board. you have that report in front of you and it's attached to board docs. then we'll have our conversation and we'll identify our next steps. and then also we did do a time analysis just to see how were we spending our time. and so last year when we adopted the vision, value goals and guardrails, we talked about spending half of our meeting time focus on student outcomes. now there is a recognition that last year that wasn't necessarily going to happen because the goals that we had established, i needed to establish interim goals. we needed to understand the baseline and we didn't have any strategies yet in place to start working towards those goals. but we did start doing progress monitoring last year for the second half of the year with the interim goals identified to at least talk about our baseline for the goals and the interim goals and some of the strategies we're planning to put in place

for this year. so so, so we did note when we did that and then there were some other areas where we kind of put a few buckets around. how did you spend board spend his time on board governance discussion items, public comment. and so you see here last year we spent 87 hours together in this room for the year and this is how we spent the time. and over 10% was on board governance. so you did do a fair amount of work to set up the structure that we have now. and then you see for the year, only 5.7% was spent on student outcomes. however, when you look for march, which from march to the end of the year represent about a quarter of the year, you see there was more time spent on student outcomes and you also see we spend time on on budget as well as other areas and so expect this figure to grow this year as we have now

regular progress monitoring scheduled for each month. so with that, you have the evaluation report in front of you and i'll turn it over to aj, travel to start our discussion. dr. wayne, is it possible to get a breakdown of what goes into these buckets in the pie charts ? yeah, it's on here. so do you want me to walk through this more? these what goes into these pie charts? yeah it's. yeah. so like, the action item refers to when the board took action, so anything that came forward for action was counted in that time except for budget because there a list of what of each of the slides. i think. no, no, no. i mean that's what i'm saying. like can you give is there a list of what went into the other category? is there a list? oh the other. yeah. or like when

you say, you know, just like. yeah. other is i don't know. i mean like the specific. no we didn't, we didn't focus in on each individual item and how long each item lasted. no i'm like what, how was this tallied. how was this time? that's i think what i'm asking for a better, more delineated. so we reviewed the videos from the meetings. and so like, like the other section, right? so we'd look at the beginning and from because it mainly come with at the beginning. and so we'd look and see, okay, if it was a superintendent's report, you know, the emergency update that went into other and then when public comments started, we'd look and see the time for public comment. so do you have a list of those that we could see like , could you give us a detail, a more detailed version of what went into those? i'm sorry, i'm still not totally fine. so what do you mean a more detailed version of what went into. so you listed like the emergency

updates as an example. could you give us the list of what goes into those? do you have a slide deck pulled up to you? because i think that's what i'm pointing to the screen here. yeah i'm not sure. am i missing something? this yes. yes, i am facilitating . so i think we should maybe come back to this particular point and figure out if there's additional levels of detail of how we're monitoring and how we're tracking it. and just to kind of have more clarity on kind of the metrics that we're holding ourselves to because we do have a list of things here, but i think it would be helpful for as we move forward to kind of have more detail on and we can kind of follow up and go deeper. and so i guess right now we're going to transition to a facilitated us through this next part. is that correct? yes. go ahead. aj. good evening. you good? what? i was controlling a little bit slide show, but it's

. yeah, that's all right. thank you for having me. members. why do you want your educators. to participate and self evaluation. so imagine your teachers, your principles, the folks who are in the front lines of providing an education for your students. why would you want them to engage in self evaluation? why would you want them to be reflective of the practice? maybe we'll ask people to raise a hand and then i can call on folks to respond. that's appropriate. as a student , i think as a student personally, i think it's helpful in group discussion form, specifically within the classroom. i think it's helpful when it's like the students evaluate themselves as well as the educators evaluating themselves so then everybody can understand what other people

think that they're doing well, because especially with things that are being miscommunicated, as in a teacher, an educator thinks that they are succeeding in getting a certain point across or meeting a certain standard or a student assumes or believe that they are meeting their educators standard and then finding out that that is not true is kind of the first step to progressing towards meeting that standard. that is, at least from a student standpoint, the insight you offer is spot on and is that this is about continuous improvement and that sometimes it's hard to see that for myself unless i'm taking some time to really sort through it and to really hold myself to an expectation to figure out if i actually have the impact i intended in some evaluation. we're not questioning the intent of, but we are evaluating what is the impact. recognizing the intention is not enough. that impact is what we seek. but the insight that you offer, i think

is part of this is about continuous improvement. it's about recognizing sometimes it takes a little bit of additional perspective to figure out what is the impact that i've had as compared to what was my intention. yeah. anyone else? why would you want your educators to self evaluate to really be involved in reflective practice what you want? we had another hand from a commissioner. oh, i'm i'm happy to please. yeah, i appreciate the question. i would like to echo the student delegates comment. i think that when we are like we are as as adult learning as adults, we are also learners and we need to be engaged in. we've talked about the growth mindset. and one of the ways that i think that we sort of the pedagogy talks about as adult learners, we need to iterate, we need to reflect, we need to think about what were our intended actions, what were our consequences, how did they match up, how did they not? and then decide how would when we need to pivot and we can't make those intentional decisions

unless we are looking back to see how did we do what went well and why did it go well, so that we can do it again or what didn't go well and why didn't it go well so that we can avoid those pitfalls in the future? so i also think it's about accountability. we're asking we that many adults in the classrooms are asking students to think about how to engage in work and reflect and embrace that growth mindset and in order for us to make sure that our students are doing it, we need to be doing it as as the adults in the room as well. so thank you. anyone else, before we transition, why would you want your educator engage and reflect, practice and engage in self-evaluation? why would you want that. feel like i'm donny osmond or something? yeah. sing sing.

jackson has turned it on for you right now. okay just a little test. just good. i was just going to say teacher specifically so that they can have the opportunity to learn everything that everybody has said. but ultimately, so our students will be successful so that so our teachers know that they're providing and creating an environment and are getting the supports that they need in order to support our students ability to be successful and have the skills and learning that they need. to move on from grade to grade or subject matter . so why am i starting a conversation about boards of evaluation with that question? why is that the question of starting board self-evaluation discussion? because as we always say, student outcomes don't change until adult behaviors change. it's totally predictable

. i absolutely maintain because i observed behaviors change the things i want to see for my students. i have to be willing to demonstrate those behaviors first, such as the occasion that brings us together and seeing things that will not work. it doesn't work to create a space of defensiveness because this isn't about good or bad or right or wrong. you intentions are not being judged this evening. your impact is your actions are certainly, but not for the purpose of determining if you're good people or bad people. good motive is a bad word, but just for the purpose of identifying. okay great. so what are we going to do next? that's the intention here, is that you have an opportunity to lead by example. how do we want conversations about adult behavior and performance to occur within our school system? we want that to be a safe space. that is

definitely looking at our adult behavior. but again, that's even honest. but to continuously improve or do we want evaluations about adult behavior to descend and the finger pointing and accusations and acronym this evening to get an opportunity to really lead the culture that you want your students to experience? that's what's really most at stake. certainly those continuous improvement opportunity for that. but i want you to read it to the cultural leadership of this evening's conversation with that. what that is our opening. i want to dive directly into the evaluation. so the nature of the evaluation is you all already went through it individually is it really looks at what are the specific behaviors that board members can engage in. there seems to be some evidence that our aligned within improvements in student outcomes. and so as we go through it, there are specific behaviors that we're looking for. and what i'm

listening for is what is the evidence? and if you cannot provide evidence, then that just means we're going to treat it as if it hasn't had that behavior hasn't been made manifest to it . if you can provide evidence that excellent, but it's not going to be a matter of i think we may have done this at some point, be prepared to speak with confidence around here's the evidence that we did. so here's the meaning of which this reflects. so with that, i want to dive in. you all conduct the board self-evaluation and you scored each of these focus areas yourselves. do you all have that document in front of me? yes all right, then, let's dive into the very first section, which is vision and goals. so you all were all over the place. and so we want to dive into this because i would argue this is especially the first page, the most important one of you all have a range from the highest

possible marks in your self-evaluation. to so much higher than that. we need to figure out which is so the floor is open, what score do you say the board has and what evidence do you offer to suggest that the there's not student outcomes focused, approaching student focused, meaning student focused and ambassador student outcomes focused of those four columns. so the question is where are you at right now? and as a reminder , you all know this, but for everybody else, the way this works is that you start at the far left with not enough sarcastic. if you complete those items, then you move to the next , but only if you complete all of those items. you move to the next and only if you include those items. you move on to the next. so you can't be at master's student of focus if you haven't completed all the items before that and meetings to get those points. so as a reminder,

what you're looking for is how far to the right did we make it and what evidence is there. and so with that is a quick reminder of how the instrument works. the is over on vision and goals. the board will collaborate with the superintendent, adopt goals. they're stood up and focused. okay, how do you solve scoring? that's nice. i come to meet everything. um, aj, this is matt alexander. i just want to make a comment about that last point because i actually think i miss i may have misunderstood how this rubric was constructed because in my experience with scoring rubrics , they're the way i've used them has been that they have descriptors as when scoring student work and that you try to align the quality of the work with the rubric, the rubric

number that is most aligned or or most closely aligned. not that you have to meet all the criteria in a particular category before you move to the next. so i think i may have when i scored, i think i was doing what i described in how i had used rubrics in the classroom. as a former educator. so that may that may explain some of the variance. does that make sense, what i'm saying? yeah so this is why we do this. yeah yeah, yeah, yeah, for sure. you get a common understanding and then we go together. so we're already in the learning process. that means we're doing what we intended to do is so who's next? how does the board score on this? first, it really vital section about the board. listen to the community's vision and codify that vision in the form of goals. how does the how would you score the board? i can go. i got this one. yeah i feel like

we are are meeting student outcome focus in regards to our goals and vision and just kind of the way that i read through it and articulate it as far as like what we've set up and what we're trying to do feels to be seems to be on point. yeah why would you say needing focus without the investment focus? so what is the next step that you all need to really follow through on from your perspective to go from being focused to things? i'm not the most articulate right now, but it just doesn't feel like we've done the things in that mastering category and like we really kind of fully analyzed everything. it feels like we're still in the process of getting there as we're still early in this process. that's just kind of my assessment. i could be more specific if i don't know if others have thoughts they want to add in or yeah, i so and i

was i didn't have us meetings to outcomes focus yet although i thought we were close and specifically the one that stood out to me, i thought in reading the approaching student outcomes focused ten that we had gotten there. but in the meeting, student outcomes focus. when maybe i was looking at the wrong document, but when i went back to look at the interim goals, for example, we have great i like our interim goals. i don't know that i saw interim goals all the way up to, for example, 2027, which is what i understood that second paragraph to be about that we have interim goal ending points for each year leading up to the ending date and assuming ending date is at five year that 2027. i don't think we had that. so that's why i didn't think that we could give ourselves the 25 points. but this is a great question. so

this particular case, when it's talking about the ending points for your own goals, it's actually meaning for the interim itself and the interim goals generally last 1 to 3 years unless there's a pretty compelling reason recommended they last three years. but sometimes for data reasons or implementation reasons, they might last only 1 or 2. but whatever the length of term of the interim goals is, that's how long in same with interim, that's how long you would expect the annual targets to reach out. so if it's a three year interim goal, then you'd expect annual targets for each of those two year. so we don't need interim goals going all the way up to the end of the five years or so. those yeah, great question. so interestingly enough, most of the time no, but that's only because implementation what's happening on the ground in the classrooms tends to evolve and grow to change more rapidly than

your goals do. and so that's why your interim goals, the data, that's tracking implementation at the building level and is likely to change more frequently than your goals to. so the goals solidly they're going to last five years, but the interim goals that may only last 1 to 3 years and that's and that's pretty pretty long. so i if i may just add on, since this superintendent develops an interim goals, this was a learning experience for me too, because i had understood and you'll see all the interim goals are only for next school year part of it is because of what we talked about, like we're changing our data assessment system. and so then as we implement a new assessment system that is more predictive of the outcomes are seeking, might have to adjust the goals. but i did understand them for each one. it was for the next year. and then you progress monitor during the year and set a new interim for the following year based on your progress monitoring. so i was as i saw

you doing the self evaluation, i realized, wait a second, what was my understanding? and aj and i talked that through. but so yes, our interim goals right now are only for a year. got it. doesn't it say that? but isn't it okay, like the green column meeting student outcomes focus is all interim goals. last from 1 to 3 years, right? yes. that's great. so it could be one year that is correct. yeah. that's why i put that was why i put the meeting student outcomes focus because i felt like we had done all of those. but maybe i misunderstood again what annual targets were exactly. but i thought those were, i thought interim goals were like the, the annual targets. but i guess that's referring actually the annual targets for the overall goal. yeah i have the same question. yeah, i did the same thing. several people had the same question. aj but i would say technically we did meet it well, that's why i was saying we're following literally. yeah. what aj saying they're all at least one year, but, but that's

