16 vote to elect whether to disclose any or all discussion on item 15 held in closed session. san francisco administrative code section 67.12. a action motion to not disclose closed session with the exception of factual updates in item 15 c that will be discussed closed in the minutes. second, for members of the public, they would like to make public comment regarding line item 16, please approach the podium. there is no public comment on the motion. commissioner walker, how do you vote? yes, commissioner walker is yes.

commissioner benedicto yes. mr. benedicto is yes. commissioner yanez. yes. commissioner yanez is yes. commissioner yee yes. commissioner yee is yes. and vice president carter oberstar. yes vice president stone is. yes. you have five yeses. line item 17 adjournment.

september 26th, 2023, to order. roll call, mr. steele. commissioner alexander here. commissioner fisher here. commissioner lamb here. commissioner mahtomedi here. commissioner sanchez. mr. vice president wiseman board president. bogus here. thank you. thank you. okay. at this time, before the board goes into closed session, i call for any speakers to the closed session items listed in the agenda. there will be a total of five minutes for speakers. are there

any speaker cards? there are none. for in-person for a virtual participants. if you care to speak to any of the closed session items, please raise your hand. seeing no hands raised. thank you so much. i will now recess this meeting at 502 for closed. and we will stah the readout from closed session and the vote on student expulsion matters. i move approval of stipulated expulsion agreement of one high school student matter. number 2023-2024- number zero two from the district for the remainder of fall 2023 semester from the date of approval of the expulsion commencing on the day following the expulsion order. can i have a second? second roll

call. vote, please. thank you, president. bogus commissioner alexander. yes commissioner fisher. yes. commissioner lamb. yes. commissioner motamedi. yes. commissioner sanchez. yes. vice president wiseman. ward. yes. president bogus. yes. seven eyes. thank you so much. the next item i move approval of the stipulated expulsion agreement of one high school student matter number 2023 dash 2024. dash number zero three from the district for the remainder of the fall 2023 semester suspended enforcement of the expulsion for spring 2024 semester. can i have a second. second roll call vote, please? commissioner alexander. yes. commissioner fisher. yes. commissioner lamb yes.

commissioner montgomery. yes commissioner sanchez. yes vice president wiseman award. yes. president bogus. yes thank you for the next item i move approval of the stipulated expulsion agreement of one middle school student matter number 2023 dash 2024. dash number four from the district for the remainder of the fall, 2023 semester and spring 2024 semester can i have a second? second. can i have a roll call vote, please? mr. steele? commissioner alexander. yes, commissioner fisher. yes commissioner lamb. yes commissioner mahtomedi. yes. commissioner sanchez. yes. vice president wiseman. ward. yes. president bogus. yes. seven us now. i will continue with a report from closed session on on a vote of 7 to 0. the board took

action to waive a conflict regarding a litigation matter in one matter of anticipated litigation, the board by a vote of seven yeses, gives direction to the general counsel in one matter of anticipated litigation, the board by a vote of six yeses and one recusal recruit excuse me, one recusal. commissioner fisher gives direction to the general counsel in the matter of elk versus sfusd. san francisco superior court number c.g.s. dash 21-589106. 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 student mr. versus sf usd oh h. case. number 20230080260. the board,

by a vote of seven yeses, gives the authority of the district to pay up to the stipulated amount . and that concludes is the report from closed session. and with that we will move to our workshop item on student outcomes and with that the board will move to the other seats.

which are on you. yes okay. i do conversations giving me a headache. that's why i said my back. that's why i'm saying my back was hurting. it's like right here. so i think we'll get started in another minute. we'll give the superinten dent and the team a few more moments to get ready and then we'll launch into the presentation on. okay. all right. good evening, everyone. very excited to start our first progress monitoring workshop of

the 2324 school year and i'd just want to remind ourselves and our community what we've committed to as a governance team and that's recognizing that that why we're here is to improve our student outcomes. always happy to welcome two of our students to our conversation . and but we're not going to improve our outcomes until our adult behaviors change. and so we've committed to changing how we do things by spending time at our board meetings on monitoring progress and appreciate the commitment, the board of education has made to. do what's are you moving things okay. don't going back. sorry. i appreciate the commitment. the board of education has made to this process and. i think was

just on the tvs in here. okay, let me try. there we go. there we go. okay, so what is this process? so we have been following the council of great city schools process for our monitoring progress and in it, they define what a progress monitoring report should look like that it has the goals that we're working towards a review of the data. our interpretation and the evidence and the plan. now, tonight, i want to acknowledge we're doing something where the goals we're presenting, we present on all of our goals and including some interim guardrails, because this is typically the evening when we do a presentation at this time of year about all of our summative data results. but what we're doing differently this year is first, we're just reporting on our progress towards our goals that the board adopted and that then we're also

starting to share some of the plan of what we're doing to address that focused on, on one of our key strategies. so we're not talking tonight actually about what we're doing specifically with literacy, math or college and career readiness . so our three goals, we're talking specifically three across all of those, how we're using data to inform changes to curriculum instruction and other actions we take to improve student outcomes. so that's actually related to our guardrail. three on curriculum and instruction. so the data is going to be on all areas, but the discussion about our strategies and plan will be will be focused on the use of data. then we have our governance calendar where next month we'll look at attendance and then we look at literacy and math and college and career readiness and then go through that process again. so we're all familiar with our goals, but it's worth putting them up again on third grade literacy, college and career eighth grade math in

college and career readiness. and so. and so. what is our progress towards those goals? right? so we have interim goals that describe what we how we're making progress throughout the year. and then we have our annual targets right? and so when we initially adopted these goals without having put in place strategies to achieve them, we were hoping to be at 53% of students proficient in third grade. literacy are meeting standards in third grade literacy. we actually see we have 52% of students meeting standard, but we kept the same target for next year of 55. in literacy, you see a flat line of achievement. in math, you see a decline. and so that's, you know , definitely concerning. we see that we went down to 40% for the for all students. and we still want to show a significant

increase in math for next year. but we're going to need to and really hone in on our math practices and support. and while we know we're coming with recommendations for that in the future, we need to do some work now to be improving math achievement. and we don't have the full college and career readiness score yet. but so we did look at how students are doing in meeting uc csu requirements. that's one of the indicators for college and career readiness and so again, we see generally flat, you know, during covid went down and starting to climb back up. but that but not any significant change. and then again, just to focus on two of our interim guardrails, so we say we're going to serve the whole child in one way. we think that we demonstrate we're doing that is how we're supporting students to be in school. appreciate when we went through the training. this isn't a student outcome because this isn't a measure of what students know and are able to do

. it's a measure of really the adults in their lives ability to ensure that they're in school, either by making sure they get there or when they're in school with us, making sure they want to stay there. and we did make improvement in that area. but still, having 26% of our students chronically absent is way too high. and then the other way we describe, we have some measures to see if we're serving the whole child is are we creating a sense of belonging for our students? and you can see that's gone down for the last two years as well. and so that's an area where we're going to need to do work to think about how we can make students feel like they belong in our schools. and then i do want to note all of this data is disaggregated because while our goals are universal, are our approach to supporting student outcomes is targeted. and so we have our interim goals are targeted. so it's important to

disaggregate the data. and you can see throughout what's challenging and you know, i know a status quo that we know has to change is the continued and ongoing gap between some of our most vulnerable populations and how overall we're doing as a district. so when looking at all of this, we what like in summary, when we look at our progress towards our goals, we are off track, right? so we have not shown any significant progress relative to the targets. we have for what we hope to be at for this year. and again, there's the persistent achievement gap across race and ethnicity and program groups. when it recognized that what we're seeing is mirroring and it's consistent with national trends. you know, for example, across the country, we're seeing the greatest drop in eighth grade math and white and racial

and socioeconomic gaps. so we share that as part of our interpretation. and just to note that that these are this is happening beyond san francisco, but what we're going to share is ways in san francisco. we think we can reverse course and accelerate that progress. so i went through that relatively quickly because what we're excited to share again, we've we've seen a lot of this data before. what we're excited to share is the evidence and the plan. so this is our broad data. you've heard me talk a lot about the street data framework. this is our satellite data, how we're doing as a system. this doesn't drive what happens at our schools, though. it's really the day to day work that our happens in the classroom, happens with our principals and our site leaders that will impact ultimately the system level data and so we want to talk about how we're using this data and to help inform at the again, in the framework language like how we're help inform what we're

seeing at the map level or the street level to really make changes. so for that, i'm going to turn it over to our head of research planning and accountability. dr. ritu khanna and her team. thank you so much , dr. wayne. good evening. board of commissioners superintendent , student board members and members of the public. my name is ritu khanna and i'm joined by my colleagues, jess reyes and moonhawk kim, who will be sharing and we'll be sharing with you the evidence and plan, which is the fourth section of the progress monitor report. okay next slide, please. before we begin, i do want to revisit the definition of a guardrail. so guardrail was created again in bill's words, as non-negotiables. that must be honored and be in place while moving through the goals for student success. so for this section, we are going to focus

