>> THE TIME IS 4:05 PM. [1. Notice and Return] [00:00:04] WE HAVE A QUORUM OF THIS COMMITTEE. THREE TRUSTEES PRESENT MYSELF, BEN MAY. PLEASE GARCIA AND BYRON SANDERS IS JOINING US VIRTUALLY. AND THIS MEETING HAS BEEN HOSTED. GOOD EVENING AND WELCOME TO THE SUPERINTENDENT'S EVALUATION AD HOC COMMITTEE MEETING OF THE DALLAS SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF TRUSTEES. PLEASE STAND AND JOIN US FOR A MOMENT OF SILENCE. REMAIN STANDING FOR THE PUG ALLEGIANCE AND SUITS OF TEXAS FLAG. UNITED STATES AMERICA. THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEE MEMBERS ARE EITHER PHYSICALLY PRESENT OR PARTICIPATING SIMULTANEOUSLY BY VIDEO CONFERENCE, A FORM OF THE SUPERINTENDENTS EVALUATION AD HOC COMMITTEE IS PHYSICALLY PRESENT AT THIS LOCATION. AT AT THIS TIME, I WOULD LIKE TO RECOGNIZE THE FOLLOWING COMMITTEE MEMBERS, TRUSTEE GARCIA, AND TRUSTEE BYRON SANDERS, WHO'S JOINING US VIRTUALLY. OUR SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, DR. STEPHANIE ELIZALDE JOINS US, AND I AM BEN MACKIE, THE COMMITTEE CHAIR. I DON'T SEE ANY OTHER TRUSTEES IN ATTENDANCE. WE WILL ACTUALLY NOW MOVE ON. DO YOU HAVE ANY SPEAKERS FOR THE PUBLIC SEGMENT? NO. SO WE WILL MOVE PAST THAT. WE'RE NOW ON ITEM 4 CLOSED SESSION, BUT THE BOARD WILL NOT RETIRE TO CLOSED SESSION. NOW WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE MET OF OUR MEETING, SECTION 55.01, [5. Discussion Items] DISCUSSION OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS '24 '25 EVALUATION INSTRUMENT TARGETS AND INCENTIVE PLAN. BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO DR. LEAR, I JUST WANT TO OUTLINE, I THINK, JUSSIE GARCIA, AND JESSIE SANDERS, CAN YOU HEAR US? YOU SAID, YES. >> YOU'LL HEAR ME? >> THE VOICE OF GOD, SPEAKING DOWN TO US. THANK YOU. A QUICK NOTE, AS TRUSTEE GARCIA, YOU HAVE THE POLICY PRINTED OUT IN FRONT OF YOU. TRUSTEE SANDERS, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THE POLICY IN FRONT OF YOU, BUT THE POLICY WE'RE LOOKING AT IS BJCD LOCAL. THIS IS THE SUPERINTENDENT EVALUATION COMMITTEE, I WOULD BE REMISS TO NOT SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF OVERVIEW OF HOW WE GOT HERE. I THINK THIS INSTRUMENT HAS BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR A LONG TIME. WE'VE USED VARIATIONS OF IT, BUT ONLY OVER THE LAST 3-4 YEARS, HAVE WE REALLY CODIFIED A SINGULAR SYSTEM FOR HOW THIS IS. WHILE THIS DOCUMENT THAT DR. LEAR, DR. ELIZALDE WILL WALK US THROUGH HAVE A LOT OF NUMBERS THAT ARE VERY COMPLEX. AT THE HEART OF IT, THE WORK HERE HAS BEEN TO TIE THE SUPERINTENDENT'S EVALUATION WITH THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS EVALUATION, AND TO WHAT WE HAVE DETERMINED ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT THINGS. OUR SUPERINTENDENT EVALUATION