why there's not multiple ones. i just wanted to clarify that. okay so i was actually back at not student outcomes focused. i definitely thought that there was portions of approaching student outcomes focus and meeting student outcomes focused . but the thing that i was hung up on is just being able to distinguish between inputs, outputs and outcomes. and that wasn't necessarily so much because the board doesn't intend to or isn't interested. but i'm more hung up on the fact that the board is not given facts and data in evaluation and assessments related to student outcomes in order to make decisions that are focused on student outcomes. and i know many i've brought this up in several public meetings and offline meetings as well as just even just the way our consent

agenda is presented to us. there's a lot of significant amounts of money and contracting and consultants and activity that is core and central to the activities and to carrying out the student outcomes. yet the board really just doesn't have visibility into how they are connected to the goals, let alone interim goals. and so forth. so i felt very stuck on in that column because of that reason. so look, so let's take that as a reflection. what my you do differently. this is ready board members. let's imagine that you all have struggled connecting the dots between your outcomes. the goals that you want to see that describe what your students will be able to do. the outputs. these are the interim goals that

help you measure throughout the year. if you're moving in the direction of goals and the inputs. these are all the action items to vote on. so let's imagine the point is, is spot on that you all have not been a great job of knowing how those dots are connected. what could you do as a board that would really support your growth in their. i can go and then if other people i mean is this resonating for so one of the areas going back to my consent calendar example is really having within our contracting process, having clarity about the purpose, how it's connected to the goals which students are being served, how it's being affirmed, having a, a staff member sponsor, and not just

assuming automatic renewal and doing this kind of what we're doing here today, the continuous learning like it's not about intent, it's about what happened and how we can improve upon or rethink or grow what is working . but having that part of how we approach our contract and really all of our activities. but that's just one example. i don't know if others have. all right. so before we move on to the next section, i want to finish up here with vision goals. anyone else? so we've heard several different ideas of where you all might be. anyone else have thoughts of where what your performance on this? first this first area is vision goals. i. similar to commissioner i scored us at zero and it wasn't for a i

think everyone has done a great job of really leaning into this process this year. i think where i'm stuck and i use the rubric, i think i cheated, i used what we got in our session last semester, not the one that's in the manual. there's a fifth line here that says the organization has not identified who their community is or process for gauging their vision. and i think for me, what got me stuck with that was we're still wrapping our our brain around what community engagement looks like, what our parent advisory committee, our pac, you know, all of that other stuff. and so , so while we checked many boxes in the approaching student outcomes focus meaning some outcomes focused mastering. you know as i learned in the process, if you don't have all the boxes checked here, you stay at zero. so that's where i was. let's just going to add just i think with us being knowing this process and these goals being

new and the interim goals being new, and i think us having questions around do we have the right assessment assessments in place to really monitor and track the things that we care most about, to kind of express our progress? i feel there's a little bit of like tension in regards to that of like we're using the best information we have, but not necessarily the things that we want to really kind of ground our vision and goals. and so i think just to add that as another element for us to reflect on as we evaluate ourselves. others with comments and thoughts, i, i feel that the composite score of like saying that it's approaching is definitely what i'm seeing as still definitely somebody who's very much new to this. like you're all new to this but i am coming straight in and approach matching because i'm actively

watching things change and happen because of wanting to get closer to the ideal score. for example, reorganizing the consent calendar and making it a lot clearer. what's going on feels student focused because that is automatically making the meetings more accessible to students. and that in and of itself shows to me that there is definitely you are definitely approaching. but so first, thank you all for just diving in and offering all the different perspectives before we move forward again. yes, i do have a question actually, this this is related to commissioner fisher's comment and question about the i just want to make sure i'm understanding what these these things mean. so for the commissioner, fisher noted that

one of the concerns about us not moving out of the zero category is that not student outcomes focus was because we still don't we're not sat at nearly satisfied with what community engagement looks like. and i agree 100. i think where i, i viewed this paragraph though, as relating to the work that we did vis a vis developing our vision and goals and not necessarily something more broader. so i think if it is something broader , i'm with you. i think if it's about the work that went into creating the vision value goals and guardrails, then i do think we did that because we had many, many, many meetings. so i guess i would just love some clarification. what is this about generally, are engagement processes with community or our community process as it related to coming up with our vision and values? maybe it would help. the question can i read this the one so this section, vision and goal

is specifically about whatever community connection you all did to set your goals. later on when we get to monitoring accountability and communication, collaboration, there's more in there about your larger systems for engaging with your community. so this section is just specific to goal setting, just like the next one is just as a good guardrail setting. but that larger observation around do we have meaningful systems for listening, for regular listening to the vision values of our community? that is a very important question. it's just not the question being asked. this page thank you. yeah, it used the wrong room, it is asked, but basically and so looking into this, the one question that i would ask is, is to what extent have you do you all have your your in the term goals and guardrails in hand and

is there a calendar for monitoring things. so you all have all of your interim goals and interim guardrails? that's the first question. yeah. have we ever seen it in one place? i don't know that i've ever been given that as a handout. i in or is it on the website board docs it's only here. okay so it's still in this format. yeah, it's not. it's still all red lights. yeah yeah. so on our website is are the updated ones that i don't think that we can have on our web page. they're there. it's not easy to find. yeah. either but it's not. yeah. you have to know what you're looking for. it's under our mission and vision. yeah but if we do search

to do like you have to, if you go to the main website, you have to do, like 5 or 6 clicks to get down to it. so it's which those of us who are willing to dig great. so if folks want to find the page on the website we're talking about, you would go to usd.edu and then go to about and then go to our mission and vision. it's a dropdown tab kind of next to the logo if you'd want to access that to see what the superintend is, is lifting up. yeah. it sends you to like the internal i think we maybe are at a place where did you have an additional question to that when or should we come back and answer that now that we've looked at the website. okay. so now that you're looking at the thing you want to do is you want to look at what are the items in this particular section that speak to your interests and just

clarify, because the part that you all are responsible for as a board are definitely the goals. the superintendent is responsible is the interim goals. and so after you walk away from this, this is your official time each year that you need to make sure that you have done your part of making sure that interim goals and policies and that they meet the expected criteria. the fact that any of you have asked about that means that before you move on, you want to stop and just verify that this case. and the one pager looks nice. i'm on the website. it's without the strikethrough. it's a revised. it's basically would you mind repeating what you what your question is what you're charged us is in this moment. yeah. so in the instrument it says a few things about your the one is that the subcommittees adopted in collaboration board 1 to 3 and from goals to progress

monitoring each goal and each interim post. yeah. there's also the expectation that each one is able to be updated multiple times during each year and then further, it suggests that all of the most retained student outputs that adult output of the that they need the last 3 or 5 years of that they need to challenge as part of behavior change. and then finally, that they need to be have there needs to be some evidence of correlation between the interim goal and the goal and that it's actually influence staff. so these are the things in that first page vision and goals that were discussed for insurance as part of your self-evaluation. you need to know are those things true for insurance or not ? so this is your official time to take a moment to do so. i have a screen here so. i shared

it. so about mission and vision so that you're just focus on the interim goals right now, right? that that is correct. as you scroll down at the bottom of your picture, you know, interim goals and guardrails that that brings up this presentation. so what you want to do as a board is you want to take a moment it just ask yourselves the question , are are they here? do they exist? have are they updated multiple times per year? are they smart? just the basic things that are expected in the interim. so just take a moment and blast through those. you just want to affirm for yourself that either it's true or it's happening. i think we might have comments. if it's definitely not about do you like them or agree with it is about do they exist and do they meet the expected

criteria. i'll just comment. i think they do exist. but however , as a board, i feel like just in the exercise that we've just gone through in the last five minutes, that perhaps i think we've been really focused on governance. you know, the vision, values and goals and guardrails. but the key word to me, and i think i'm going to be jumping a little bit ahead and around the monitoring and accountability. is that the key word around collaboration with the superintendent? and certainly we've had public discussions around the superintendent bringing forward his goals and the interim goals and guardrails. i think for me, we've been course correcting to where we acknowledge the role of

the board and the role of the superintendent and that, you know, what is policy and what is vague. i think in this year, moving forward. and that's where i assess us, is that i actually would like to dive deeper on the monitoring aspect. so that we can be clear from the interim progress for example, you know, we're actually quite off the mark already from the last presentation from the superintendent on a few of the goals, and i'm not really clear about both adjustments looking ahead of what is necessary for the acceleration in order to even meet either those interim annual goals. and furthermore to actually meeting those goals. i think we've had some initial discussions, so that's something that is top of mind for me is to deepen our discussions around

the interim. i guess building upon that, when the question of whether they're smart goals, the achieve viable part is in question for me. to say more about that, i, i building upon what commissioner lam was saying, i don't have confidence and i'm not seeing enough monitoring to know what's happening, what activities are taking place, where we are making progress, where we aren't. so the achievable part hasn't been fleshed out to me as a commissioner, even though that they they follow the framework of smart. can you give us an example of that? um, i mean, i'm just going to just the first, first one for because it's here

and it's up on the screen too. so the first one at one point, one from the percentage of african american and pacific islander kindergarten students meeting grade level proficiency will increase from 24% in june 20th 22 to 48% by june 2024. that would be great, but i don't have an understanding of what is happening. and i'm not saying that there aren't things happening that is not what i'm trying to convey. i'm just saying as a commissioner, i don't well understand why what is being implemented or underway to get there? does that answer? can i clarify that a little bit? can i build to build on so to recognize this goal here going the main goal going from 52% proficiency to 70% to follow up on this, that actually is a good example of us taking community feedback because i remember initially when i was sitting in the audience before i was here, many of us pushed back and said

the initial goal wasn't ambitious enough. right and so this so, so, yes, that there's been some tension with the achievable, um, and then the question to go back to monitoring then becomes we've got the new reading curriculum, we have all these things. so where i think a lot of it for me comes back to when are we going to see the through line to resource alignment. i don't know if that's maybe where you're going with that right? so and what one of the things that we were we are wrapping our brain around as a district to and we had this conversation earlier is we're not always doing everything that we aspirationally hope to do. and where do we have the opportunity to talk through that right and share that information with the public at large. so hopefully this process will be part of that. i i think that's a good

place to start. i'll if i can chime in to it is and i think this is the point about this feedback and the progress monitoring. so i hear what you're saying tonight. i also feel like we learned that in some of the progress monitoring that we did last year, because what what we did was we said know, here's our math goal or here's our college career in in. so we kind of here's high level where we are and what we're doing. and through that conversation our i left in talking with the team like we need to hone in more on the interim goals and then more specifically how we're impacting those. so again, learning for us , too, but what we'll start to see as we do monitoring this year is i think, a more narrow focus. and so, again, staying in our in our role in our roles, that's why i appreciate your raising. here's what would be helpful to see in monitoring to know we're on target, not, you

know, questioning whether we're doing it or not, but then we'll actually get to see that. but that was my takeaway from last year of the monitoring needs to be, for lack of a better word, tighter, more closely aligned to the interims than just the overall broad. here's what we're doing for literacy. yeah. and a follow up to that, i think why i scored us low in this point is, is we see some of our focal populations and some of our students who scores desperately need to increase in this. and we are we're missing some really important focal populations in here as well. and so how that's going to impact not only our monitoring, but what resources we end up then allocating to those students who desperately need that is going to be critical to consider moving forward. i think. okay. just 49 seconds. just as a question, as far as i can see, all of these

goals are based on very important things like literacy and math and college and career readiness. i was wondering if separately, there are also goals that have to do with student wellness because as far as i'm aware, we do those surveys where we discuss our school environment as well as our general mental wellness and those results are recorded and you do receive them in some form or another. so whether there is space for interim goals regarding that as well, because student wellness increase would essentially increase these academic goals as well, because the environment that you are in is half of the equation. and i just wondering whether those goals exist or if there is room for them at this table. if i can be for a moment board, why do we not have those as goals? sorry, aj, i'm taking over your role. i