on the interim guardrail, 3.2, which hones in on the use of data regularly reviewing data to monitor progress for continuous improvement of instruction. an even though this goal specific guardrails specifically speaks to teachers use of data, it is important to note that data use should be prevalent at all levels of the district. as such, we will describe our systems approach to the use of data. next slide please. the theory of action in here outlines our commitment to building the systems, the structures, the routines for using data for improvement. our belief is that by analyzing and reflecting on both implementation and impact data at the classroom school district level, we can ascertain the extent to which our strategies are working and scale those that are promising in

accomplishing our goals. okay, next slide please. given this theory of action, we want to really begin by focusing on what is new and what is the new thing that we are doing in our approach to the use of data. okay there are some strategic pivots that we have done with in our regular routines in the use of data. so the number one i want to talk about is leveraging district targets and cascading them to school level targets to build a shared responsibility and accountability for our district goals. it's the first time that sites have been able to see how many students do we need to really reach this district target. okay an innovation that i also want to talk about is we have created these. what we are calling equity enhanced targets for schools and these equity

enhanced targets are taking into account the fact that some schools, you know, might be further behind on need and accelerated trajectory of academic recovery. therefore, their target has to be more than what the district standard target is. okay the second strategy, we again, we always do data conferences. we've been doing them for years. but thanks to this board and superintendent, we have now begun to focus on the goals and guardrails and get more specific into the high leverage actions to help achieve the targets as we cascade and as we ask schools specifically around a grade level, there is they are tapping into their resources, their programs and their strategies and honing in on some successes. they are seeing specifically at

that grade level. last thing i want to talk about is building capacity, both at the central and site level to review and reflect on both implement and impact measures related to the vision, values, goals and guardrails for each one of the interim goals and interim guardrails. we have logic models. we have theories of actions. so we are trying to at every progress monitoring report, we will present those theories of action and logic models and look at both. implement action and impact data for an implementation in data that i would like to talk about is the use of the core rubric for reviewing tier one instruction. so we have launched that and you know, we are doing it both at the central and site level to look at some of our sites. okay. so again, i do want to end by saying that what we

are going to continue to present this data even more as we do our progress monitoring reports. okay with that, i'm going to turn it over to moonhawk to take us into a deeper dive into the equity enhanced targets. thank you. thank you to. okay before we get into the actual targets, i want to set a little bit of context, right? so because it's important to call attention to the fact that our use of data work really builds on the existing and widespread culture and practice of data use as shown by this survey result. so this is coming out of the quality teacher education act sponsored survey from last year at the end of last year, each row indicates with whom and each color indicates how frequent. so at the top you see the top bar going across is teachers individually reviewing

assessment data and all the subsequent rows show with some partner, whether it's a grade level colleague or across grades or with a site leader, either a principal or assistant principal. so what this shows is that virtually all teachers reviewed assessment data, at least on their own and more importantly or simultaneously, a majority of teachers also reviewed assessment data with their colleagues or their site leaders. at least a few times a year. so this shows that there is an existing culture of data use among teachers. so this is the culture and practice that we're trying to build on. and as reto mentioned, we are focusing on moving from analysis to action. so in order to facilitate that in the upcoming december, administra version of this survey, we will be including a new question. the question starter is a little bit off on the slide, but the following is the novel question will be including it goes i review implementation and impact

data to progress monitor for continuous improvement of instruction and teachers will have an option options to choose the frequency with which they engage in that practice. so one of the innovative pieces to bolster and build on this existing use data, use culture and practice is the target support. we have endeavored to be very intentional and systematic in devising the site level targets and the basic approach consists of three components. i will go through these relatively quickly. the first step is to determine the baseline capacity we compare the historical performance, which is a three year average of schools performance to their latest performance. s obtained in school year 2023 and take the higher value between the two. and the idea is that if a school has a higher historical performance, that means their pre-pandemic performance was higher and we're hoping that they will be able to get back to that baseline capacity. or if a

school has higher value and the latest performance that indicates to us that they're emerging more strongly coming out of the pandemic. and we're hoping that they can continue to build on that progress. so the first step is to determine the baseline capacity after that. the second step is to compare that baseline capacity to the district's average in the example that we will walk through, it's 52% was the district wide proficiency rate in third grade literacy. so compare that number to each site's baseline capability, whether it is in terms of the historical performance or their latest performance. and then the last step, the key step is to then think about what sort of growth target we will assign to each site. if a school sites baseline capability is higher than the district average, then they are assigned what is what we are calling the standard fixed growth target of 3% above their baseline. if a school is

schools based on capability is far below the district's average, then when those sites receive what we are calling equity enhancing targets and we label them as such because in order for districts to pursue the division of equity and for school sites to be able to reach that level, undoubtedly they will have to grow at an accelerated rate. so walk through some more specific examples. first, starting with the district level. so this is what the report looks like for school sites for goal one. and this is zooming in on the district side and i'll go through this relatively quickly as well. it's a figure on the bottom that you're familiar with from prior progress report progress monitoring reports. the seven portion is the growth trajectory of the district with the goal of 70% target rate in 2027. dr. wayne is giving me a

time signal, so i'll go a little bit faster. the target here for the school district wide is 55. so going from 52% last year to 55. and as indicated, there are a number of students that need to be proficient in order to reach that target level. and more importantly, just three quick scenarios for schools. school a is a case in which the baseline is a three year average. it is higher than the district wide average, so it receives a standard target of 3. so the school year, 2024 target is 79. school b is the second scenario in which the baseline capability is last year's performance, 44, which is higher than the historical average. but because there have been growing at a rapid pace as you can see, they also received a standard target of 3% growing of growth to achieve 47% by the end of this year. school c is the example of equity enhancing

target of 5. there baseline capability is the three year historical average of 20. and because there are far below the district average, we are setting the target to be 25% for this school year. it's worth noting that setting these targets alone is not going to bring about the improvements, the targets provide, the focal points around which all the conversations is planning, directing and redirecting of the resources and the implementation of all these can consolidate and align. and it's been really heartening to see these conversations taking place among school leaders and central office leaders and really the system coming together for to move this work forward. and with that, i'll pass it to jessie reyes, executive director of rpa. thank you, moonhawk. so strategy number two is around the data conference. as reto mentioned earlier, that we've always had

data conferences, but the new aspect of them this year is in the leveraging of the equity enhanced targets for grade three. ela and for grade eight math, most of which will happen next month. so in partnership with lead, we will engage in a deep dive on third grade literacy and or eighth grade math by reviewing the school level targets, having school leaders share baseline observation data they've collected thus far, and then connecting to programs, resources and district supports and defining next steps for scaling promising strategies and actions. and new strategy. number three is about building capacity in the use of data. and while we've historically had data review sessions at the admin institute, this will be the first time that we will actually engage with interim goals to monitor progress during the year in the fall and in the spring semesters. more specifically, the rpa will provide training on using a new data review protocol tool and reports for site leaders and

coaches. in october and february . and this is chosen strategically when the new star interim assessment s are administered this way. schools can prepare in advance to engage their instructional leadership teams to progress, monitor for continuous improvement and document their analysis and action steps. schools that complete a survey and share their meeting artifacts will receive $500 each in november and march to foster and support their continued improvement efforts at the site level. and finally, the surveys and artifacts will be synthesized and will then serve as the district's own street data to inform refinements to district strategies and to target our school supports. and with that, i'll turn it back to reto. thank you. i wish we could bring all our principals to this session, but we consider ourselves really fortunate to have created the space for at least two of our

great leaders to share their data stories based on their amazing leadership, their beautiful teachers, families, community. and last and most importantly, fantastic students from roosevelt middle school principal emily latcham and sheridan elementary school principal deanna edwards. please join us. for me. okay, so good evening. board president boggess, commissioners and student reps. i really appreciate having the opportunity to just celebrate the extraordinary students,

staff and families from roosevelt. i'm emily leccia. like i said, the principal of roosevelt middle school. this is my third year at roosevelt and my families and staff hear me say it all the time, but i just feel really, really lucky to be at such a special school. i'm really excited to share the growth, success and systems that we are implementing as a school site. i really believe that our success comes from being a school with shared decision making. we make decisions through an anti-racist lens and we provide time for teacher collaboration. so what you see on the slides are our math and ela data. but we really look at the whole child of roosevelt. we believe that if a child is seen, heard and valued, they will take the academic risks that they need to be successful. our students have shown growth in both math and ela. i really want to celebrate our special education and our english