INSTRUMENT, BOTH THE INSTRUMENT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR LAST YEAR, AS WELL AS THE INSTRUMENT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR NEXT YEAR AND BEYOND, FOLLOW THE SAME SYSTEM, WHICH IS 60% OF IT IS ALLOCATED BASED ON ACHIEVEMENT OF OUR GOALS AND PROGRESS MEASURES. THIS IS BASED ON THE PREVIOUS SET OF GOALS. NEXT YEAR'S EVALUATION WILL BE BASED ON THE NEW GOALS THAT WE ARE ADOPTING,22% IS BASED ON THE BOARD CONSTRAINTS AND THE CONSTRAINT PROGRESS MEASURES. AGAIN, THIS ONE BASED ON THE LAST SET OF CONSTRAINTS AND CONSTRAINT PROGRESS MEASURES, AND THE NEW EVALUATION FOR THIS CURRENT SCHOOL YEAR FY '26 OR '25 '26 WILL BE ON THE NEXT SET OF CONSTRAINTS AND PROGRESS MEASURES, AND THEN WE HAVE 18% ALLOCATED TOWARDS SPECIFIC OTHER ELEMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN DEEMED IMPORTANT. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AS MEASURED BY A SERIES OF FOUR SURVEYS, OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION, PARENTS, TAXPAYERS, AND THE BOARD. THAT'S WHERE WE PUT OUR EVALUATIONS IN, AS WELL AS THE FUND BALANCE, WHICH MEASURES THE FINANCIAL HEALTH OF THE DISTRICT. WHILE A LOT OF THIS STUFF HAS A LOT OF NUMBERS, ALL OF THEM ARE KNOWN KNOWNS, AND WE WILL EITHER HAVE THE NUMBER OR WE WON'T HAVE THE NUMBER, AND THE SCORES ALL GET ADDED FROM THERE. REALLY, WHAT WE'RE DOING IS WE DON'T NEED TO DIVE INTO THIS AND LOOK AT EACH OF THE NUMBERS, WE CAN CERTAINLY HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT IT. BUT FUNCTIONALLY, 96% OF THE SUPERINTENDENT'S EVALUATION IS QUANTITATIVE IN NATURE TIED TO THE PRIORITIES OF THE SYSTEM, AND THEN THE BOARD HAS 4% THAT WE WILL AFTER WE FINISH TODAY'S MEETING, IF EVERYTHING GETS APPROVED, MISS HOSKINS WILL WORK WITH THE BOARD TO GET ALL OF THOSE ENTERED INTO IT. THE WAY WE WILL WORK, THAT'S A LITTLE BIT OF AN OVERVIEW, BUT I AM GOING TO TURN OVER IN JUST A MOMENT TO DR. ELIZALDE AND DR. LEAR TO WALK THROUGH LAST YEAR. THAT IS ONE WE HAVE UP ON THE DOCUMENT. WE'LL GO THROUGH HOW THIS IS STRUCTURED. I'LL HAVE THEM GO THROUGH THE OVERVIEW, [00:05:02] AND THEN WE'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS, CONVERSATION AROUND THIS, AND THEN MOVE ON TO NEXT STEPS. BUT BEFORE WE GET INTO THAT, I DIDN'T KNOW IF EITHER TRUSTEE SANDERS OR TRUSTEE GARCIA, IF YOU ALL HAD ANY OVERALL QUESTIONS ABOUT THE SUPERINTENDENT'S EVALUATION BEFORE WE GO INTO THIS. >> SANTO, CAN YOU SEND ME LIKE FEMALE PDF. >> CHAIR OF MAGGIE. JUST ONE SECOND. WHEN TRUSTEE SANDERS IS SPEAKING, HE NEEDS TO MAKE SURE HE'S ON THE CAMERA. THANK YOU. >> CARRY ON, TRUSTEE SANDERS. CAN WE SEND YOU WHAT? >> CAN YOU SEND ME THE PDF OF THE BOARD DOC LINK THAT I CAN'T LOG INTO THE SYSTEM. >> GREAT. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT THE EVALUATION DOCUMENT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? WE'RE WORKING ON GETTING THAT TO YOU RIGHT NOW. TRUSTEE GARCIA, WHILE WE WAIT FOR THAT. >> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY. STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT. YOU SAY IT WAS BOARD, TAXPAYERS, AND WAS THERE ANOTHER CLIP? >> IT IS OVERALL SATISFACTION. WE COULD TALK ABOUT OF THE SPECIFICS PARENTS, TAXPAYERS AND BOARD OF TRUSTEES. IT'S ON THAT DOCUMENT, YOU SEE THIS YEAR SCORE CARD OR NEXT YEARS, IF YOU FLIP THE SECOND PAGE. IT'S, ACTUALLY, THE LAST FOUR ELEMENTS UNDER STAKEHOLDER SATISFACTION. >> I SEE IT. THANK YOU. >> LOTS OF ITEMS, BUT THEY ALL DERIVE FROM OUR GOALS, OUR CONSTRAINTS AND PROGRESS MEASURES, AND THEN THOSE SURVEYS AND FUND BALANCE. WITH THAT, DR. ELIZALDE AND DR. LEAR, IF YOU'D LIKE TO WALK US THROUGH THE CURRENT NUMBERS WE HAVE. >> I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO DR. LEAR, BUT BEFORE I DO, I JUST WANT, FIRST OF ALL, I THINK IT'S AN EXTREMELY CHALLENGING WAY TO BE EVALUATED BECAUSE IT IS STRICTLY ON VERY OBJECTIVE DATA AND THE PERFORMANCE OF OUR DISTRICT IS EITHER MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION OR NOT. I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE BOARD FOR EVALUATING THE SUPERINTENDENCY IN THIS WAY. FOR TWO REASONS, ONE, BECAUSE I THINK IT IS INCUMBENT UPON WHOEVER THE SUPERINTENDENT IS TO RECOGNIZE THE LEVEL OF RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE ROLE WHILE I DON'T TEACH ANY STUDENTS DIRECTLY, AND I DON'T EVALUATE ANY INDIVIDUAL CAMPUSES PER SE. IT IS ABOUT THE ENTIRE TEAM AND HOW THE WORK IS THAT THIS BOARD HAS PUT UPON US TO ENSURE THAT WE WORK AS A TEAM TO MEET THOSE GOALS. THE SECOND REASON IS THAT I CERTAINLY COULD NOT ASK TEACHERS FOR 35% OF THEIR EVALUATION TO BE BASED ON OBJECTIVE DATA, AND I NOT LEAD THE WAY. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT TEACHERS THE MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF A TEACHER'S EFFECTIVENESS OR EVALUATION IS 35%. FOR OTHER CATEGORIES, IT MAY BE LESS THAN THAT.. FOR MY EVALUATION, AS YOU NOTED, TRUSTEE MACKIE, 60% IS COMING STRICTLY FROM THOSE BOARD GOALS, AND 22% COME FROM THE CONSTRAINTS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN'T ASK INDIVIDUALS WHO ARE DOING THE WORK ON THE GROUND LEVEL, BOOTS ON THE GROUND, AS WAS OUR THEME, AND THAT I WOULD NOT BE LEADING THE WAY. THANK YOU. IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY. IT MAY NOT ALWAYS FEEL THAT WAY, BUT I AM GREATLY APPRECIATIVE OF AND HUMBLED BY THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE. WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE DR. LEAR TO JUST WALK US THROUGH QUICKLY. >> SURE. THANK YOU. >> BEFORE YOU BEGIN. TRUSTEE SANDERS, ARE