. applaud commissioners. to work to setting you up for success because goals only measure what students know and are able to get to where this is. you know? and so goals measure what students know and able to do. guardrails are how we make sure we're living our values and operating our values to meet those goals. so what i put on the screen when we get to guardrail is we do have a value. we have a guardrail about serving the whole child. so we have measures on how we're doing that. and actually we're using the measure you noted about sense of belonging, but that goes into guardrails, not the goals. and i think from the board's perspective to the mental health and well-being of students should be going through all of the goals because that's a big barrier to their success. for all these metrics. and so there needs to be a certain amount of consideration of that and all the strategies and approaches that are being taken. and i think that's what the board was hoping to see as we

had to kind of really pick a few narrow things and focus in on i think that these goals, these first interim goals that have to do with academic performance are the ones that students see the most often in documents that we are given regarding the boards, intentions and progress and i think it would be valuable. this is more general student feedback. it would be valuable to have to make it clearer to your student populations that those wellness and sense of belonging and absenteeism goals do exist. but there are guardrails. guardrails. yeah, but i've heard that as well. i really appreciate that comment. i've heard that as well that i think there's from staff and educators that there's been so far more and we can't do everything at once, but there's been more awareness of the goals and less of a guardrail. i i had a question about the interim goals and this in the student

outputs question the student, the phrase all interim goals pertain to student outputs or student outcomes is increasing enrollment in cte pathways, which is goal 3.3. is that a output? i struggle with this concept of outputs. i have to be honest. i know it's not an outcome, but is it an output? what's what? i'm looking at 3.3 goal because to me, yeah, 3.3. yeah yeah. that's that's an output because to me that feels a little bit like an input on. yes it's what students can do. it's like a ten foot and i don't know. so i don't know. i guess that's a question. that's the only one that struck me as a little. and i was wondering if. yeah, i don't know. yeah. appreciate you the question. essentially what a 3.3 seems to be describing is always seeing

more participation by students in cte pathways. am i understanding this correctly? yeah. if we're talking about student participation, i, i would i participation is an example of an output because their actions that are happening to increase the participation. so generally we make it more cte pathways available or we are doing a better job of communicating the availability of pathways. and so i would describe participation rates as an output. but also tend to describe participation rates as a fairly unique output, as opposed to a strong output. that may be what you're reflecting on is that by talking about our students participating, there's

a critical thing that it's not informing us, which is do they complete the pathway, which is, yeah, that's what i was thinking, right? i was thinking because even completing the pathway doesn't tell you that their college career ready, but it is a step because that's a that's a part of the element of the cde measurement. it prepares them and it is in fact. so anyway, that's yeah, maybe that needs to be changed because i do feel like i think it was there when, when, why cte pathways and when to complete a pathway, you actually have to know and be able to do some things to get the certificate to complete the pathway. so maybe that one does need to be altered to be completed in you're enrolled in it. so i mean, so enrolled and, and it might be that the first the first interim goal is in fact enrollment if we're really i mean, i don't know, maybe this makes sense for the first interim goal to be enrollment then and for us to then change it to completion ones are something else that's entirely possible. to answer your question, that prospective, yes, this means the criteria, the

participation rates are outputs . however, as a board, you should know outputs are considered to be a weaker participation rate. that would be a weaker example than output for the reason that you all just identified. but if we are if we are beginning something brand new, then that may be the data that you have to lean into. and then as you grow application, then you go to more meaningful outcome measures. i don't know if that's true here or not, that is certainly something to be mindful of. and so i appreciate you catching. can we any other reflections on connection goals before? yeah, i just have one is mark sanchez. i just have one question related to what matt alexander just brought up with 3.3 of the interim goals. can we look at 3.1 and discuss if that's an output or an outcome? the percentage of entering ninth

grade students with one or both risk factors will decrease from 6% to 3. is that more aligned to an outcome than an output then? so 3.31 that i was wondering if you would look at more closely. i think the question here. i'm less inclined to the first question that i have to this one is with what frequency can you evaluate how frequently do you know whether or not internet grade students have one or both risk factors? yeah it's really talking about it's really i was going to say, it's really talking about eighth graders. then right? i mean, you have that's that's perfectly fine. the question is with what frequency can the data be updated? so i turn to look at misses out here. but i mean, because we do get i mean, students get in middle school, they get quarter grades and semester grades and we do

attendance reporting. so it could be updated. i mean, that's all i'm expecting to happen because i did notice all of these are at the end of the year, but they do meet the criteria. we were intentional about picking things that we could see during the year to see if we met the end of year target. so that one could be looked at. i think it would be important for gpa to make a distinction between an uptick like a gpa on the way up and a gpa that is staying stagnant. when you look at like like how you rate it from like approaching to blank with the way you self evaluate because as realistically you can't change your gpa that much within a single year, especially if you're an eighth grade and you likely aren't taking any ap classes. you have to at least give the students some credit in the sense of approaching a certain thing. so so these are

exact the types of conversations you should be having to interrogate. do we have interim goals that really allow us to measure progress relative to the goals that we've seen to say so what i needed you to do before because i told you you needed to have evidence, not just have assumption about it. and so now that you have done a little bit of a dive into your goals, so a little bit of a dive into your goals, which are the two main deliverables for vision goals. now i just need you as a team to reach a census where do you place yourself on those first page of the instrument not set up of focused coaching, meeting or master? so if you can quickly reach a place of consensus which where do you place yourself of those four, can i ask more of a theoretical question while we're on this section? i'm sorry, one of. aj one of the things i'm

struggling with is we as a board said the goals and then the superintend sets the interim goals right? that's the process. so why is we why are we as a board being evaluated on the interim goals if that's what the superintendent says? because because you really shouldn't be going about the business of adopting your goals and guardrails until you were confident that the metrics used to monitor them are solid. so it is on you to ascertain yes, these are solid as a result, we are ready to proceed with our goals and guardrails. otherwise you have no real means of knowing how your progress is going to be monitored relative. so is it the superintendent's job to produce? yes. but it is your job to verify that is your part of the collaboration that it actually has been done to you, all centered. and if for some reason it hasn't, then it's on you to consider, monitor, modifying your goals or your grounds to be responsive to

that. all of that normally happens before you ever get around to adopting your goals and guardrails. and so that is not what took place. you all want the process a little bit out of order. that's perfectly fine, but it doesn't alleviate you all of the responsibility for evaluating whether or not the interim goals and interim guardrails meet the expectation of essentially. right. okay so as far as us building consent, is, is it helpful for one of us to like present something to people want to have an opportunity to share what they think it should be and kind of create some discussion space for that which maybe will be a little bit more time intensive than we want to spend. so yeah, i'm open. if somebody wants to make a proposal either towards a score or how we do it, or i can . but yeah, flexibility to see how we want to go through it. we have five of these left. this will probably be the most in-depth one. but yeah, i think

they all this is always the most challenging one, but there's a good reason for that. we could say a score and then once we've reached that like numerical consensus, we could see if we'd like to elaborate. so i'll go around and share our score. yeah, we have to. we have. we have to. we have to. why can't we just do the average like we did for we all have to reach an absolute consensus on this. oh, no, like consensus. we can reach an average right. is consensus do have an average? is i guess. but i think that we need to land on in one of these categories. and right now. okay that makes sense. we either have right now the average is 11.4. so assuming we're going to either be approaching or meeting student would be where the consensus ends up. if i had to guess. okay i think so. the question is, where are you? you have an instrument in front of you. what have you actually accomplished? what have you? not yet. that we need to plan for over the next three months, the next year.

listen i would propose that we align ourselves on the green column of meeting student outcome, focus. there was the question about whether the board has adopted only smart goals because of i don't remember which interim goal it was on, but somebody i think it was commissioner had mentioned that there was the question of that was more around monitoring whether that was more, whether they're achievable. they're just designed in a smart framework. but it's the question is whether or not they are achievable. are we just going around i think going around people have evidence to disprove me that they would want to offer up and then we can we can go from there and work down to up to our appropriate score. well, i can be counterpoint because i'm i'm

still i just reiterate what i said before about not feeling student outcomes focused for the example that i gave before about i mean, our last conversation that we just had was some general confusion about inputs, outputs and outcomes. so i still feel i do think there are things that we're doing in the other columns. this is not to say we haven't done anything beyond that first column, but i do feel like that as a pretty gaping hole in my experience as a commissioner. of both input, we kind of start the conversation that we can build around versus having people come back and have . well, i'll go back to my point. i think this is where maybe i'm struggling with the structure of the rubric because i actually agree with you, commissioner, and like, i think that's an area we need to work on. but when i look at everything else, to me it feels like we're in the meeting column

on this one. and so i don't know that it makes sense to say we're at zero when we're doing most of these things. i would love. i would like to grade us as a in the green column and say, and we need to fix this other thing or something or give us 20 instead of a 25 and say, we got to fix that. to me, i want some more nuance is what i'm looking for. i feel like we're in a game show . the price is right. other commissioners want to give input, feedback, maybe give us prompting if that is helpful to help us land. yes. so we have a question here for comment. so could we just like very could i could i get a very clear definition of what counts is like an input versus an output in this context. can someone answer that question? and then we'll settle whether or not

ladies assertion is accurate. we're going to ask the superintendent. so i quizzed you again. that's i know you're evaluation so it's not my wisdom . i think you can't cheat any jenny looking jenny no, i was going to i should input that curriculum used. there's a manual staffing. yeah. i think there's quite a few of us who feel comfortable doing it, but we don't necessarily all want to jump up at the same time. is there anyone who wants to volunteer to respond to the question? delegate commissioner bishop i heard i maybe i'm not clear on that. so it's not like, okay, i'll take a first stab at it and everyone correct me because i'm not good with words today. so input are the resources that we bring into the system, the teachers, the program, the staff, the amazing things that have to happen for

us to get to the output. i'm not going to even try because of our last conversation, but the outcomes are what students can do and know that that's the finally that's where we measure is what when we get to outcomes , that's what students can do and what they know. and that's so those are what we're measuring there. and when we talk about inputs, it's the resources and we just have that fuzzy conversation about outcomes versus outputs. so i'm going to let somebody else tackle that. did that answer your question? yeah, yeah. i'll give a shot. so inputs would be what we would consider at the beginning of a learning cycle. an output would be something in the middle of a cycle of the learning cycle and then an outcome would be the impacts of the end of the cycle to see. so it's a progression between input outputs and outcomes. in a

particular outcome could be your score on the spec because that's cumulative and an output could be the middle of the year. your fnp score for literacy, for example. and the input would be the rating curriculum and in one input in that sense would be the curriculum adopted. for that outcome. can i ask a question? yeah so my question is, has the board consistently demonstrated its ability to distinguish between inputs, outputs and outcomes? i think i just said that one can, but then i want to go back to commissioner alexander's point. and so to mr. aj, can we is there any nuance in this? because i would hate to and again, i'm not because i'm we're afraid of a poor score

like we started at zero. so it's only up from here. i have one would hope, but we up it it does seem like there is so much important work and strides that we've made in the in the second and third column. so is there do we have permission to not do what you said in terms of how we grade ourselves? and i just i know the question that you're really asking is, what is the culture we want to create in our school system around performance ? okay, i disagree. i disagree with. that's my question. i disagree. here's why i disagree. i don't i think what i'm saying is a rubric ought to be accurate in terms of student performance. this is a this rubric. you have to do everything. it's all or nothing. right? i want to say, yes, we're not doing well in this area, which is listed here, and we need to do better. so i'm not about lowering standards at all, but i also want to note

where we've done well. if we give ourselves a zero for visioning goals, it suggest to ourselves in the public that we haven't done all these other things. so i want to i think we ought to i think it's really important to name success, just as it's important to name where we have failed and need to improve. and can i add another thing to probably agree that you all have to you have to have success. i strongly agree with that. it because we go to some of the other sections of the instrument. i think there's a lot of success. we have my concern for you is the if you are making a take and you add up all the ingredient points except . for unless it's intentionally a schedule and it's in the recipe, it does benefit from having all of the ingredients and so there are points in your

performance is that as we get into the rest of the instrument, i think will be more obvious. were struggles in the area of discerning between those outcomes outcomes is actually hurting you in other areas that you that may just be less obvious. the benefit is to say yeah, we need all the ingredients and we need to do we need to actually make the recipe that we've told people that we we're going to make. people are expecting and i okay. and that that's what we promised them. we need to actually bring all the ingredients to bear to do so. and so the intention here is not to be punitive. like i said, this is about good or bad or right or wrong. it is about half . we've done the work necessary . to serve our students as well as we think we possibly can. and

if the answer is we haven't yet, that that means that we need to think about what are some of the things that we can do over the next three months that can really move the needle on that. and then in three months, we have a celebration when we jump from 0 to 20 5 or 35. so i have i have this is lisa. i'll make maybe two points and then pass it along. i get one question i appreciate that we could celebrate from going to 0 to 25, but i also think that there's actually a flip side of that, which is we could then become, you could see how one could become complacent and be like, oh, we actually don't really need to do that much because we're all we're, we're set. like but if we had said we're at ten or we're 25, then we're actually going to be really, really motivated to, to move on to, to the mastering student outcome focus. so i do worry a little bit about holding ourselves back and i wonder if we can we can acknowledge where we still