learners for the amount of growth they made this year, especially in math. i also want to highlight that our african-american and latinx students both saw growth in ela , and our latinx students had a 16% growth in math. so it's a huge thing to celebrate for our school site. thank you. so i just want to explain a little bit of what we're doing at our site that we think is really making that we know that it's making this happen. and so we're really fortunate to be be a pilot school for our initiate wonder. and i want to highlight the value of the common planning time that comes with the initiate wonder program. this provides our educators with a space where the department teachers can come together for intentional collaboration, and they do this multiple times a week and this is outside of their regular preparation. so this is a dedicated space for our teachers and educators to work together. we use it to have

adult deeper learning together. we use it for planning and cycles of inquiry in our math department. common planning time is used to regularly engage in cycles of inquiry. they're using pdsa cycles. they've been doing this for three years, so they're really focusing on academic language through math, math talks, conducting data cycles in classroom discussions and bringing back that data to reflect and evaluate what they need to do next. as educators in science, common planning time is used for the team to set goals as educators, and they do this throughout the year. they're also making time to fine tune their grading policies as a team. our sped department uses this time to create individual missions that they will use to guide them through the year with their work, with their students and their families. a lot of them are. i read through them just the other day to get them around my head and some of them were about student self-advocacy and building healthy partnerships with our students and families. we really use this

space as well to prioritize building intentional partnerships with our families. that is something when i came in that i wanted to make sure there was space to build not just relationships, but partnerships with our families. so we dedicate our monday common planning time, which is our lightning day. so it's all of our classes that time is protected for our teachers to use as to do family outreach. and we really make sure i make sure that they know this is not a time to call for this is what's not going right. it's a time to call to say this is what's going great. and i really just wanted to connect with you so that we're serving your child together. administration and student support. we definitely take the time to make the sunshine calls, to call home and just say, how are you? i was before i came on, i had a parent texting me like, hey, this is going on. i was like, okay, let me i'll be i'll call you back in 20 minutes. so we're really trying to make that time to for our families to know that we are here for them no matter what. we also really partner closely with

our beacon program, so they are doing a lot of work for our cultural identity nights. they help with our identity based clubs at the site so that all of our students feel they have a place to go, as well as a trusted adult. we're going to continue to include conversations on building relationships with our students and our families and supporting our students, feeling a sense of belonging at roosevelt. it's something that is a huge priority for us, and we plan to do this through a lot of data analysis, teacher collaboration and using the cpt. time for adult deeper learning on the importance of building those relationships and how we can build those relationships. so moving into this year, i really want to continue with that adult deeper learning in our common planning time. this year we're using we're starting the year with street data protocols, having our teachers really dive into the data, having them look at the data that really is speaking to them. and we're going to have them share that out with us as a whole staff. and i'm really excited to hear kind of what went what they went

through with that, what we guided them with was analyze those student strengths. where are the growth points? where do we as educators need to focus to increase our student agency and our outcomes? my goal this year is to have by the end of this year is that every teacher will have a focal student that they will then continue to follow through the years we want to make sure that we're really watching our students and seeing what's working for them. the vision at our school really include that all students are heard valued and trusted to thrive by continuing our growth on how we are utilizing the common planning time as a structure to support our students and a place to align around instructional coherence. building positive partnerships with our students and families. i really believe that our students will continue to succeed and excel at roosevelt community. at roosevelt is a really, really strong community . we have hard conversations as we talk through things. we put our students and families first and we're committed to every student in that building really

seeing their greatness. so thank you all. thank you. thank you so much. for hello, everyone. my name is dina edwards and i am the principal at sheridan elementary school. i have been this is my 15th year as principal of the school, so i've been here there for a long time . our we have a very dedicated and cohesive staff that considers the whole child and everything that we do. and i have an amazing team of paris teachers, social worker, nurse, secretary, a sped team, custodian, lunch lady, every person at that school is truly there for the child and when you walk through the door, you can feel that when you walk through.

so you can look at our data and we have made some really great increases and we're very proud of that. and i want to share just a few things that we have done to make that happen. so one thing we started about three years ago is we have parent teacher conferences at the beginning of the year and we have those conferences to make that a initial intentional social connection with parents so we can get to know the family. liz right from the beginning and we use that street data to inform and make school decisions right from the beginning. so we ask the same questions of every parent so that we can know what use that data to inform our decisions as we do, look at data regularly and over the last couple of years, we have three umbrellas of practice is that we have been

implement ing. the first one is demonstrations of learning and that is where the students we focus on student agency over their own learning. so students create their own learning goals, collect data on their learning goals, collect their best work that demonstrates, demonstrate state's mastery of those learning goals. and they present that to parents during student led conferences and after they do that and they have the two conferences at the end of the school year, we have portfolio nights where they have a culminating portfolio of their progress over time that they present to families. we also have been doing shift the balance, which is the science of reading, and we're reading a book for second kindergarten through second grade shift the balance where we learn how we can incorporate more phonics into our ela program. this year

they have a three through five book and we're going to use that to do the same thing. this has been very instrumental in our goal of third grade reading readiness at the end of third grade. all of our teachers have been trained in the science of reading and they are very excited by it. and the children are also excited by the learning that they've been doing at. and lastly, we have been doing culturally responsive pedagogy. so last year we read culturally responsive teaching in the brain as a school, as a book club, and focusing on being warm demanders . and we have now are moving that theory that we've been learning about into practice and what strategies are we going to be implementing that we learned and then expanding that to other texts that we've been reading.

so some of the things that we have been doing and why we're just the bright spot and i'm so excited to be here to share that we are the bright spot is that even though i've been the principal for 15 years, i have been at sheridan for 26 years, one of the things is that we have a very we and most of our teachers have been there. i mean, i have a few teachers that have been there longer than i have. and i do have a very small school turnover rate. and i think that is also one of the reasons why we have been doing as well as we have been doing people are here, they are dedicated. we know the families, children that i taught when i was a teacher have brought their children back to share in. so it is a truly a family feel and i'm just very blessed and i feel very lucky to be there. thank

you. thank you both. and thank you to the rpa team. and don't go anywhere because we know this is a long presentation, but we wanted to get everything out to then then have a discussion and want to emphasize this, this strategy is about from analysis to action. so you heard two sites and talk through their analysis and then the actions they're taking. and so the questions that you see up there are the ones that are asked at every data conference. and then when we think systemically, we get to hear what are some promising practices to build on. so it's unlikely we can ensure that every principal is at their school for 27 years. but but but in terms of our focus on foundational skills, that's what we're doing as a district with our district wide professional development and we see a school that went further, faster. what

the results have been, and that's something that's really encouraged to see or we have more schools now that have adopted the initiate wonder schedule, but we have a model of that of how that time can be used for collaboration and to really get to know our middle school students and be able to meet their needs. so with that, a lot of information. but thank you both for being here and thanks to the team. and we'll turn it over to the board for our discussion. so for commissioners, what we'll do is we'll get a stack and we'll give folks 2 to 3 minutes for comments and we'll ask folks to refrain from follow up questions immediately so we can get all voices in. we'll create space if our student delegates want to go first. if not, we can kind of see who else on the board is ready to ask questions. we'll actually start with our vice president and kind of go around from there. okay. and let students know, i think we're ready for you. yeah yeah. sorry

. hi. thank thank you to the rpa team. thank you to our site leaders. it's i've been smiling and taking lots of notes. my question actually is maybe for our site leaders, but but also to dr. wayne. it's we're we're learning we're sharing data. we're sharing how we might do do things similar like using the common plan and common planning time consistently and other sites. and i guess i'm wondering, is there a space or is there a mechanism for you all as site leaders at middle school or elementary school to have like a buddy system so that not not just so that there's accountability, but like, let me walk you through how we're doing this principle, the principle. well, let me talk to you about how i've supported my staff, how

we're focused on this. and i know that we have assistant superintendents that should be providing support as well. but it seems different and maybe would land in a in a would be more effective if it's coming from someone else that is doing the job. and may has been may have dealt with with similar challenges. or can i haven't i haven't had that challenge. but wow, this is what i might do. and i just wonder if there's a if there isn't already a buddy. i don't know what the word is, a buddy system or something like that. is that something i mean, obviously we don't want there to be extra work, but is that something that that the district can help facilitate, date and coordinate and then let you all engage? would that be helpful? and the answer might be no. and that's okay, too. and i would defer to your expertise on that . so during our principals meetings, we do have time where we sit and talk together and have that time to discuss any issues or what we're doing at

different school sites. so we already have that built into our principals meetings for our cohort in cohort five. but there's not like a it's not like that's a group. yes, there's not like a one on one like you and principal from school x no, but our cohort is pretty cohesive and together, so we share together for everything. so i don't feel like i need a 1 to 1 buddy because i have 20 buddies that i can talk. to thank you. and i know at middle school we did start doing it. we had a retreat this summer and really started talking about like, what does cpt look like? and really starting to have those conversations. and we do have a small cohort. so it is, i think, a really good space to be able to have those conversations and i forgot to do something. i forgot to shout out. mr. davis sagowr, who is no longer sitting there because he's one of our

student support people at roosevelt. so i had to make sure i gave him a shout out. because i stole the mic from my fellow commissioner. sorry. i just wanted to i was excited to thank our site leaders for being here and just having been a former site leader myself, i know it is extra work to do, you know, to make the presentation and actually present it. so thank you so much for being here tonight. and also i just would recommend and for our superintendent that i mean to hear these positive, you know, stories real stories, real things that are happening in our sites is so it's such a departure, you know, from what we normally hear as board members in our meetings, obviously there are a lot of things that have gone wrong and will continue to go wrong. that's just the nature of public schools. but that we also have so many wonderful things happening at our sites every single day, every single day. and you're witness to it and you know that it's not perfect. and you know that there are things

that you have to fix at all times as site leaders and work. but that we have wonderful things happening in our sites. and i'd love for us to spend more time concentrating on those and to your point, vice president wesson ward, the ability or having the space and time for site leaders to share with each other their successes and their struggles is really important work that needs to be done. it needs to be done on an ongoing basis, because if we don't do that, we operate in silos and we don't share best practices that can be replicated in other sites. and i do have a question, though, and our slides at least the handouts, not paginated, but the summer. 2023 survey, there was 66% of the teachers responded. i don't know if that's a higher or low percentage, but maybe you can that's okay. so it does seem like a high, high number. so a lot of motivated folks wanting

to get their. 1673 teachers. but at the same time, a third of our teachers did not respond. and i'm just wondering if we can make any assumptions about a, who those teachers are and maybe, b, what kind of responses they may have provided. the one area, the first bar graph is, you know, positive. obviously teachers are looking at their data and assessment data and are making decisions based on instruction to help their instruction. but then when you get down to having a principal or ap, it's quite a low percentage of teachers that are taking that opportunity or even given the opportunity to have that conversation. so i'm wondering if leadership can provide any answers around that . right. at this point. you know

, it's again, we want to keep moving from not just the assessment of, you know, looking at the assessment results or looking at data, whether it's street data, interim data, summative data. it's more how do we then move from an advising to acting and that's what we are really in the process of moving. i think it's the structures that they were talking about, how many structures do we really have in place to allow this use of data? you know, or this conversation around data? it could be just few times a year. that's the reason when you look at the results, you will see that when we asked about do you review it within your grade level, the percentage was more across grade level. it became a little lower and then with the principal, it became even lower. so my connection is more to the structures that we have in place

and the option entities and just to add that, i think we're i was going to say is we're in those structures trying to create opportunities for where you see the cross grade level discussions. and so last week we had our first district aligned pd session. so it's wednesdays. you know, kids are out early on wednesdays, right? so that's at every school. but then we to support our like an elementary level to support our literacy goal. we had provided materials for schools to do around focusing on the standards and the essential content. so our with miss rice, mitchell and dr. aguilera, we were at chavez observing their session, which was really great to see. and so they were actually analyzing the standards. but you had the first and second grade team together, the third and fourth grade team together. so they could start seeing like the standards below their grade level or where they are above their grade level.

right? so it is leveraging those structures to then create opportunities to talk not just within the grade level, but across what are we expecting from our students as. thank you very much to our school leaders for being here. i echo what commissioner sanchez said. it's so nice to hear the bright spots and, um. mr. kim thank you for pointing out that while we're identifying targets, that doesn't in and of itself lead to improved outcome. you know, and we've got some work to do around resource allocation in that area as well. so um, it was really exciting to hear the bright spots both from roosevelt and sheridan in an and my kids are now in high school, so you know, i've seen like common planning time when my now senior was at everett that was happening at everett too. um, and. when 75% of our students with disability 80s actually sit in gen ed class

but don't necessarily have time with their case manager that common planning time can be so key to making sure that the differentiation and the individualization is happening there. so i'm so excited to actually see that tie to an increase in data. so yay self advocacy for students with disabilities. oh my gosh. only about a third of kids who qualify for disability services in college actually go into the disability services office and ask for those accommodations. so so making sure that our kids understand how to advocate is so key. so thank you. and family outreach from a positive frame. um, there have been schools where me as a parent, i've seen that phone number been like, uh oh, what are they calling about now? so to hear it framed from a positive, i mean, when we talk about sense of belonging, that's step number one. so thank you so much. um and ms. edwards of course, i'm going to toot your horn a little bit because one of

the things that you didn't talk about was just what an anchor you are to the community. you know how connected you are to the lakeview, the omni. and i think you're not giving yourself anywhere near enough credit for being the glue that holds the community. fauci and, you know, and the resources you bring into the school like you were the definition of community schools before we had community schools. so thank you for all the work you've been doing for so long. i'm a little biased. um, you know, sheridan is. is my neighborhood school, and i love hearing you talk about structured literacy. i was actually in ms. mackovic's classroom today, one of our kindergarten teachers at. and i know that they they have structured literacy, you and your team, because of the work of the teachers to write grants , to put themselves through training over the summer. you know, this was self built. this isn't resource was brought to sheridan by the district. this was the need determined by the community went out and figured out how to do it. and the

kindergarten team in first grade, the first grade teacher said, hey, what did you do? you know what's going on here? and then they went and learned. and then the next grade level went and learned. and so that's that's been a real success story . so i think, you know, and, and we've got other schools that have worked with ms. hammonds to do culturally responsive teaching in the brain. and that warmed, you know, everything you talked about. so i think the reason i bring all this up and there is a point to my circle in we have so many bright spots. to commissioner sanchez's point, i think for me, my big question as a district is how do we systematize these all of this? how do we provide the consistency in support and how do we take these bright spots? one by one through and granted, we're talking about 120 plus schools, right? so it's no easy feat. but how are we taking this

and making sure and to your point as well, commissioner wiseman, more, you know, learning from each other. but i think us as a leadership team, how are we providing thing? what are we doing to systematize? and i think i will stop there. um, yeah, i want to follow up on what commissioner fisher just said because i think that was and i superintended and i actually had a good conversation about this already, but i think that's what i don't see as much in this report yet is the and i guess our because our job here is to kind of give feedback right on this on our progress toward this guardrail and the guardrail, says teacher. others will review implementation impact data to progress monitor for continuous improvement. right? so the focus is on teachers. it's not a central office. it's not other people, it's not even principals. it's teachers, which i think is the correct goal. and so then the question becomes, as a system, how are we ensuring that that's

occurring? and i think what we're seeing is some brilliant bright spots. and i think the that story that you just told is really relevant because i think that's been the history of sfusd , where individual schools with incredible leaders like ms. edwards do amazing work and then but the system in the past has actually sort of ignored them and they had to fly under the radar. i think that's changing, right? i think now clearly it's changing. here's evidence that it's changing, but but i don't see a strategy yet that we have to. then how do we spread those things? right. and i mean, just to be real, like i don't like when we look when i look at target at sorry strategy one here of setting targets. right? i mean, like it's just doing some math. it's saying, oh, we got to add three to our last year score. that's not a that's not a strategy to actually spread the work that's happening here. and so i think my question maybe and maybe rather than asking the district leaders, i want to ask the principals if you were designing a system to

kind of support bright spots and spread the kind of work that you all have been able to do in a district wide, what would it look like. and if it's okay if you don't have an answer to that, but i'm going to i want to open the space. if you have thoughts on that question, i think i look at the way the work we're doing at roosevelt and really starting with the teachers and having their voices be the center of what that would look like, because i agree. i think it's really smart. but making sure that teachers are are part of that and leading that conversation of what's going to work for them and work, because that's going to build and build and build. so for me, i think that's where it needs to start. i agree because as much as, you know, a lead is saying about my leadership, my leadership would not be what it is if i didn't have a group of wonderful people and staff. so i feel like that is where it should start with with them and

then move up from there. thank you. first, thank you to our site leaders for your tremendous work as a parent, alumni of roosevelt and former ssk member. i can attest that that has been absolutely the approach of leading with with our educators working in strong collaboration and planning. so i really do feel it's been years and years in the making and setting that really strong foundation. so thank you. two questions. one is around some of the conversations that have been raised already about the systematizing. how do we go from data analysis to action? i'm curious to the superintendent or to the rpa team around how how then will this new approach of move from

analysis, analysis to action, how does that incorporate things like that? we have to submit it to cde like and, and just curious to how that makes in thinking forward around then strategically around improvements that are going to be made overall for our student experience. i definitely want to highlight that one. one is data analysis to analysis to action is something that we discussed pretty extensive early in our data conference is and you know , we've we've got at least 52 data conferences that we've scheduled or have finished. so that's a lot of schools. and these conferences are one on one where we are discussing these strategies. so that's one we