absolutely need to do better and then still continue to focus. and i, i appreciate the analogy, but i might say, okay, you let's it's not passover. so we do want flour in the cake, but maybe it's a five course meal, right? and then you're ignoring everything else and, and basically saying none of that is worth it. and we're just focusing on on the flaws. so i do want us to focus very much. i appreciate commissioner montgomery bringing this up. i hadn't been that focused on it. so this has been a learning point for me in terms of how critical this is to moving along. but again, i'm clearly fighting the hypo here. and if we need to be a zero, i guess that's where we are. but i i'm just going to say i just find it to be incredibly foundational to like every conversation we have and the kinds of conversations that we want our educators to be having and how we want them to be thinking about. and our students like, to me, this is so foundational to everything. it's kind of like if you are learning

to play basketball, you've learned the rules, you've got the basketball court all set up, everyone's clear. you've been running through the different kinds of plays that can happen on the court and you show up without your shoes tied like it's just not there's just some basic foundation things. and you would, you wouldn't let them run out to the court. you fully believe that they know how to play and they've got the rules down, but they're not showing up prepared like like i just think we have to build this muscle. otherwise the rest of the stuff is not going to be tight. can i guess? i guess. i guess i would just disagree a little bit with us being in zero for the first one. if people do feel strongly that way. i guess i'm curious, we can maybe let's go through and just talk through, i guess. do people feel i mean, it's really the issue that people feel like we don't understand as a board inputs, outputs and outcomes. and that's what puts us in the right or so we've adopted goals. we posted listening sessions around them. i mean, collectively, i think we do have a good understanding. i

don't think we all like to publicly say the definition of them around. aj, but i guess i don't know. do you do you feel we as a board don't have the understanding or that not every member of the board is as much of an expert in these as you feel like? we need? it's not reflex, it's not reflex. it needs to be reflex. and i and i don't think like i'm not saying like zero, like as a punitive thing, this is what we want people to this is what i want people to show up in sped like, hey, you know what? like we're not i see so much good, but we're not out of the woods at all. so like, we got to, like, i just am trying to model what i how i want staff to show up to me when they're like, when there's something that they think is essential in order to get the other pieces done. and i guess, you know, aj has been pretty emphatic about how the scoring is, and i feel like we're spending more of the time trying to convince aj to change his scoring system than to, like, acknowledge that, oh, we identified a gap. i guess i just

don't see that as a gap as us not being maybe as as high as you would want all of us to be. i guess maybe that's a different perspective. we have commissioner those so i rated ourselves at approaching the student outcomes focus at no surprise. i'm like in the middle . um, i do agree that it is clear from tonight's discussion and even um, we haven't dedicated, i think the time around the monitoring around the interims and how they feed into the goals. like i said earlier. so, um, but i do think that we have some approaching outcomes focus that we have demonstrated . um, so i just wanted to restate kind of where i both scored my, you know, ourselves and then even now throughout this conversation, i do think we are in between the zero and ten. both are not student outcomes focused to the approaching student outcomes. and

furthermore, i think that also speaks to, i think some of the presentations from the superintendent and the staff. and there's been a lot of work i know at the staff level and the superintendent level to even also, um, embody the vision and the goals. i feel that. i think that to me from again, from a more fresh eyes position, this all sounds like the very base level. if you only look at the titles of the categories, this all sounds like approaching like every single person, no matter where they put us. it sounds as if it's circling around the word approaching and then. i think there's a risk of the conversation becoming circular in the sense that a lot of

people are agreeing and saying it in their own way. and that way is very valid and important. and i'm learning new things with how each person speaks and then i also know that you all had a goal of saving time in the set. i i at risk of at risk of being mean. i do understand that because being conscious of those goals, as we move through the meeting as well and not just discussing the goals themselves, but living them, this is why we need more student commissioners. thank you very much. thank you very much. um, i think my real question once once we get through the semantics or the circuitous of not student outcomes focused or approaching student outcomes focused is we've highlighted the gaps. now what are we going to do about them. right. um you know, you

all as a we're going to, we're going to come to that conversation next. okay. so the first thing is where do you all score yourself? and then the second and then once you determine where your story. so then i've actually got my notes open and i'm ready to type what are one, 2 or 3 things that you want to do to try to improve between now and then? the next time? so first kind of land. where do you all put yourselves? and again, i want to emphasize this as a culture setting opportunity. you have i have not opened it on what i think your score is. what i've been pushing you is it however, is wherever you think you are. that's is how you need to score yourselves. this is not about anything else. you want to be accurate on this. the message you don't want to say is, hey, senior year, i know you didn't actually complete all of your requirements, but you completed all but one of them, so you still graduate. hey, and staff, i know you didn't actually complete all the things you said as you're going to do,

but you completed most of it. so we located and i do want to be accurate about what you have and haven't done. you want to identify whatever of score that gives you. and then once you've done that, we'll sit down briefly think, okay, so what is given that you're at, what is 1 or 2, maybe three tangible things we can do over the next three, six, nine months in order to really grow performance in that area? so where are you all at? and then once you get that figured out, then let's chat about what are we going to do next and then let's move on because we've got plenty of other pages of the instrument. just to confirm, you are asking us to get to consensus as far as where we want to land right? so strong preference for do is this process works better if you all reach consensus about what is your current state of performance, you are not the only board to ever do this. getting to consensus is not typically the challenge. thinking about what are some of

the next steps in the process that sometimes creates a little bit of challenge, but but getting clarity about what is our current state performance that is not designed to be the hiccup. it's designed to be pretty straightforward. you know, it's either this column, that column, that column or that column. okay, now that we've affirmed that, what is what are the next steps? what are the things that we'll take. yeah, i don't know. i just wanted to say maybe this is similar to what you were saying. melanie is that i think i'm not hearing a ton of disagreement, although maybe i think what would be useful is if we're hearing disagree in our analysis of what the problems are, what the areas of weakness are. i think that's the most i think what's most important is this conversation and having consensus on those areas. i think there's some disagreement on the scoring system and whether it's possible to bake a flourless cake, which we've sort of done right. like maybe we've baked a lot of the cake, but we didn't we didn't use the flour.

and so there's some disagreement on whether that's valid. but i think what what's more important actually is, is that we recognize that there's an area we need to improve and there's areas that we've actually done good work. so i'm just curious if there's places where we think it would be useful to have further conversations. i don't think like i don't think arguing over the scoring system is helpful. i guess what i'm saying. so i guess i'm wondering if folks see areas that where it's like, oh wait, there was there was actual real disagreement among us as to where we're at. i think we can score ourselves as zero and recognize the great work we've done. yeah, yeah. that's what i mean. if we want to do that. so if we're going to abide by the scoring system, we do need to give ourselves, i give us approaching, but i if we're going to abide by the actual scoring method and it's a we are in the first column, but we can acknowledge the things at the same time that we've done that fall in the other columns that are better. could you say why

you feel like we're in the first column? because if we're going to follow the system which says, you have to meet everything in the column to get to the next column, we i agree with commissioner matamata. we haven't done that for the inputs , outputs and outcomes. it's not reflexive that we can just maybe it is that we're saying in front of aj and we're afraid. but we clearly are not there yet. and so if we haven't met that part of that goal, the first one in that first column, then we can't move to the second column. i don't appreciate that scoring method, but that's the method we have right here. if we're intentionally going very word for word and by the book and by the rule, it doesn't say anything about reflexivity. it just says that you're able to distinguish them. it doesn't even necessarily say anything about defining. it just says that you can distinguish them from each other. and i think it's important to look at how it will look to students just

numerically. if the board says we're not student outcomes focused where it is, it is very important to reflect on yourself and to not give yourself too much praise just to look good to the student population. but you have to consider how that fear will affect our own school environment because that this is something that is going to be public information, whatever that score is. and especially parents specifically i know, are somebody who are maybe looking at this more. i think that that is important to look at it from the other side as well, which doesn't mean that we should compromise the scoring system or compromise our own values, but that is another angle. well, it's kind of like what you said before and again, this is where my gut on a rubric, if you ask me, where are we? if you just

said to me, without these descriptors, are you are we not student outcome, focus, are we approaching, are we meeting or are we mastering? i actually would have said approaching because that's just my gut feeling of like we've done a lot of good work, but there's areas we still need to we're not there yet. even in meeting, i would say. but but again, i think then we end up arguing over the details of the scoring system. so i don't know where we want to go with it. can i can i clarify why this is? because i hear you and i certainly wouldn't want i would be very careful about how that's communicated as far as like not students outcomes focused, because that is not at all what i'm trying to say. but what i think is important to admit is when you recognize you haven't made as much progress and that and then the next what i was saying is the next steps. what are you going to do about it? like, i think that actually is a really healthy thing to model for students and families. is the what are you going to do about it? not like, oh, well, i guess we tried and failed and walked away and so going like if

we are not with this part, it does matter because because i think we feel approaching student outcomes focus. but the doing part has a lot of work and when we sit up there at our business meetings and we approve things that we don't understand and that could be better spent and be better aligned with our goals and our guardrails and all the things. but we haven't spent the time pushing on inputs out outputs and outcomes. then we may feel good. we may be saying the words, but what we're performing is something completely different. and that's where i'm at with it. and so this is, to me a very big deal to step back and to say like, whoa, whoa, whoa. you know, the theatric are great, but like the underpinning and the staging and the lighting and all the stuff is needs to be some serious reworking. and so i would communicate it to like, this is

what i want you to do as a student is to when you recognize like i've got, i'm like, i've just been like i had, you know, what does that call like when you didn't realize like, i was blind to something or i didn't? yeah that is not the time to double down and say like, well, that's cool. now i got it. you showed it. so like, i don't have to behave differently. and that's why that's why our consent agenda is so important to me because that is the bulk of what we do in a lot of ways. i just want to jump in. i think i definitely see what you're saying. i think the thing that i viewed differently and so for me, like being like when i supporters, i think i put us at meetings to outcome focused, it's not to say that we've done all the work in the district is there, but it's that we have reoriented the board to be centered on that and i think we've done the majority of those things to be we've done all the things in the green category, the orange category and the pink category, in my opinion, to be

there, even though we haven't implemented it fully as a district, we have set the standard and the target to be outcomes focused. and i feel like we have actually done that. we haven't fulfilled the vision organizationally, but i think we have set the path and the goals to do that. and for me, looking for things underneath each of these, i, i do cross them out as us as a board, having those skills, knowledge and abilities and then the things that we've done and gone through collectively. i do see them as things that we have have have met. i like to amend and i think hearing what you have to say, that makes a lot more sense. and i think this isn't necessarily our department, but it is a term in terms of display where when, when a student or a parent or anybody else looking at these statistics sees that zero, they can then immediately see what is being done, why that score is there, what the board specifically has to say about

what that why that score is the way it is. and then that would that would like amend the fear that would happen at seeing upon seeing that zero. so and i think that is more in terms of a display thing and that pushes me into the faction of being okay with that zero. all right, folks , you have basically spent as much time talking about how your performance will appear as you been talking about your performance. we need to wrap this up. what's the score? and then whenever you reach that conclusion, what are one, 2 or 3 things that you want to do over the next few months to really continue to grow your performance. i'd like to give the support leadership. yeah, we do each vote, so i mean, we

could all go around if we're going to do consensus and i think we would all go. i think we've all said what i think what we want to share. so maybe president is okay if i make the suggestion that go around, we indicate where we are. we see if we need to go around again and then we focus on what our next steps are, no matter where the number is. how's that sound? okay. good. all right. it's going to make someone else go first. i can go first. well, we know what you are. yeah, it sounds fine. go first. okay. good. president bogus. lead us off. all right, i'll go first, and then we'll go to my right. sounds good. so, yeah, i think i'm still seeing us as outcome focused, just based on what i feel like we've done and accomplish and how we have set ourselves up to really be centered on student outcomes. so that's kind of where i'm at, right? so 2520 okay. yeah i say

zero and i mean that is no disrespect to the work that we've all done in the buy in. i think there's so much great stuff that's happened and, and i think we still have some, some foundational work to do. okay are you tallying this? at the risk of repeating myself, i believe we've done a lot of the things, if not all of the things in the meeting column. however, i agree with commissioner carmody and appreciate the analysis around and the inputs outputs and outcomes. and so i will defer to my colleague. so if i don't need to i mean, if it was just me, i'd, i'd probably put it, i'd probably give us a 20. but, but, but i'm and give ourselves a deduction off of the meeting column. but i know that's violating the rules. so i'm going to just defer to others in order to try to reach consensus because i don't think it. i think what's more important is the content. so you're abstaining? i'm