learn from principals like them. and then, you know, we are able to even guide and suggest this to other principals as well. that's one strategy. i would say, too. we also have a lot of programs such as i would call out the pitch initiative, where we do have presentations by principals and them sharing the same kind of, you know, bright spots. so i don't want to even highlight that last but not the least, we do have tools that we are giving out along with the monetary, you know, payment to schools to say that we call it the idea protocol where with every intention we say describe the data data can be from the street map or assessment data. then we say the e stands for explain the data. but e stands

for how do you act on the data? so the idea protocol is something that we have been definitely implementing at the site level. okay. thank you. one, dr. wayne. i think had something to add. my other question then is looking at the sample targets for our third grade literacy. be curious to understand and you know, for this current year looking at what strategies are we seeing that haven't been working, what are some adjustments potentially that are being adapted? because we've seen particularly early, i won't go dive too deep, but for example, english learners, i feel like i've been pretty consistent from what we've seen have really taken a dive. and so i'm just curious around and hearing what strategies aren't working. and some adjustments for this year. someone from

staff want to respond to thinking. let's hear another one and we'll get back. we'll pass the mic over to the student delegate and then. this is awkward. i can i. oh, okay. i wanted to specifically be appreciate to you your impact on what you've talked about is happening at your school site, not just because me and my peers middle school experience science wasn't always fantastic stick and it just makes me really emotional in a great way to hear that my peers struggles, my educators struggles and all of that feedback for so many years has culminated into these bright spots and also to hear about that, what sounds like a sense of belonging that you're

creating for your students. so i'm also wondering for these bright spots, do we also have of numbers for sense of belonging? because an and could we view those as well just because i think that's a data point that we really need to put a lot more focus on, especially in presentations like these, because at the end of the day, a lot of this is culminating to or is the result of a higher sense of belonging. and i'm wondering where that data is available. in the slides, we did point out sense of belonging, but the data is available all at the site level. so, you know, the sense of belonging rates are given for the last five years and then also i heard commissioner's comments on systems rising. and i think that there are a lot of elements that can be systematized. but i think what i'm hearing and also what i've noticed in my own educational

experience is that when teachers are given the infrastructure required to have the space and the time to get feedback from their individual students and from students specifically at their school site, and survey those students for what they specifically need. that is, when they're able to make a lot of change, specifically within grade level amongst all educator peers. and i think that there should be a focus on that as well, because if we're going to talk about equity, we have to talk about each individual school site and each individual classroom. thank you. also want to thank all of you for all of the initiatives that have contributed to making this student a more belong at school, like the beacon center and having cultural clubs. we actually have that at washington high school and i've seen the impact that has had on like student government and making like cultural fairs and all of these fun activities that weren't existing at our school

prior to that. and i see that continuing to multiple grade levels, like in middle school and elementary schools. and then also like the book club system, you know, picking a book and sharing with the staff and really getting that's also something that i've seen. it's really effective. and then we're such a diverse school district with like a plethora of identities and i think it's so important that you guys have communicate with all these families because without this communication, people might feel kind of locked out and we don't have that support. and that really reflects with the chronic absentee rates and all the data that has improved. so i just want to congratulate you guys. did you want to respond? i'll pass the mic over. okay. yeah. thank you. and i appreciate the question because i realized like so focused on like what we are doing, had to think for a moment, you know, are we what are we not doing? and to some

extent it's by what we are doing. it's saying what we are going to strategically abandon. so i'll give three, three examples is, you know, so one is just even around the use of assessment. right. we had a lot of conversation around this last year. and so saying we are going to have new, new interim assessments that are are more standards aligned and aligned to giving us an indication of student progress at at grade level standards and secondly, even with our approach to curriculum and again, like appreciating schools went on their own to focus on foundational skills, because district wide we, we had inconsistent approaches to that. and, and had an orientation of developing our own curriculum which has its you know, can have its benefits. but we didn't see the results we needed to see. so we're doing the pilot in literacy to have literacy, and

we just actually launched our math audit and we'll be looking at our math curriculum as well. and then, you know, and then i think what again, so this kind of focusing on what what we have done is in terms of when we're talking about the systemic approaches with so many schools , schools have their own unique needs. but we need to be clear on like, what do we want to see consistent, district wide. and so basically saying you can't have the only time where we say that is like one pd at the beginning of the year. that's why we've had these monthly interactions that we're starting with with school sites. so i guess it's subtraction by addition. so what do you call my answer? i don't know. um, i, i have a couple questions. one is i'm just curious about how cohort data is informing how we track this. so it's not just, you know, an ever turning new set of third graders that we're looking at or eighth graders. so how is the lead up as we look at these the goals and the

guardrails? how are we mapping and seeing progress is within cohorts or not seeing progress? how does that factor in the work that rpa is doing and the data dives that that you all are doing? so when we do this, the data dive at the central level. they are looking at their cohort data and they do look at it with both lenses from the performance lens as well as from the growth lens. so i think there was a question asked in the board reports where it was matched data. so we did go back and look at matched data and now we'll incorporate it in all the coming reports. but even looking at matched data, we didn't see any difference in the results that we looked at. so whether it was unmatched or matched data, the cohort gave the same results. i

think part of why i'm asking is so when site leaders are monitoring progress, are they are you also seeing how how growth and performance within cohort groups are moving? you know, we have these set targets, but it's not like we just care about if third graders are reading, we care about if all of our kids are reading and so are you. also having access and reviewing data around progress and opportunity within the cohorts as well as these? okay. all right. and then i was just curious. i and this is building on questions that have come before how much of this great work that you're doing the sunshine calls, the shared collaborative time and the many other portfolios eolianite all these things. how much of this is reflective of your individual

leadership or the group of teachers that you're working with versus district supported or suggested or normalized activities. so the demonstrations of learning was a district initiative that my teachers wanted to do. so that came directly from the district. they're not doing it this year, but we're continuing it because it was so successful. we decided not only at first it was for third, fourth and fifth grade, but they were so, so excited by it. we brought it down to k-2. so now our whole school is doing it at different levels, you know, kindergarten and fifth grade are doing it very differently, but we're doing it school wide. but it was initially a district initiative of and i think at roosevelt, i came in with an eight wonder already set. so i came into a

staff already bought in ready to go. so i was very lucky to be able to come in and just say, okay, we're here. how do we get here? and i think with the sunshine calls, i was the principal. after distance learning. so when i came in, i said the first month we are focusing on building relationships and making sure our kids feel okay at school. and that's a big priority for me, especially excuse me, with middle school. they're hard years. so what are we doing to make sure that our kids feel good and that our families feel good? and so that's a big priority in the way i lead. so i'm hearing it was very much because of the i mean, in many ways, the individual leadership. and so looking back at the presentation, one of the things and going back to the questions is that support scale and action. and so how are not just the learnings from the data dives, but the kinds of behaviors that are demonstrating . improvements in attendance,

improvements at schools with sense of belonging. i'm curious about how those are being identified, mapped and shared, and also how it expands into k through 12 coherency and sharing through our, you know, each the entire cohort as they move through our system. yeah. i mean because i actually heard it mixed. i didn't hear the i heard what i heard is and ritsu spoke to this that there's structures that the district has helped put in place to support the kind of professional learning and conversations. what we that we want to have and professional development opportunities. what i heard though, is how that how that time is used. you know, there's often things, but maybe it's not consistent. that's where we can look at consistent you know, look at what we want to do district wide that's consistent, recognizing if we try to manage every one of those minutes, you know, that's not going to be effective because we don't know what's happening at

each schools. so like what's the balance between what are some, you know, as you're saying, like , what do we want to scale? what are some actions we say, like, you know, these are promising practices, try them versus like, this is what we expect everybody to do. so i wasn't suggesting that it should all be i don't i don't want it to be all top down, but i'm more just kind of to the original question of vice president wiseman ward is what are the opportunity is to share within cohort schools, but also as a as a district. i mean, it doesn't just relate to what is happening in one middle school. i mean, it can grow from there. thank you. so what we're going to do, i'm going to offer up my question and then i think we maybe will transition if there aren't additional questions from commissioners or we can dive deeper if that is, what is the desire. i think the thing that i'm curious about is what kind of analysis have we done on kind

of where we're at in relationship to the projected targets versus the actuals? and if there was any analysis or anything learned from that? i think what i'm slightly concerned about, i think everything within the approach feels right, i guess. how are we gauging wing sites, individual capacity to meet the goals that they have, have given the constraints they have around staffing or facilities or other things of that nature, and kind of what do those conversations look like when you are meeting with the site, having the conversation about data and they don't necessarily feel confident that they can fully reach those goals? and how are we addressing that to essentially support them to be successful versus failing to reach the goals. i mean, i think this is you're seeing our theory of action kind of at the beginning of the of the process. so you know, i know in the

cohorts meaning like, you know, like they said, they have their cohort meetings and then they work with their executive director. so we now have these targets and these equity enhanced targets and so then i think the question you're asking and is okay during the year is you know, implementing these new interim assessments and seeing our progress like what opportunities are there for the schools to you know, change their action or reflect on their progress and get feedback on it and shift. and i think it's going to be through those cohort meetings and through the interactions with, you know, with the lead team as they're working with the school leaders on our progress towards our goals. so then i guess for clarity in those types of situations is your expectation that the site will receive all the additional supports and resources they need so that they're confident that they can reach the goal or the goal is going to be adjusted to the constraints of the site and be

balanced proportionately to what they're capable to do. because i guess what i'm concerned about is i feel that for a long time in the district, there has been a concern practice of setting goals. and as conditions change and people don't have access to the resources to be successful, the goals don't change. people don't reach the goals and then people don't talk about them because there's all these concerning factors. and i guess just making sure that as we go through this process and we're having these conversations, we have confidence that we will hit the goals and confidence that we're able to identify my issues before we reach the final goal completion date so that we can support folks to be successful. and i guess i'm just curious how we're thinking about that approach and maybe that's a conversation for another time that we can come back to. but i feel like for me, i just want to make sure that we aren't creating false expectations that we aren't fully supporting and resourcing at the school site level, because i feel like we've had some issues with that in the past and our students and families and staff have suffered from burnout and overcommitment.

and i just really want to make sure we don't fall down those those habits again. yeah, i appreciate that. and as we're still relatively new to this process, we i think where i feel more more confident until we see the results. but i feel like we set some interim goals that we're working really hard to meet. and those are, you know, we're going to see progress of those in a few months. where i get concerned and is if i'll even go back to it. like when you look at our annual targets, right this is where this is where, you know, if you go back to you know, like actually this one, right. you know, we see, you know, we have for next year 10% growth to be on track in math. that's going to be really difficult to achieve. and so i want to like so i appreciate i think what you're saying here is i think this is the spirit of the process. there's space is we're doing the interim interim

goals and aligning our resources to support them. if we're seeing there's room to say if we're off target, like, okay, so what are we going to do about that? including looking at the goal for the, you know, our trajectory and, you know, how will we adjust our trajectory if necessary? but i hear the first question we should really be answering is, how are we making sure we've done everything possible with our you know, the resources we have to ensure we're on target. but so, again, in summary, interim goals feel more confident and we'll see where they go. so when we get to our annual progress s, i think we're going to we'll see the conversation we have next year. okay. we'll go to additional round of comments. we'll start with our student delegates and then we'll give folks another round and see where we land on the conversation before we start our next presentation. i was just interested in how we look at progress outside of one specific school site. for example, a student who goes to a

school or a set of schools that has a certain like a sense of belonging percentage above or below a certain rate, and how that prepares them. for example , if they went to an elementary school with those statistics and then how that prepares them for eighth grade math and then how that further how their middle school site and even their elementary school site prepares them for college readiness and whether those school sites have access to that data or whether that data that consistently follows children from specific school sites or specific set of school sites, whether that data exists following them. thank you for the question. it does. we they can see the trajectory of the of progress through the school years. the highest correlate nation that we have seen with academic data is actually around attendance is where we've seen that for

students who have an attendance of 90% or more, you can see within that group the proficiency rates are much higher than 50 to they're like almost at 70% at and for the group, which has 80% or less attendance at that group, the proficiency rates are as low as 17. so you know, you can see the difference right? so the highest correlate we have seen is around attendance with regards to all the social emotional measures, especially since the pandemic, there are schools that are actually even monitor it throughout the year. so, you know, we have they have the ability within our system to create some smaller social, emotional measures or questions and give like a quick survey and analyze the results even mid-year, not waiting till the

end of year to know how the progress goes. thank you. thank you, commissioner alexander um, thank you. can we go to the slide with the school? a, b and c on it? um, because i wanted to come back. actually, to your point around resource allocation , um, because my concern and as i said earlier, i don't think, i really don't think strategy one is a strategy of just publishing targets. but but to the extent that this is happening, um, my concern know, the next. yeah the . a lot of information you yeah this one and see one more there. thank you. so my concern with this is that i mean it makes

sense right? i mean, in terms of targets, i think it makes perfect sense. but to me the concern is if this is not matched to resource allocations , this is telling school c, which is already the one that's struggling the most, or let's put it differently, i don't like the language baseline capability because it makes it sound like the schools or the students aren't capable. i think they're all very capable, but the students may have higher needs, more challenges. so now we're saying to school c, you have to make more growth. but if it's not tied to more resources or in a strategy like that, all that's doing, that's a recipe for burnout for the educators and cynicism. so that's my concern, is if we're going to set targets for schools in particular, i think we need to be i mean, i guess my let me try to frame it as a question since we're just speaking of asking questions like what's our what? how is this linked to resource allocation, i guess is my question. i'm assuming there's some thinking around that, but i think we need to talk about it together. okay. i'm going to

start first by i do take offense. this is not this is baseline capability of the school. it has nothing to do with students. so i want to make sure i make that clear in terms of baseline capability, it was before the pandemic that was what the school had produced as an average. and so that's what we want to say, that, yes, the school is capable of that. that's the reason we call it baseline capability. but i think it's an excellent question that both you and president bogus has put into our minds. we are going to be doing one on one data conference sciences with each and every equity enhanced target school and we will make sure to ask them that that question, that you just posed, what we are asking them right now is what programs aims resources at your site? can you use to reach these targets? but we will ask them

about how realistic are these targets or how realistic is it that, you know, these resources match the targets. well and then just see because these these are real schools. right. and so we have our you know, we do have different allocations, though, for schools with different needs . but i'm not sure how aligned that is to the if we've actually aligned that to the target. so i can likely i don't know what schools school see, but i can likely say, you know, school c is getting some additional resources is but this is part of that whole shift of having of resource alignment towards our goals. yeah we'll go to commissioner lamb next. so i just wanted to follow up, you know, for my question is then i think we've been talking around it is to be able to understand then what are the strategies is that are delivering that growth

or meeting the goal. because i think we've had some resources, allocations to sites either be through mts or local control funding formula and i think it's really about the strategic e.g. that leads at the board level and the governance team level. we are not going to continue to monitor. this is part of the crux of the monitoring piece is what are the strategies that are working, turning that to continue action and then the scaling and the supports. so i just wanted to tie that back. did you want to respond or no? okay um, again, i don't know the page number, but this is guardrail 3.2. i don't know if you can bring it up on. so this is what the flow chart of

inputs, activities, outputs and outcomes and then impact. and i just want to mention that historically, only teachers and others in this district and families and even site leaders have been really suspect about using spac as state mandated cumulative testing as our metric for how we do it is the metric. but there and it's not going to change anytime soon. but how when we get to this part where it says thereby teachers across sites will increasingly review implementation and impact data to plan and provide targeted instruction when we have such a huge i mean, i'm not projecting just because i'm not really happy with spec, but i've seen this in the conversations i've had for decades about this with other educators in the field, particularly here in san francisco, that there's such resistance voice and rightfully so, i think many times to utilize this type of data to set goals and we had this discussion

when we were making our goals too, but this is where we landed. how do we get to the point where our our everyday instructor actually does this? like, is that a realistic is that something that we can actualize when we have so many folks that are just really not happy with the actual testing model that we utilize? um because it is problematic and, and i just wondering because that's kind of where we end up before we get to the impact. so that's the outcomes. yeah. and maybe i think appreciate you bringing us to this slide too, because this is when you ask like, what's the strategy or like this is the theory of action behind it. and then i'll get to your question. but it's just making me reflect like, okay, we're working on this progress monitoring. and right now for every goal and guardrail , asking to see what's our theory of action behind it and then you're illuminating some things that might be helpful in future progress. monitor about delineating the strategies and resources related to that theory

of action. so with that being said, though, to your question, i was going to say is yeah, i mean, again, we've had these conversations and that's why i've talked about the street data framework. so i'm actually going to turn it back over to our site leaders to say, you know, the theory of action is not you see the data and now you will act. it's there's the, the then you will and the thereby. so i mean, you spoke to it some, but if you want to speak to more . so how do you bridge that gap because you're right our teachers are not excited like okay, i got the scores now i'm going to plan my seventh grade math. but there is a link between the satellite data and the street data. so what we're doing and this is something we are starting this year is we put together so me and i have a part time erf put together a lot of the data. so we put a spec. we also put sense of belonging, we put culture and climate data we did last year, we put in a lot and we said choose 2 or 3 that you want to look at that are interesting to you because we felt that that would be a way for our educators to really engage more deeply in the data.