abstaining, basically. no, abstain. well, no. i told you my score. if you want me to score, it's a 20. but i don't want to. i'm willing to go to zero. i'm willing to. okay, well, that's. that's okay if others want to do that. all right, um, repeat what i said. the rules of the rules for the rubric. so i will give it a zero, even though my original score was a ten, it's the same exact place where i was started. a ten and get a b, a zero. um, and this is why we're having this process in this conversation, and i'm looking forward to the what do we do next part. i did start out as a ten and then i called the our consultants to say i'm super confused about the scoring system. and that's how i landed as a zero. but i'm very excited to look at to celebrate the things that we are doing well in the other categories and to and to do the work. so that we will quickly advance out of the zero category. i feel like i've

already shared where i'm at. so i'm comfortable if colleagues feel like we're in the zero, i do think that we've made some progress. but if this means that we need to be more disciplined starting and modeling from at the very top, at the governance level on inputs, outputs and outcomes, then i am in full support because then that has to get adopted and not just i don't i don't want to use the word socialized, but really adopted ingrained throughout the entire system. so i'm already for seeing some future board meetings and to do the superintendent working with the staff around like really tracking what is an input output and outcome. ideally i'd say five, but because that's not an option, i'm going to go zero. i would say a ten, but after

hearing everyone's comments, i'm going to go down to zero. i'm excited to see all the things you guys are, all what the board does to move it up to a ten. but we're just missing a few things and i know we'll get there. to folks think we need to go and the superintendent. oh, i do get to evaluate. huh? i get to evaluate the self-evaluation. but he is a board. you are. he's a part of the governing. oh, i didn't fill it out for just your thoughts for what? no, i appreciate the conversation and i agree. i agree that if we're following this rubric and what we've committed to, that we're a zero. and i think just want to emphasize what what aj is talking about in terms of the culture setting of this activity. right? think about what we want to communicate. and i feel like we are trying to

communicate two things. then standards matter and we'll both celebrate success and our effort towards them. but if we're not meeting them, we're going to take steps to get there. so let's talk about what those steps are, because i have a feeling i have to do some stuff. as long as it's not consensus because i didn't agree. but that's so i don't know. so yeah, and i have an actual score. i know i said zero. yeah got it. all right. so now real quick, what is one, 2 or 3 things that . well, i think that's we don't have to we do. sorry. aj, just. well we're not we don't need unanimity, but i guess consensus is only as long as president isn't saying i'm blocking this from moving forward. we do have consensus. then you do. are you blocking the comment? yeah i don't agree with the zero. you don't have to agree. you don't have to agree. but there's a in order for the consensus process to move forward, you i don't think a zero is a valid score

for the work that we've done and where we're at. right. so you don't you have you absolutely do not have to agree with the zero. but but are you. block a zero vote is what i'm saying. yeah. from consensus. yeah so that means there is not consensus. okay. what do you agree to it? ten all right. so board. that means that you can either spend some time trying to reach consensus or you can move forward without consensus before you. yeah. can we put a plan in place that hopefully gets us to consensus with for the next evaluation? i think you mentioned the next steps were to try and put a plan in place to fix where we were or to address where we are, certainly. but before we move on on that, again , this is one of my first times doing this. and so i've been a stickler for this. so this will be really, really fast in in the future when you all do this, this is normally like a 15, 20 minute process, but it's normal for the first time for this to be as challenging as we're all

just kind of normal, right? so i hear that there is not a consensus on the board score. so the question is, does the board want to take some time to try to reach a consensus or does the board want to move on with the score without a consensus? i just need to understand that for going forward, i think we want to move forward based off kind of where we're at in the conversation. we already had. is there anyone who disagrees and wants to dive deeper? seeing nobody. all right. so the score is zero without consensus. now the question is what are one, 2 or 3 things that you all could do, actions you could take over the next few months to really continue to grow and whatever areas of opportunity there are any recommendation. i think one thing i would lift up is just maybe having more training for kind of commissioner student delegates and just kind of everyone around the inputs, outcomes and outputs and just

both to understand which ones are we using and how to define them and just to increase people's level of like confidence and understanding in them, seeing that as being, i think like our biggest barrier to getting away from zero for most folks. any other ideas you got one idea of more training for commissioners to do delegates. any other ideas? i would like to see more information about our vgs more prominently placed everywhere. you know, we've. we can use the trickle down economics theory or we can blast it out everywhere. i don't know. but if we have this level of confusion, considering our training, you know, and in the spirit of modeling best practices, right, we've got to really highlight this and emphasize this. so what else before we transition, i

have a request to similar to we have a one pager for vg. i would like to have have the interim goals and guardrails also within a one pager or somehow that it's not seen as separate, but it's actually very kind of visually assessable to our school community, i mean, to our broader community because right now they live is like decks you know, i was going to see if you had thoughts on what you were doing, because i think it's well to two things come to mind is really how do we model this at our board meetings? how do we have our conversation? so it's clear about when we're having a conversation about an input, when we're having a conversation about an output, when is it an outcome related conversation, because there are input and output. i mean, it's not like everything is so i think that would be a way for us to develop

our muscle and to model it for the community around us. and also, i will just reiterate, like i would like to see it come through or through line with our expenditures and how and how we align our expenditures and have it clarified. and there is a way to help us. i'd request that on that vg sheet. i don't know if that this would be included, but like consi, nice definitions and differences between those things because i'm personally having trouble understanding the differences between a like a goal and a guardrail like intimately. i understand it on a base level, but i'm sure there are examples where i would not be able to distinguish whether it was one or the other. yes can

i think that there are many groups that have done a good job of aligning to the visions, values, goals and guardrails. i think a lot of our central teams have really redefined their work in relationship to our goals. in particular. and so being able to highlight some of those best practices and raise some of those examples up, i think could be really positive as well. seeing other comments from commissioners right now. you know, the one other thing that i would add in was just somewhat related to tell you all said so i like the idea of you all taking it upon yourselves to create a one pager or something of that sort about the interims . i like that i did. you know, that sounds like a great thing for a board member to take on of what might have look like is that that helps you get strengthened in your knowledge of as well. i like to do more training for commissioners and school buildings. however i would modify that i think you

all are giving yourself enough credit for all the amazing things that you have done and you do know i would recommend modifying that to say, commissioners and student delegates will provide training on effective governance practices for students, staff and community members and i think going to the process of having this conversation with constituencies will actually strengthen you all in these conversations as well. and so we can certainly do training and obviously make myself available for that. but i think you all are actually stronger than you give yourselves credit for. i think the next step for you all is going out and communicating about these things to others. and so don't worry, i'm typing all this stuff, all over my notes and that will include some of those recommendations and tangible next steps. so that brings us to the end of division goals. by the way, this is always the it's always the roughest one because it needs to

be because we're both learning the instrument and the team dynamics and then some of the nomenclature. so with that, let's go to the next page. values of our most the will in collaboration. superintendent adopt guardrails and as you heard earlier, the intention of goals is to really capture what's the community's vision for what students should be able to do. but that talks about what's happening in the world of students. it doesn't what's happening in the world of adults, the guardrails are really where you capture the values and generally speaking, that perfectly accurate. but generally speaking, guardrails are more likely. describe what what is it the adults in the system are doing to try to accomplish or what what are the values of the adults? won't violate the path to accomplishing the goals. so that's what brings us to the second page values and guardrails. how do you score yourselves? and again, the intention here is to ask

whatever type of questions you have. i'm certainly available for that. but really quickly try to get to a first consensus and then try to identify what are some next steps on our continuous approval process before is open. how would you slow yourselves? i scored us as a five. i saw this as a. ten i also scored us as a five to so positive. i think we look at these maybe a little bit deeper maybe. yeah. yeah. i guess i would ask for folks who picked five. if you would just kind of share what was the one you felt like that held us, the ones that held us back from from being above their. i have notes. yeah, please. so there was the status

of each interim guardrail is not currently scheduled to be updated multiple times during the school year. the draft governance calendar does not include updates for guardrails one, 2 or 5. guardrail three is scheduled four times and guardrail four is scheduled twice. the superintendent just left the room so and then the other is currently in my reading. several of the interim guardrails do not clearly meet the smart framework and i can give examples, but. but now he's back. so could you give examples of the smart piece or or does anyone else have any? yeah. yeah. did you put a zero. i thought i put a thought because they're not. i think that needs to be a zero then. oh right, right. yes i did put a zero. i did for the people here i guess. right here we can pass them like for example, i did put it because i was reading my. okay yes it was because i put yeah, i

don't know what i put but now that i'm looking at it, i don't have my the thing i turned in in front of me but now that i'm looking at it, i think it's clearly a zero. if the interim guardrails need to be smart goals because some of them like like interim guardrail for point one is just increase the percentage of classrooms which are fully staffed from august 15th, 2022 to 2024. well, i guess that is measurable, but it's not. it doesn't include what they are. does it include the starting point? yeah, exactly. exactly which i would consider at least very useful to clarify that as a smart goal. i think there's a number of them that actually are like that that are kind of that aren't specifically measurable, but could be with a little bit of tweaking. and that's absolutely correct is with a little bit of tweaking of them very much could be when you eventually identified that several of them on that. and then if we meet the

criteria in column one, not student outcomes focused and we moved a column two, then we're automatically getting five points right? is that once you get to column two, you score yourself as five points. is that correct or am i wrong? at the very top of completed? okay, no items from the student outcomes focus and you have to have all the yes. so. then that's so i a superintendent when you walked out, one of the things that we had raised for that was just that the status of each interim guardrail is not currently scheduled to be updated. multiple times during each school year. so if the guardrails it does not include updates for guardrails one, 2 or 5 and gargoyle three is four times a guardrail for us twice. are you looking at our monitoring calendar? yeah and

aj, does it update mean what does an update entail? because one of the things we're so the requirement on this page is that for each of the interim goals and interim guardrails that the data that new data is available multiple times per year. so if it's something that only updates once per year, that is functionally worthless for tracking progress within the year. so to track progress per year, you needed to change at least once. so the two different data points during the year, preferably 3 or 4, a lot more, but at minimum it needs to have been at least twice per year. so if you have something that says something about some type of data that's only knowable once per year, that that would not be eligible, what lady might actually be talking about this actually in the next section monitoring and accountability is with what frequency are those and guardrails monitored so that that is the next topic that's

not this topic. so this was how frequently is the data updated for the next page? monitoring accountability talks about how frequently should the board schedule monitoring reports to come to the board so those are two separate issues. okay so then, yeah, i mean, some of these some of the interims are still not in the format we've described. and i've been more focused on i mean, some of it we just trying to get some of our baseline data stuff. but that's a different question. i mean, definitely we set up the goals to be monitored throughout the year. i'm going to have to go back and look and see that we can like the staffing. i mean, throughout the year, we know staffing vacancies, let's say, but it's really critical is it is critical throughout the year. i mean, we could look mid-year and we're continually i mean, particularly right now, we're continuing to try to find staffing. so i'll reflect on on that piece. then i do have a follow up question. but i'll wait until we get on the

frequency of monitoring them, but then i'll wait till we get to that. so, so the interesting thing, so guardrails are supposed to be. end goals without more elaboration, like within the guardrail itself? yes so it's like a guardrail. would be something that is like more far out because i know we want them to be smart. right but achievable doesn't necessarily mean that it's all laid out within the guardrail or should it be more laid out within the guardrail that like how that is to be achieved, the guardrail is are more the conditions that we're the what we're telling the superintendent he cannot do when implementing the goals. so, for example, he can't make any major decisions surrounding the goals without getting community input.