this is the first time we're doing it, so we're going to see how it turns out when we have our staff meeting. but it's something we're going to continue to do because i think i agree that we can't just have that one piece. it's like we've got to have so many different and so this year we're going to really try and get more of the empathy interviews, get more street data at our site to hear directly from our students, because i was really hearing the student representatives talking about that of like, where can we get that authentic voice of what that experience is both academically and socially, emotionally. and we also have empathy, interviews and other data besides the fact we do look at the back, but then we look at other data, street data, empathy interviews with with, with students. we are also looking forward to the new star assessment because we can all do it at the same time. and then look at the data at the same time as a group. whereas before, because we had to get

substitutes and it, you know, it was such a wide range of dates in between each time the teachers or the students took the test that it was very difficult to do something school wide. so this data allows us to look at it as a school, look where where the children are, and we can talk about next steps together. and so we're looking forward to doing that and hoping that we'll get some good outcomes from that. um i was just going to it's such a it's so great having site leaders here, so thank you. and before we close, i just wanted to ask if there's anything you want to share with us because we're going through this process. we've established the goals and guardrails. we're working with the super intendent and we're going to be going through resource allocation in in a very

constrained environment. and i would love to hear if there's anything that you want to make sure that we know now, especially around systems of support and scale and bringing the things that, you know, are working to action, but also things that may be, you know, a wealth, some constructive thoughts about things that we could do better. i just i'd love to hear your your perspective. so one thing i will say is i've been the principal for 15 years and we've had, you know, ups and downs throughout the 15 years. but as soon as we start to do better, they say, oh, you don't need these supports and start to take them away and then they're like, oh, you're not doing well. you need some supports, here are some supports, or you're doing better. we need to take the supports away. so more consistency in keeping those supports because i feel like

those supports that we have are just what we need in order to do what we need to do in schools or is not something that you can take away. it is just what we need. so more consistency in keeping those supports would be really good. can you and can you identify some specific examples of supports? so so we had an active that was really good at um, looking and seeing where children that needed that extra support and that was taken away from us because we're no longer a tier that needed that received those supports and that was a devastating blow to us and took us a while to realize what we could do without without that support. so that's just one specific. over the years, i've, i've lost erfs and social workers and they came back and back and forth. i mean, i could talk a whole lot, but that's

lately that is the one specific thing. i think for me. i started working in middle schools in san francisco. i have never left middle schools in san francisco. i love this age group and having the dedicated common planning time that initiate wonder provides takes so much stress off of my teachers because before i remember common planning time was for 40 minutes before school when you were already stressed out and trying to get ready. and so now it is this protected time outside of preparation period. so teachers are like, okay, this is our time to actually do some deeper work . and that's been great for me to be able to give them things to be thinking about and talking about. i just it's just a really it's a great thing for teachers that inevitably is going to it helps our students. so thank you . with the commentary on sbac

testing, i want to say from the student perspective, there's a lack of understanding for what our sbac tests, how they affect our school site. and that affects shouldn't necessarily be placed on students. that pressure of being told like, oh, you guys didn't do good this year and we lost money, but just knowing because i know that we get told a mix of things a lot of the time because some of our educators aren't given the opportunity to be fully be informed on how this sbac scores are going to affect our school site. so then occasionally we're told they don't matter. and then i know that there's probably some skewing of data because i've watched kids genuinely leave the essay section blank because they're not told that it means anything, or that the district is actually looking at each individual school site and each individual grade level. how

that's playing out. and i think that having more resources for students, families and on the ground educators to understand what those tests mean and also what ongoing discussions are about the continued use of them and also whether they're they're ethical. et cetera would be incredibly helpful. okay. and with that, we will transition on to the second part of our presentation and i'll hand it back over to the superint. we have a part two back. i don't i'll, i'll be, i'll be brief. i'll be brief. and then. okay. thank you. thank you so much. yeah, yeah. let's give. yeah, let's give. i i was so focused

on this i forgot. yeah. we have a part two, so the. yeah. and i really appreciate the presentation and the conversation. and so i think at our, our at our, our governance evaluation when we were looking at what is the criteria to be a board of education and governance team engaged in student outcomes focused governance and one of them was to have interim smart interim goals and guardrails that represent what we think will is progress towards meeting those goals and guardrails and that are in the smart goal format and so we noticed when reviewing them that not all of them were in the smart goal form at and some we had shared that was we were trying to figure out the best way to explore what this guardrail might look like in

terms of a measure that we would monitor and so since then, we've presenting here our revised and mainly revised interim interim guardrails and so this is not for the board to approve, but it's for the board an opportunity to give feedback. and ultimately, if these interim guardrails don't seem to capture what we think the guardrails and our values are, there is an opportunity for the board to revisit, like, why are we expressing the guardrail in the appropriate way? or what does that look like? so with that, what you see in the presentation is in red is what has been changed since the last time you you saw this. and so actually going to ask dr. khanna to talk about the early warnings indicator, that's the only interim goal that we changed. and can you speak to that one, please, while i get to it? yeah, sure. what we want. sorry, we're using the same deck for this one. or this one. she's got the right deck. yeah that deck. yeah

. so with regards to the early warning indicators, what we wanted to do was see success at the end of ninth grade. and that's the reason we've changed the interim goals. so that we can see that. what are some of the strategies that are employed at that transition grade of ninth grade and which will help some of the students who are entering with early warning indicators, early warning indicators are indicators that they are at risk of graduating. okay. so what are some of the interventions or strategies that we do in ninth grade to help turn that around? okay. so that's the reason it was reframed to make it a ninth grade initiative. thank you so then if you go to the guardrail

, so for the first one, this is one where they weren't really smart goals. so we were trying to think, well, what does it look like to be to engage our families and include our families? so i appreciate the rpa team looking at research about community engagement. it has identified an implementation rubric. and so we made a lot of decisions in the past where we didn't have any guidance of what that looked like. so we're saying for this year, like the way we previously had identified the guardrail, but it wasn't really a smart goal, was to identify five major decisions. so we've identified those. so saying for those we should be able to show at the innovative level how we're including our educational partners and how we're creating opportunities for two way engagement and then we also have developed. and so we want it to be explicit that for some we still don't have baseline data, but be very clear, like we will be collecting data at particular times. so here we have the. baseline data will be collecting

from those who participate in the decision making, their their percent satisfied. and then aj crabill gave some helpful feedback. he said, don't you know, don't put, don't put if you don't have the data, don't put a target percentage until you really see what the baseline baseline is. so that's why the numbers change to an x. if we go to the next one, we just part of being a smart goal is saying what the measurement will be. so we made that made that clear. if you go to the next one and the other thing is we've really tried to have interim guardrails, like not create whole new buckets of work for this. so you've heard us talk about the core rubric and the survey. so just using those and again, recognize just wanted to be explicit like when you should expect to see baseline data and then we'll be clear on what the change will be. if you go to the next one. again, we just have

some updated data around our staffing. so we put put that in. 4.2 was one of those ones that wasn't really a smart goal. and so since we're talking about resource allocation and, you know, we're looking at we went through a process to realize some savings and then continuing that process for this year. and then if you go to the last one, really thought about like in working, what does it mean to work in a strategic partnership and while that's a lot of people are collaborating with our partners thought maybe how i'm spending my time as a leader of the organization might be helpful indication of like are we working with our partners? so actually did an analysis of my calendar of how much time on spending with those who are outside the district. so that's refers to like our city partners foundation men's unit, tri-cities, and then looking to see that increase. this when i look at my calendar for the next year and cultivating those

partnerships. so those are the changes and yeah, so there are various questions asked about them. and so this is it's not this is more like if there's feedback or questions or guidance about like why, why this measure? and if you have any other suggestions, i guess we're still at a point where we can we can adjust some of these, but at least when we do our next evaluation, they are all in smart goal format and can be measured accordingly. okay. thank you for the brief presentation. now we'll see if there's questions or comments from commissioners. i will start us off and then we'll kind of see where we go and also if there's any broad feedback on kind of how everything is sitting with folks to give the superintendent his team as well . definitely appreciate the updates that were made and making sure everything is in kind of the format that we're looking for. definitely appreciate the intention and the

thought that's kind of gone into this through the whole planning process. i do still feel like for some of the interim goals and guardrails, primarily the guardrails that they don't necessarily match up with what i think i had in mind initially when we were creating the guardrails, i'm not necessarily sure what would be better measures based off the data that we have, but i think i am really interested in whether or not these things are going to tell us after we get all the data from them, the key things that we need to know to measure whether or not we're on track to kind of be successful, even though they're all really important things. i'm not sure if they're the things that i would view as the most foundational to kind of our success. and so i think as we go through this process, we get this data in and we start the process of analyzing it. i'll be really interested to see how we're able to show that these are the correct interims or if we're needing to adjust how we kind of are able to do that and ensure that we're being the most impactful that we can be. and so

those are my thoughts in general. no need for a response unless there is one that you're hankering to do an and then we'll go with our student delegates and then we'll go around and see what other commissioners want to add. i'd like to appreciate for on slide seven, interim goals for goal three, interim goal number 3.1 was changed from decreasing to increasing. and i think that that intentional choice of language is very powerful. and i think it shows us that we are climbing towards something as opposed to trying to detract, even though it would be a positive detraction, it's still that choice of language definitely sets a more positive tone. and then also, i'd like to ask a question about that. i think it's guardrail two and

specifically 2.3. i don't necessarily understand that guardrail. it says reduce disproportionality of african-american and black students referred to special education in in other health impairment and emotional disturbance categories. so does that mean specifically like students being mis referred to those categories as in like wrongly referred or is it okay? yes. no. so and we chose this measure because, again, we tried to in areas where we're doing work, like how do we strengthen the work and monitor progress. so wonder what's called coordinated, comprehensive, coordinated early intervention services. you get this designation when you disproportionately refer students to special education. so there are going to be a typical number of students who are referred. and so this is an area where we have disproportionately referred students and we have of a what

we call a case plan to help address this. so then this is monitoring the progress of that . one just announced before we continue with commissioners comments and student delegates, just want to remind folks that we are going to have public comment on all items after we finish this part of the discussion. even if you haven't submitted a card, please do just want to kind of let folks know before we get to public comment . sorry. thank you. okay. i want to acknowledge the importance of guardrail number one, effective decision making. i've seen the impact it's had on like pac councils and developing new committees. and that's just so important because we're expanding the voices that are involved in the decision making and advisory processes and just having all of these voices that are usually not included in this represented is so important. and i just want to say thank you. okay. yeah, i think just

acknowledging that some of the guardrails in particular are hard to measure as i think president boggess said. but i did have some questions about number one, um, well, i guess my question is for one guardrail, 1.3 when it says percentage of participants satisfied with major decision making processes will increase from the baseline , does participants there mean the people that the general populace, as it says in the rubric, kind of the people generally impacted? or does it mean the members of the working committees as the working committees? okay. so then i guess my concern with number one and the way they're all framed is that it is that there is this real focus on the committees. and i think at least my understanding of the intention of guardrail one was that it was well, what it says is people who are going to be impacted by the decisions. so i think the danger of using only measures that that

reflect the committees, i think that makes sense to have. i'm not saying we shouldn't have the committees, but i think to me the measure is did the people who were impacted by the decisions feel like they had an opportunity to be consulted. so just comment there. i think we have some we have a survey design for all three committees on that question. so the degree of satisfaction, even from the general populace will become a part of their survey of how satisfied were they with the information that they gave for the for the working committee? we do have this is where we are measuring this goal. but it's not that for the general population to when we ask them for their input, wait, we're measuring the survey that's being designed is for the committee? yes so for the working committee for the working committee. so it's not for the general populace, but for the general population. do

we have a survey that we are going to be asking but we haven't measured. but it's not it's not just not one of the measures. no, it's not. yeah okay. well, this one we're not doing till december, so. yeah, well, that's just my feedback. yeah i hear that point. okay. thank you. yeah um. oh, so i had a general question. thank you for the updates on the guardrails and i was one of the people that had a lot of questions that were referred to other monitoring sessions. and so my question is how, how can we the board and how can the public expect to stay up to date in between calendared board meetings so that we have awareness s or confidence that things are working or just awareness? if there's things that are falling behind. so what are the mechanisms that we can expect to be updated and have progress reports because otherwise it's there's big gaps in time. yeah, big. so let me

i'll take that as a question to provide a response to in future monitoring sessions because i hear what you're saying. you're right. we're going to like next month, we're going to attendance and we're not going to hear about attendance for a while. but we just heard how critical attendance is to our student outcomes. so how might we communicate our progress around attendance until before waiting ? until then? i think the next one around that is may. so so yeah, but i don't have a system . i don't think we have a system yet. i mean, do you have any suggestions of how we can do all the some sort of dashboard that's regularly internally updated that could then have some public facing element that's even just posted to our the web pages that are related to our goals and guardrails so that it's a more dynamic updating process and frequency could be quarterly. but i have i

have hankered for some sort of dashboard where i can see, know, click through and you can imagine what i might hanker for. but yeah, so that would be i think that would be helpful. okay. and also just for the general public that wants to see how progress is going or if there's associated activities that they can engage with to get information. and i think i appreciate that and need to think that's what i'm saying. like need to think how to do it. so if dr. khanna doesn't mind my appreciating her for being a data nerd, she was so excited this afternoon to share, like the new assessments, you actually can have a dashboard aligned to our vision, aligned to our goals in the interim guardrails. but then thinking how we present that publicly and all that, we got to work through. and then for the guardrails, there's less need to do some thinking, thinking through. but for some we could do more quickly, i think, because they're already they're being built into the systems we have. so that was she was very excited to see that this was a

summer squishier summer. her excitement was visible as our data leader. i do want to also say something about the attendance is the only one that's a leading indicator because it is actually changing all the time. some of these are lagging indicators in terms of we only actually measure the interim twice a year. so we should be mindful. i mean, i think some explanation, though, where since we have anyway just some some way because otherwise it feels like it can be forgotten and as the principal mentioned before, when you have assessments and then time goes by and you so much time goes by that it's not really it doesn't feel relevant anymore or it doesn't feel up to date. so that was the one thing. and so i am continuing both my written and now verbal request for such information. iron so guardrail five. i did want to better understand with what what it what the measurement of increase the time the superintendent

engages with strategic partners . from 6% to 10% as measured by what what does that what do you anticipate that that will tell you about that collaboration and how do you define the strategic partners? i'm just trying to understand how that is a helpful measure for around our partnerships. the way we measured this was we actually took random ten dates from his calendar. and so what percent of it was distributed for external partnerships versus internal work? so that's how we computed the baseline and we'll do the same for the next. the idea was more around both advocate advocacy and bringing in partners. so it was both around that kind of a relationship that would help the guardrail. so

both advocacy of the district and bringing in partners. okay we're going to follow. i mean, i'm still quantity over over purpose, i guess, is what i'm trying to understand how that helps. but i can i've been hogging so i can move on. i'm just going to flag that. actually, i, i that's helpful. just the little contrast you made right there too. and so to. yeah so you know what i think dr. connor was saying right at the end is what some of the purposes of the advocacy and the engagement. so let me think a little bit more how that would be communicated through this. so i have a i'm looking at interim guardrails for guardrail three, but it's similar to vein theme of question in terms of the qualitative versus quantitative. and i noticed that, for example,

3.1 and 3.3 seem to have both quantitative and qualitative. 3.1 is, you know, implement did a high quality tier 3.3 reported receiving meaningful feedback and 3.2. and i appreciate that. the slides that we just looked at in the other presentation where that does, i guess i'll just say 3.2. i don't see that same kind quantitative threshold there. and to be clear, i'm not assuming that teachers are going to review the data just to check the box. but if we are including some type of qualitative statement for the others, are we intentionally not including it here? is it because we assume they're going to reference the sequel question, which says, i reviewed assessment data to continually improve instruction , which means that there's meaningful thought going to the review. but i don't know whether it needs to be changed or whether there's maybe just a link to the survey so that the question is there just something that there's a little bit more more fullness in understanding

exactly why we should care about whether their reviewing the data and to what end. thank you so much for mentioning that. i think in our in the building capacity slide we did mention that we are going to collect street data through artifacts of how schools are using data to inform instruction or to inform planning. and those artifacts is what we are going to put up on our website as our street data. so it's our own street data, but but within this, you know, we also there is also an open ended section where they actually ask what data did you use? and how did it help you? so i guess we'll even summarize that qualitative part, right? and i do think i do think like the progress monitor for continuous improvement of instruction. that's, that's like the qualitative piece. and so what

dr. cano was saying is like, well, here are some ways we would see what that means. but you're right, it's missing the adjective that the others have, like high quality, meaningful. i just i wonder if an adjective could. yeah. all right. thank you for the opportunity to have this discussion. no surprise. i will go to guardrail five since i was the one obsessing about guardrail five and strategic partnerships during the process. i think overall all just just some general feedback for 5.3. i was always intrigued around the internships being listed under this guardrail for me, as a high school parent, i always considered this more within goal three of career and college readiness, as while i certainly understood stand the partnerships that need to be in

place in order to have such a robust internship and successful all programs that we have had id and really appreciate that the opportunities for our high school students to be paid in their summer internships to get credit, you know, so anyhow, that's just i feel like is more tactical and i think overall my feedback for the interim goals or i'm sorry, interim guardrails for five of is more my intention was intrigued around and how is the district demonstrating its increasing of its partnerships. so for example i'll i'm also very intrigued by our fund development approaches like through philanthropy and how is that being leveraged. so over time in an annual basis, how much growth are we seeking in philanthropy to leverage? public private ne