that's one of them right there. all if you look at the way the interim or the guardrails are all laid out, they're all and this was the hard part for me. they're all in the negative, right? the superintendent will not the superintendent shall not , you know, like the whole child. the superintendent will not do anything that doesn't take the whole child into account. so it's like you have to meet these goals. but within these conditions, within this bucket, does that help? yeah. so is there can we reach a consensus on where the board is for values of guardrails? and then once we've done that, let's identify one, 2 or 3 things that the board can do to continue improvement. yeah i guess i would recommend that we find consensus around zero as it being that we don't have our smart goals for the interim goals in the place that they're

supposed to be. and so that would indicate that we are not out of five yet. i can get behind that. is there any. no, we don't have all commissioners . is there any disagreements amongst present folks? so it seems like we do have generally consensus. i think we'll check and to make sure everybody's back. but i don't know if we're going to transition to the next step part or how you want to handle. but i'll pass it to you before we do that, can i just recognize the amount of work that staff put into these and getting us to this point? i think that's that's really important to recognize. yeah, i want to recognize. but i also. and should we pass the mic, please? yes, i want to read all the work that's gone in in this past year. but i think we're really demonstrates just the type of work that this board is

leading with just how one instrumental essential and how far we were, where we want to go in service and service with our students and their outcomes. so i just wanted to state that because it is so clear to me just now doing the self-evaluation that even though we have done a tremendous amount of work over this past year, that trying to move a system of this size and when we talked about level setting on what inputs, outputs and outcomes are, we have a lot of work ahead and how we spend our time monitoring that progress. the consensus around us. for yes,

there is what does that consensus. zero. not so well. what are specific steps that the board could take next on your continuous improvement journey. direct the superintendent to update the guardrail. to be smart and come back and review together is one. and then also get clarity on on what that updating the updating of multiple times for each guardrail looks like what our expectations ought to be around that so what i've paid for my notes is add a review of the interim goals and interim guardrails to a future board meeting agenda and add a review of the monitoring and calendar to a future learning agenda. is

does that capture your attention ? yes she said yes. if you couldn't hear anyone else steps you take on your conclusion. i had sort of a related question was how does this interact with the monitoring progress? monitoring sessions? i guess i'm assuming we should do that step before, ideally before the progress monitoring sessions is correct or it would be really helpful. well, to review the interim as quickly as is reasonably possible. so that's really a question of for staff, how quickly could they make some adjustments and bring those back. but yes, because that does have a direct impact on your ability to effectively monitor because i guess partly to say i think that the strongest part of this whole process to my understanding and the reason the thing i'm really looking forward to is those progress monitoring conversations this year. i felt like the ones we had last

spring, even as sort of practice , were really helpful and so i just want to make sure that we're prepared for those. so i think that's going to be the place where we can really dig in on on, on in terms of thinking about accountable and pushing, pushing forward. so i just want to, i don't know, make sure that we're ready. yeah we could definitely provide some more preparation for board members individually or small groups in advance of your next progress writing session. so i'll add that in my notes as well. anyone else that steps on this one before we transition, can i actually ask a clarification question that i was struggling with when i was going through each of the interim guardrails because some of them don't have baselines, because they haven't been measured before, so they just have increased by a certain percent. and i wasn't i wasn't sure how that would work. and then i did have one particular the guardrail, 4.33, which is

improved heating systems to reduce work orders submitted by heat by 20% like that is a smart goal. like it's measurable. but one it raised the question for me is how do do we want them to be related to students? i mean, i wasn't clear on how how it just. yeah and i didn't remember that one coming forward to the board for discussion. it's a lot. a lot of the other ones can just are more around like how are we monitoring where how is the baseline set like that kind of stuff. but that one in particular popped out to me is, is like, does this even count. oh, which one were you referring to? interim guardrail 4.33. which is improved heating systems to reduce work orders submitted about heat by 20. i mean, i am not pushing back on

an improving the heating systems. that is not what i'm trying to say here. but in as a guardrail for resource allocation, especially as it relates to student outcomes. i was i got stuck there. gotcha. and so i definitely don't want to discuss individual interims today. but when we had the review of the interim to a future board agenda, i think that's absolutely going to be fair game. and the question that the board is trying to answer for those moments, is it do we like or dislike the answer? that is that is not for your discussion. that's not the intention. the question is, is there agreement by the board that the interims are a reasonable interpretation of the guardrail itself? so when you read guardrail for, what would a reasonable person read that and then say, yes, i can see why heating system would be a part

of that? i may agree or disagree , but i can see that. or would a reasonable person look at that and say this has absolutely nothing to do with heating systems? i don't take it there. if it's the latter, then it be the job of the board to modify the guardrail to help clarify to add clarity such that the superintendent would see clearly that heating systems is not what we intended. but as a board, it's always your job to assume that if there's a lack of collaboration between the board and supported it. your first assumption should always be we were that clear as a governing body and so that's the step we need to take. assume that the superintendent did his job, but we just need to do our job. be more clear. but all of that can happen as part of a future board meeting agenda, interim review. is that responsive to your inquiry? yes yes. that was a yes . okay why don't you go ahead. i

would like to put forward that i think possibly expanding that. i think the intention is that the environment, like the literal physical environment that students and educators are in, contributes greatly to their ability to for the educators and administration to effectively run their school and then for the students to effectively be present in their education. and i'd just like to put forward very much that that heating systems definitely something that i can attest a lot of students would agree with as well as a lot of educators. and i'd like to definitely keep that with within the sphere of what the board is looking at and what the community like is. yeah, no, that conversation, until we have a review conversation about all the terms. so we've got a

consensus on this. what i'm looking for is are there any other next steps before we go any of the next steps, a specific next steps before we transition? seeing none. oh, commissioner fish, you want excellent. all right, then let's move on to monitoring. can i just say one one thing then as we're moving to the next. what's that? heating system. well, so as i say, no is again wanting to talk about heating systems right now because. no, no, no, no, no, no. just the learning. just the again, the learning, the guardrails. i'm going to say finding interim guardrails that both reflect what we mean as well as our measurable, our tough. so i didn't share that one in june. i don't know if we ended up talking about it. that was a but it wasn't in an update when we got to the end of the year. but that's tough and i'll say ag. i mean, aj has been a great resource and i've even checked in. aj you can correct me if point me to a different direction, but as i checked with other districts, the guardrails

are tough to figure out exactly how to measure them. so just appreciate that there's another opportunity to come back and tighten some of some of these and the heating one will be a good one to discuss because it's a balance between it's both very narrow but easily measurable. but it does represent it's to me , it's indicative of a broader system that, you know, because we could pick five other facilities issues. but if our facilities start getting better anyway. all right. moving on, monitoring and accountability, i'm gonna need to be more facilitator on tonight. all right, so we've got a bunch going to cover. good. so what questions for you? or can we merge toward a consensus on your score for accountability? and i'd like to just cover, as i promised, we got to that last one very quickly. compared to the first one at the end, you want to keep getting speakers here, folks. all right. so monitoring the ability of what

what emerging consensus is there about a school 000, just because we haven't done enough of it. can i just so i did i don't know. i don't know if other people did, but we do have a draft governing calendar that's been shared internally. and i did count out each one. currently. goal one is monitored twice. goal two is monitored three times and goal three is monitored twice and the board has not scheduled each guardrail to be monitored at least once per year. we have not adopted a monitoring calendar. we do not track. it's, you know, excetera . so and yeah. is there a consensus. i thought i heard one, but it's hard to tell from the silence. the silence is a

zero. i'm personally abstaining, so. okay, so it sounds like at the moment there's a consensus. but if somebody if we need to break consensus and discuss it so be it. assuming there's consensus about what our next steps, what are some tangible next steps that the board pay on its continuous approval agenda? i think to commissioner nominees points, we need to look very closely at this first column and make sure that the monitoring calendar reflects that each goal is going to be monitored four times a year. so this is sort of very tangible steps, just making sure that we have stuff on the calendar with sufficient frequent. i know that we are now tracking time and maybe it came up. i think i had some comments in a different part, but making sure that the tracking of time

is something that is publicly available on on a regular frequency. so whether it's quarterly or monthly, i'm not sure. i want to be mindful of staff time as well. but just making sure that we are tracking and then making it available at regular intervals. so actually i want to offer a modified version though. board members are welcome to sit down on this one. but my recommendation is that for the next seven months, maybe nine, if the school board members want to get involved, that for the next seven months, one board member take responsibility for doing the time, use evaluation for the previous month and so over the course of the next seven months, then for nine months, then all of you will have done it once, which i think will give you deeper insights into it and a greater sensitivity to how you spend your time as opposed to having staff do it for you. if you choose to take that recommendation that i'll gladly

commit to working with whoever's that is to help you through that process. so that is the recommendation that i would have, but i'm not going to write it in my notes unless one of you takes it up and says, this is something we recommend for our next step. well, i want to clarify that. that was part of why i was asking what we meant by our time tracking pie sheet earlier. you know, like that's why i was asking what particular activities that we were doing at what meetings fell into the other category. like this pie chart was created from some google sheet or excel sheet or something, right? so what what led into these calculations? so that's kind of so let me finish. let me finish, please. so if we're going to take on we have to be really clear. i think defining what qualifies as a student outcomes conversation versus is what qualifies as a budget conversation because i feel like so many of the conversations we have, you know, any one of us could subjectively

qualify or could do it in different ways. so i think before we take this on, we have to better understand what we're talking about. i'm not saying no. i just think it should be a conversation in greater detail and a greater form. but that wasn't really so with that, i do appreciate that. that is a fair point. i mean, again, i think we were not clear, but i can share more how the analysis was done. but then, yeah, everybody, how do we know? aj then if nine different people are doing the analysis that it's the, it's consistent. exactly. well i think that's why if you all chose to do that, i would work with you. so there is a document, it's a spreadsheet. you just have to fill it in that it has explicit definitions for basically everything. and so it's just a matter of watching the video and then identifying which of these definitions was

met in the moment and then tracking the minutes. so there's a spreadsheet, there's a full set of instructions. this is not something that you want to be independently making up. yeah i did it. i did it that time when i had covid and i was bored and i was watching the meeting at home and i because i couldn't attend because i had covid and the and it was very interesting. and i would highly recommend, i think that's actually the best way to learn it is to do it. and then i think and then i think it builds self awareness for all of us around what those different elements are. but going back to our grading rubric here, it's just some of this was really informative for me when we were talking about, oh gosh. so so like for example, one of the criteria here is the board has not consistently demonstrated the ability to distinguish between customer service issues and owner service issues. i think that's an to me, yes, i

see that as a big part of our understanding. in the same way, just understanding the process and in some additional information for us as commissioners, for the public who attends the meetings and the district as a whole, building upon that, actually i would i personally would benefit from more training around this. i get it. i get tripped up on that. and i also see stop sign behavior like, you know, the example that you gave us in training age eight. and i think i don't know if there's training that or coaching that you could provide to help us step back and look at more root cause analysis as opposed to getting drawn into like a particular solution or recommendation at a at to specific situation, looking more

at the root cause and what are the underlying concerns of the community that we're trying to address. so going back to what what would you suggest as far as training to get us to really understand customer and owner stuff? and then also getting out of the, you know, delivering the stop sign mentality? yeah. and i can definitely put this down as training opportunities. so i would recommend two things. one, i find it's helpful to work through some scenarios and so that's something i could do with you all in either individually or collectively. but then i also find it's really helpful to for you to have to explain it to others. and so if i were going to make these recommendations, those would be the one that i offer some scenario training for you all to help you really fine tuning your sense of are people doing something to be that the best person to meet their

children's needs most quickly is actually the teacher, not a board member or is the best person to meet their needs, their children's needs. most swiftly, a principal rather than a board member. so i can help provide this area to help you hone your instincts around that . but then the real way to bring home is to you all provide that training and coaching to folks in your community and i'm super excited to support you and i. so i'd follow up around and um, as a next step then for us to do it as a group, um, to understanding that type of scenario analysis. and then from there, from that next body of work, then what the next steps potentially would look like is we going into community. and i think that's something i would also like to explore around the scenario. i do think there is a calibration , but um, be curious around working with the superintendent

as well. um, once we go through this initial scenario. so, um, training with the board around the governing team because i think there's still some pieces around the customer and owning that ownership at the staff level and then as owners and as, as board members reflecting the values of the community. yeah i'd like to suggest that with that training, others being helpful, it would definitely i think the student delegates find that it would be very helpful if that training others could be steered in our direction. as in we would love some training specifically from aj or from you guys regarding this and then separately, the student delegates do have to leave at nine. so anything we have something to say about

communication and collaboration. and if there's anything specifically you would want our opinion on or want us to hear, then on that should probably be brought forward. i'll just share a little bit. i was actually recommended we move on to the next page. was there something else about monitoring accountability? yeah two things. one, just since you're leaving, i'll share. so we have we're getting out to the communication on this, but we have aj coming to do a workshop with families and ssk saturday, october 14th actually. also have him scheduled to stay to work with district leadership on cascading the vision values goals and guardrails. so mary kate's here. let's plan on this and aj, if you're okay with it, let's plan on the 16th then also finding some time for aj to meet with our student board members. although i really like the idea of our board doing the training, you know, it's nice when we get to meet with you. aj and then the other thing with just this

one, we are going to i don't know, we're going to have to rethink about our board calendar. i guess when we put together the monitoring calendar had more focus on like the rhythm of our data for the year. but if we're supposed to have if we want to have four monitoring sessions of the goal, our monitor each goal four times per year and the monitoring guardrail five once per year, that's 1217 more monitoring sessions. that's in every monitor session. are you saying aj for it to count, it needs to be a board discussion item. so for goal monitoring those never go on the consent agenda. those always you really want to talk about that because that's the most important thing. are we serving our students and what's working with staff working? how do we improve the guardrail monitoring reports are our consent agenda eligible? but if any individual board member has concerns about performance relative the guardrails that that should be included pulled off and have an actual

conversation about it. so you'll always discuss the goals no matter what. you'll only discuss the guardrails if at least one board member has concerns about performance in that area. considering our current discussion tonight about guardrails, i don't think they're ready for consent. i think they should be. yeah. so we're just going to need to think through this one. and i don't know that even. but by now to next year, we'll get to the meeting level and we've already two meetings in and. yeah, sorry. go ahead. we can collaborate. let's say there's first how do we perform and then what are some next steps that the board can take on. did you want to do we want to let our student delegate share? is this the one you want us to share? ours is based more an improvement. so if we to score. but what was that? i could hear that the student delegates point

is based more in improvement and moving forward. so the scoring no go ahead. and i understand your time is running short. so the sac, the student advisory council in the past year, there was a form of governance that was redone, as far as i understand, where resolutions are no longer put forth. so that was the sacs larger way of engaging with the school board. and now the sac feels that they have not necessarily been given a clear path forward in how to continue engaging with the board in the way that they had before and to continue improving that engagement. so the sac is just one example. i'm sure there are other student organizations who feel that they are lacking that level of communication and

collaboration that that they expect and also would like to improve. that so one thing i definitely volunteer is to make time to visit with the sac if invited. it's not my meeting to talk through what are really powerful ways for student leaders to have their voice heard. part of that is distinguishing that the previous conversation between are these items that belong to the school attended or involved with the board. so i certainly encourage you all you have concerns that you want to bring before the board is intended to do so. now, just now we just have a conversation about what's the best way to do so and how do we discern between is this a superintendent issue or is this a board issue? but if it is the will of the supervisor council

have gladly made myself available to support you all and how to best make sure that your voice is never squelched anyway , i would just add so i think a part of it is a lot of the things that have historically come to the board from the student advisory council, from advisory groups, from community coalitions, nonprofits, parents, students are things that actually should go to the superintendent and that we as a district need to have internal systems and protocols to be responsive, whether it's to address a problem or to build a partnership or a collaboration. and i think what we're trying to figure out now is what we do in the interim as we build those things out to really shift that focus. so the voice of people doesn't feel gone in this moment , but really towards a place where people who are doing the actual day to day work can actually get that information and implement those things in a way that we as a board can't directly impact those things. and the way that the staff were doing the work day to day can.

do folks want to say numbers is that we're apples. there other conversation maybe before that that helps to have. communication and collaboration , right? that's right. yes. zero i was also zero. but i'll just say i thought we checked everything in zero, unlike the other stuff. we just hadn't checked everything in the next in the. sorry, i didn't print out in color. oh the yellow orange. yeah. so unlike the other ones where we hadn't even met everything in the zero box, i do think we did. we just didn't check all the right this stuff specifically about the tracks of time and those specific categories. i think the categories that are in that we have in the in our presentation today, they don't match. they're

not the same categories. so we just missed out on one point. i i thought we were going from zero to something. so i think we can anyone else. is there a consensus or a recommended next steps? it seems like there is consensus that we do not have all of that accurate meeting, tracking protocols in place. so we are at the zero knots an outcome focus. what are some next steps that the board of board members can be taken for tracking? would this be i guess i don't. is this i'm i don't really understand the difference between the tracking stuff here and the tracking stuff that we just spoke about, where you made the recommendation that that we as board members and student delegates take take that tracking on ourselves. but whatever that recommendation is,

i think that seems applicable to this as well. so just to cross walk and the one of the superintendent gave you what the superintendent has listed as action board governance discussion items and other or would all count. and this instrument is other. the section about public comment. my with community engagement depending on how that structured, if it's not structured as to way interaction with folks and it would also fall as other and so essentially what your administration has done is taking what we describe as other stuff that doesn't seem to have a strong connection. right back to your goals and guardrails and broken it out into subcategories . but the instrument that we recommend of does not indulge in

the generosity that you give us . well, actually, i have a question about that. we passed the mark. i would say it was more precision than generosity. well chemistry there. i like that. i like that. well, okay. can i just ask clarifying question about that? because one of the things that in the training we've talked about there is, you know, we should be primarily focused on student outcomes, but there is like obligatory compliance work that we have to do. and so that would that be in other except for the voting part of that? that's correct. so essentially, the work recommended here is that if you say that your students learning and growing is the most important thing, then the coaching is don't tell us that that's what you believes. show the people that that's what you believe by making that which is

the majority of your time. but when we say majority, we do that somewhat literally. but 5,051% recognizing that the rest of your time that are legitimate operational issues that you need to attend to in legal matters that you have to attend to. and so that's why the recommendation isn't 100% of your time, honestly. now though, i would love that my heart for that case. i just recognize that that not a reality of. do i have a follow up question? where does public comment fall in that? because i remember you remarking at one point that you did not recommend necessarily limiting public comment. does that is that included in the 100? because as so it depends. this varies by state. if this is something that is required by state statute, then you don't track it in that at all and just simply say that is a reflection of the legislature decision making, that the boards, those elements that are not required

by state statute, that it is tracked as part of the board, reiterating its discretion on how its tab is used. and we do differentiate between public comment that is not an authentic two way interaction with the community, which we strongly recommend and community engagement. what we described is that intentional to weigh interaction. and so if it's the intentional two way interaction where you're really talking about the vision of the community, then that that embedded in the board does a lot more of that than you are currently doing by a long shot, that there's nothing wrong with public comment, but public comment is a two way. so if somebody if to really understand what's in somebody's heart, you need to be able to have a conversation back there for public comment as a format. that's why we do not consider public comment at authentic form of community engagement. it's not it's necessary in in your case, it's actually a certain amount of it is definitely legally required, but it's not it doesn't rise to the level of

two way conversation with your constituents, which is what we recommend, that you build more time into your calendars to. yeah, no, i agree. i think that makes a lot of sense. i guess i was just asking. i didn't want there to be an incentive necessarily to reduce public comment in order to increase our percentage on outcomes. i want to spend more time talking about outcomes, not restrict the voice of the public. so that was all. thank you. i agree with what you said. this i spend more time on community engagement. that is correct. yeah yes, absolutely. yeah. without breaking the. yeah any other recommended next steps on communication and collaboration? i'm seeing none. all right, good. first good. we want to dismiss our student delegates and thank them for their excellence and intelligence for communication. thank you. your comments were so helpful. thank you. thank you so

much. and i look forward to connecting with you to whatever ways i can be supportive. i was eager to serve your predecessors. certainly eager to serve you in whatever ways you have being that you need the sac would definitely like to have you as soon as possible. we very much open up our meeting. time to you. thank you. hi looking early. we took a late flight on october 16th. please they meet on monday. it's considered. you next week. thank you. thanks. for we're ready if you are, you'll be interested. but we've got two left. community interest and continuous improvement. we cannot both of these out in just a couple of minutes each community the interest what's the score and what are that stats. i think there is zero

we're almost i have we're almost got one point. is it so if you look at the second column we meet some of them. we don't meet all of the provisions. i don't think we've adopted an ethics conflicts of interest statement. we have a conflict of interest statement that we have to provide to the city. right. every year, right? yeah that's right. stuff doesn't. so that's that's not a board policy. it's not the city that. what was that just like there's some city stuff that governs us but this is actually more reference to us having individual policies. right. well like for example in my work, i when i came onto the board, i sent a proactive email off to district leadership stating what i was going to do to prevent conflict of interest . we have a policy in my company

about how we firewall me from the work that we do, but that conversation has never happened as opposed to me. it's always been proactively me out and in our work internally. but you don't have any work in the district doing this? well, that's what i'm saying is how how we keep me from doing because my company does work that an advocacy around sf usd. but i am completely firewalled from it. right and i all of my clients that i have that were supposed clients, i had to hand them over to other people. when i became a commissioner. so we've put a whole lot of policies in place in my company, but that's just me independently know what? there's not been any conversations. i and i proactively have communicated that to the district. and what i'm doing. and in an attempt to cover myself in the district, but no one ever came to me and had a conversation with me or provided me with a policy saying, hey, let's talk through that. excuse yourself from anything could personally benefit from all. that's right. right. but there's you know,

that's just because i know what i i've done the research on my end. there's not been anyone who's come to me and said, here's what you have to do. so listen for the fairly easy fix, though, it does. well, except what. so what's the recommendation? put a policy in place? well, so i would just say we could there's very boilerplate type policies that we could put in place. and two seconds pretty much. but i do want to flag that if we do want to be on meeting student outcomes, focus, there's very specific elements to what what they're proposing here that i just wanted to flag. if we want to get that extra two points in the green column. in the green column. yeah. i might have a problem with just getting to the green column.

so it seems like we have consensus is that we are in the unity and trust category, not students outcome focused because we haven't developed internal policies that governance yet yet. yeah yeah what are the recommended steps. develop policies with specific language to allow us to approach or meet student outcomes goals. all right. that that is something that could definitely work with you on my recommendation on that is similar to what you offered for me in the past. i'd recommend putting together an ad hoc committee that just hammers that out, does a bunch of the homework for the board and something out, and then bring something back for the board's consideration. and then the board can decide, does this work for us or not? and what modifications do you think? so

that would be my recommendation to expedite progress on on. on that item of this. i don't know if you need a committee like. right. it could be board leadership. the california school board association has a bunch of policies and we tend to use those as templates. i'm sure in five minutes we could google search and find a conflict of interest in ethics policy. but no doubt, i'm not suggesting that it would take the ad hoc committee to do its job any other recommended next steps for unity and trust before we move on, can i can i get clarity when you say this ad hoc committee, would you suggest that we attempt to get the ethics and conflict of interest statement to the green column or just do a quick and dirty of the yellow column definition? like i recommend that you aim for masterful focus on student outcomes. of course he's going.

we don't want to get that. two. you want me to what? i want to get back to the wind in our hair . hello. hi i just want to kind of chime in on the conversation regarding conflicts of interest. so in a nutshell, there is a lot of information about conflicts of interest and with all due respect, you don't have a lot of wiggle room to negotiate the meaning of any of that. also in a nutshell, is that the district is precluded by law from advising individual board members as to their own conflicts of interests that is particular to you as individuals with whatever's going on with your finances, your spouse's community, property. business interests, so on and so forth. now. historically and throughout the state, general counsel can give general advice which you are not allowed to use as a

defense when you're charged with a crime, to say these are the contours of conflict of interest. i say it that way very bluntly because that comes from the fppc, see? right. and there's an abc hotline that i encourage you to take advantage of that you can speak to somebody generally, and i don't i don't know any i'm not a representative of the fppc, but it's my understanding that they'll get back to you within 24 hours. and, you know, if you are lucky enough to get a written opinion from them, that might be something you can rely on. so with conflicts of interest because as individual board members stand in responsible, civilly and criminally from that a i highly recommend that we look at the information that's available to us first and then think about it. of course, adopting things with ccpa and whatnot, not because no one size does not fit all. and that's why specific the law doesn't allow us to advise anybody individually because

there are so many permutations about financial and financial interests are usually the first kind of situation, and then you have common law conflicts of interest issues. and so there's a lot there's a lot there. can i ask a follow up question then? and i don't know if you have access to this particular document because, i mean, you don't have to opine in this moment, but like, is this something that we can even do or are we going to be running afoul of some other type of. right. so i've been. monitoring the conversation throughout. the evening, and there are several areas that the law will need to be taking into consideration. i will just leave it at that in the sense of saying, number one, we're on an open microphone and i'm not going to give you confidential legal advice one way or another, because i would strongly advise that we do so in some other method. that's a little more robust and frankly

protected by the attorney client privilege. but when we're talking about, say, issues about the brown act, right, very rigorous rules, not a whole lot of wiggle room, conflicts of interest, very. rigorous rules, a lot of enforcement, not a lot of wiggle room. so, yes, i do see situations here where because this is a self evaluation of the board, i'm with the understanding that the board also recognizes that you operate in an environment where you do not have unlimited power. we are regulated by the state. we are regulated by elections, law, education law, penal code, government code, so on. i mean, the list goes on and the laws are plenty federal law, state law, court opinions. so. so any decision made by the board? absolutely is in the shadow and

with the understanding of the law and whether we acknowledge that or not, we're all held responsible to it and be held liable for it. did we do something wrong? yeah, i live next steps before we move on. okay. maybe we take a step back and understand whether what whether we are in a position to have an ethics and conflict statement by the board. but whether that's even even okay, if you're asking that of your attorney, certainly welcome to ask him if he's willing all that i still recommend. i said my previous recommendation that this should really is better done by committee that can sit down with your attorney and hammer this type of stuff out. yeah let's do that. okay. any other recommendations in unity and present for you? move on to the last page. all right? okay.

let's go to continuous improvement. can we reach a consensus around the score? and what are the next steps? continuous improvement as page? well, considering this is our first several evaluation, i think that puts us at zero just to vote on it. and this is not an action item. so do an evaluation together at the previous retreat. i feel like we did know, but we didn't vote no in this first column, also over a vote on it. this is actually a first for me. yeah it was just like in may or. yeah i mean. oh yeah. because i haven't even started the 12 months. i think it's a little bit off because of our schedule of like we couldn't do it evaluation before we finished this school year. but i definitely. and not opposed to being a hard grader. yeah i mean

yeah, yeah. get it perfect for sure. yeah we encourage body work and the zero doesn't reflect the work that we've done. we're so close to one and the commitment of continued work. so and is it because the 12 year period piece is what folks think we're just that we didn't vote on the monitoring piece or i voted it at zero because i didn't know you all did a self evaluate at the seminar. so i thought it was pretty light. yeah it was not a it was just circling a bunch of zeros, but i mean, that's all i think, you know. but i think well, and that's where and that's why i think when you look at our zero today. okay well that's what i was saying. that was why i was arguing. that was why i was arguing for points out zero, even though i'm support, i'm supportive. but that's because i do think we've made a lot of progress. so i wanted to see maybe that's what i want. maybe i want a column that's like between the zero and the one or something so we can show some some level of what's going

to like in the iep. yes exactly. i mean, this is so similar to the iep process, right? you develop measurable goals and then you monitor them throughout the year. you come back and report on the progress a year later and even though our students don't always meet their goals, you have to celebrate the progress that they've made toward meeting right? but when they don't meet their goals, you put more supports and services in place as you develop the new goals. so here we are. one thing i wanted to note, um, is with the time tracking we put under other around wrap awards, i think with some minor adjustments around how do we recognize the accomplishments of its students and staff towards progress of goals and interim goals? i think that would be, um, a great kind of opportunity to really then also make that connection from our school sites , school communities in the field to the work more broadly at the student outcomes, um,

goals that have been set by the board. oh, i like that. a raise goal for math, a great goal for reading and for college and career readiness or guardrails as well. yeah. and remind us, what is the recommended cadence that we do? is this an annual thing or is there a i mean, as far as like our own monitoring? right. we're asking this superintendent and staff to do regular monitoring. is there a version of this where it's not so intensive, but we're at least assessing progress? you're talking about with the voice of evaluation? yes check the last descriptor under mastery. oh, okay. okay. all right. okay. i don't even bother to look above 80. and you can only do it once.

you don't hear. okay okay. it's a quarterly. and as i mentioned earlier, the first time you've done this in a while is always takes a bit because you're norming. and having created a shared understanding around things. so example my board last night did our quarterly self evaluation. i think it may have taken ten minutes, maybe, but that's only because we do it every quarter. so we, i mean, people know exactly what it is like, oh, we missed this, where we at? okay, this is where we to take on and then bam, bam, bam. and then you move on. and so the intention is to do this quarterly in the same way that you would monitor your students progress on a quarterly basis. the intention to do monitor your own so that you're constantly looking at how do we get stronger on behalf of the students we serve? okay, so give

us a little pep rally. aj what did you score? how long have you been doing it? what did you start with? so my district, we started this process in, i want to say september of 2020, and our first the first score was taken in october of 2020. and it was at 12 points. um, the score i as i can't remember the score from last night, i should have a written score. i don't remember . but our last i do remember last quarter and it was it was 82. i mean i remember the first time we passed 80 points was going to say 26 months after we got started. and that's about right. it only takes about two years to go from 0 to 80 or and the recommendation is isn't anything other than it's ideal

to be north of 80, 80 or above. and so it's not like try to get to 100. it was the goal it's if we're 80 and above, we really, really aligning our work with our intention that our that our action actions are actually aligned with our intentions and aligned with action. and so that's the that's the game plan. and normally takes boards about two years to get there. like i said, it took us just, just a hair over two years to fix meaningfully exceed 80 points. practice makes progress. okay. thank you. to put in perspective, you all are currently, what, 15 months into this process. and so i suspect based on what we've learned this evening, you could very well blow past what we did in the

amount of time we did it based on where you all are at. so i realize that there's a bunch of zeros here, but there was a ton of work that you have already done with just a few minor adjustments. it wouldn't surprise you. very well. find yourselves coming back in three months, assuming you do the work that you could very well come back in three months and be in the 50, 60, 70, because you have already done so much of the work and you all said that's worth celebrating. that doesn't change the fact that you are where you are, but it does mean that in very short order you could be you could the score could demonstrate very capably the hard work of this board is put in. any of the recommended steps before we close this thing out. then i would just ask in closing, what's one thing you'll

take away from the self-evaluation process? and i will email you. i'll probably email the jetson notes, if you don't mind. and then you can share with everybody what you the one thing that you'll take away from taking a moment to self-evaluation. if i can go further. oh, i'm sorry. go ahead . i said before, take away. yeah, no, i just think just the fact that we need to be significantly more diligent and ensuring that we're doing all the key things and that we're really living up to our expectation of making sure the superintendent and district staff are getting us the things that we need to really do our jobs. and so i think really just making a bigger emphasis that we have to do a much stronger job of ensuring that all these kind of little things are happening. and definitely just as board president wanting to be, i think, just more actively engaged and ensuring that as we hit the end of this semester, that we have a lot more points and progress made and that we're just a lot more accountable to the things that we've committed to do in ways that this process

has showed that maybe we haven't and that we all collectively have. maybe another level of like study to take as far as mastering the concepts and things in here as well. so i guess those are the things that i would add is reflection. i'll just go around, i guess i'll well, this parallels the work that so many of our educators are doing right now. we just adopted a new reading curriculum, right? and it's not like you go to one weekend of pd and then you've mastered the curriculum. it takes on going training and coaching and everything, right? so this is us modeling that in the same way practice makes progress, practice doesn't make perfect, practice makes progress. and so i think this, this is going to be a journey for us and i'm excited to be here doing the work with all of you and the leadership team in the district . yeah. echoing commissioner fisher, i think and kind of as i said earlier, i think the

important part is the process, not the score. and i think we've come to a, um, a much deeper understanding of where we're at and what we need to do and a more collective understanding of that. and so i've really appreciated this process and look forward to continuing the conversations. can i add one more thing? i just the nerd in me, the you know, the a focus student, i want to point out that the weighting of this is heavily geared towards vision and goals and modeling and accountability and so i think we are so close and honestly, i think that's that's where it should be. that's where the bulk of our work needs to be, right? so you know, a little bit more effort in a short amount of time . and like aj said, we can really increase our score. sorry to interrupt. no, no worries. would you say practice makes progress? exactly as i welcome

my fourth graders tomorrow, my new class, we emphasize always social, emotional learning and growth and the growth mindset set. so even though we have zeros and we have a lot of growth to do, those zeros actually actually do reflect, as other people said, that we have actually done a lot of groundwork and we have obviously a lot of growth to make, but we can do it. i don't know if we'll get to 80 necessarily in two years. oh, come on, mark. we can do it. we can do it. okay. we'll get to 90 into you know, i think we'll make a lot of progress. and i really appreciate the opportunity to work with this group to do that. yeah, i think . jd your question of sort of the takeaways and what have we learned? i mean, i don't know if this is something new, but a reminder that, you know, self critique, self awareness can be hard and uncomfortable, but it's also necessary and motivating and important. so onwards. um,

thank you to all for hearing me out and, and indulging my, my tough grading. i appreciate that each of you and i just for me, the real takeaway in this conversation is just remembering that the we are modeling this. we are the ones that know this better than anyone else in the district. and so for asking people to carry out this vision like we need to walk it and talk it and help others come along with us. so that's modeling it and being willing to ask questions or admit like if there's something that i don't understand or i'm stuck on is that's yeah. so but i think i feel we've made a lot of progress in the last 15 months. some key takeaways is that this work is not easy. it requires

focus and discipline, just like the experience of our, our students and our educators, what they're doing every day. and that this is truly a journey and that we are benefiting from either from being coached to now. i think actually moving into the coaching, you know, aspect of our journey. and just like tonight, thinking about, um, you know, as we're reflecting, so how are we going to engage in our, in the community, how are we engaging with our student leaders and our students and that truly we are the ones, you know, this journey when we started, right? 18 was it been 18 months? um i just felt very grateful to have gone through this work and know that there's just so much more of

growth and that our students are really going to benefit from this governance work. we forgot to thank you. and of course, without saying thank aj for his tremendous mentorship and also the connectedness to the work not only in san francisco, but connecting with our colleagues from across the country and learning about their journeys and their learnings has also been, um, just so appreciative and grateful for that experience and still to this day, san francisco, i think leads the way in the state of california to adopt a student outcomes, goals and framework. we were the first . i would offer to was closing out. it is entirely improbable that a board would struggle with

its growth in the absence of a coaching or. um. and so the challenge that i take on this evening is certainly to try to match the hard work that you all have already put in and the enthusiasm that you've demonstrated for the work with a willingness to rededicate myself and the work of my team to being more attentive and to be doing a better job of supporting you all and being available to do all that you need. and so i want to match your commitment to possible reach students with my own commitment to supporting you in pursuing that possibility. but the floor shows. thank you for your time. thank you. okay. all right. i think at this time,

then we will go to public comment. we will see if there are any cards for public comment in person. and then we will see if there's any virtual public comment. i have no public comment cards for in-person. thank you. is there any virtual public comment for our virtual participant? please raise your hand if you care to share your public comment on the workshop. on student outcomes. and can we please have that repeated in spanish and chinese of salinas? seven comentario conversation again, it's a celebration that is. would you for me, gabriel? go ahead. thank you very thank you. i'm seeing one hand raised . supriya, go ahead, please. hi. this is sabrina. i just wanted

to thank you for engaging in this process of self evaluation and emphasizing this really important point about walking the walk and, you know, not just talking the talk, making sure that we're modeling for students and for the rest of the community, what we want to be achieving as a school system. so i very much appreciate that you all took the time to engage in this, and i appreciate mr. efforts to, you know, to assist and support the board. it's been a lot of work. thank you. thank you, vanessa. hi. good evening. um, happy new school year, everybody. i wanted to just mention that there is some really great opportunity in here , right? and i'm going to ask each of you to really work with community leaders as you move

these opportunities forward. i know that we here at parents of public schools in san francisco has not really heard from some of the commissioners. and we would love to talk to you all about about what our sections are to just encourage you in more partnership and more collaboration for this school year. have a great evening. thank you. however i, i, i just first off, welcome back and thank you for all your work. the first thing is i just wanted to highlight three things that i heard. the internal goals really upset this before along the state getting you to consider reevaluating some of that and encouraging smart goals for some . the second is, i do hope that you will have more data monitoring and board meetings as

you paint. and when you do it, i am begging you to not only do data all students, but you cross-reference the intersections and break it down and the third thing is yes, community engagement is still a need and the fourth thing is i just appreciate all your hard work. 100. thank you so much. that's it. thank you. that concludes our public comment for our virtual participants. okay. thank you for everyone providing public comment. and with that, we will adjourn this meeting at 9:31 p.m.

s f gov tv san francisco government televisiontelevision >> (music). >> we're going to show you how to pay for parking with the smart phone app the quickest way to pay for parking you'll download did app in the apple

and google play store and on the app and enter our name and phone number and make sure to verify your account to use the app and net check the overhead signs and type that zone number in the location and then choose how long you want to park for and for the duration and finally confirming this and make the payment that is a combination many parking control officers need and if you need to extend our parking time on the app and select the option and select the time and make the payment. >> for for whatever reason the connection call 866 to pay by phone and enter our number or

press one to register. emergency our pin the last four digits of our credit card number and number of the minutes you want to park. alter the end of call will confirm everything if you're a new users call (856) 490-7275 and the walk you through will walk through it you'll enter the zone number and see parking time. and finally there are for refunds. that's it the information will only be saved for the direct your attention of our parking time and it is by the pay by phone is

simple check our other parking zone number and thanks for

our chair is onr is onr is onr l just just just just just get us started untild untis here, and thenand thenand thena. so so so so so let's start withart withart . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . member member member member m catalano here. good morningmorn, memb cunningham. dennym. dennymt vice chair d'antonio'antonio'an. member. friedenbachdenbachdenba. member. prestonprestonprestonpre walton hereon hereon hereon hera . be latebe latebe latebe lateby