YOU ABLE TO GET THE DOCUMENT? >> YES, I HAVE IT NOW. I'M GOOD TO GO. >> GREAT. >> THANK YOU, DR. ELIZALDE. IN GOOD AFTERNOON, TRUSTEES. I DO WANT TO JUST REMIND THE TRUSTEES THAT WE GO THROUGH THE GOALS, THE GOAL PROGRESS MEASURES, THE CONSTRAINTS, AND THE CONSTRAINT PROGRESS MEASURES EVERY MONTH. I'M NOT GOING TO GO IN DETAIL. I'M GOING TO KEEP THIS AT A VERY HIGH LEVEL AND GO THROUGH EACH GOAL. IF WE LOOK AT GOAL 1, WE CAN SEE THAT THE SUPERINTENDENT EARNED EIGHT POINTS. IF WE LOOK AT GOAL 2 AND THE GPMS, THERE WERE 16 POINTS THAT WERE EARNED, AND YOU CAN SEE IT'S OVER THE TOTAL 12 BECAUSE SEVERAL OF THESE THE SUPERINTENDENT SCORED CLEARLY SUPERIOR. GOAL 3, WE'RE AT 15 POINTS OUT OF 12. GOAL 4, WE'RE AT 17 POINTS OUT OF 12. GOAL 5, THE SUPERINTENDENT EARNED 14 POINTS OUT OF 12. [00:10:03] IF WE GO DOWN TO FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT, 7.5 OUT OF FIVE, THEN WHEN WE GO DOWN TO THE CONSTRAINTS, WE'RE AT 14.5 OUT OF 22, AND NOTE THAT NOT ALL OF THE DATA IS HERE YET. WE SHOULD HAVE ALL OF THE DATA BY NOVEMBER. BUT AT THIS POINT, WE'RE JUST CALCULATING 14.5 OUT OF THE TOTAL 22. WE GO TO STAKEHOLDER SATISFACTION, WE'RE AT 7.5 AT A 13, AND OF COURSE, THE BOARD WILL EVALUATE THE SUPERINTENDENT AT I GUESS IN MAYBE THE NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER BOARD MEETING. AT THIS POINT, THE TOTAL IS 99.5 ON 100 POINT SCALE. >> LET ME ADD A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT JUST FOR TRUSTEE GARCIA AND TRUSTEE SANDERS TO FOLLOW ALONG. STICKING WITH JUST THE GOALS. AGAIN, 60% IS ON GOALS, SO WE HAVE FIVE GOALS,60/5 IS 12 POINTS EACH. THAT'S WHERE THE 12 COMES FROM THAT YOU'LL SEE RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE IT SAYS GOAL ONE STUDENT OUTCOME ACHIEVEMENT 12 POINTS. THE WAY THAT THOSE POINTS ARE BROKEN UP IS THE SUPERINTENDENT CAN EARN SIX POINTS FOR ACHIEVING THE GOAL AND CAN EARN TWO POINTS EACH FOR EACH OF THE THREE PROGRESS MEASURES. THAT'S THE TOTAL OF 12. IF YOU WILL LOOK IN THE COLUMN THAT IS FS 1.0 UNDER '24 '25 PERFORMANCE TARGET. DOES THAT ALL SEE FS? >> YES. >> THAT IS FULLY SATISFACTORY. ESSENTIALLY, IF YOU THINK BACK TO WHEN WE WERE SETTING THE GOALS AND GOING THROUGH THIS, IF IT'S A FIVE YEAR GOAL, HAS A TARGET THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE AT EACH YEAR. IF WE STARTED AT 40% AND WE'RE GOING TO 50% IN THE NEXT FIVE YEARS, THERE'S A ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENT THAT SHOWS THE TARGET. IT MIGHT GO 40-41 TO 43 TO 46 TO 47 TO 50. THAT FULLY SATISFACTORY, THAT FS IS THE BOARD APPROVED TARGET FOR THIS YEAR. THAT WAS WHAT THE BOARD SET THAT IS VISIBLE ON OUR GOAL SHEET THAT'S IN FRONT OF US EACH TIME FOR THE CURRENT STUFF. THAT FULLY SATISFACTORY IS WHAT THE BOARD APPROVED LAST YEAR FOR THE TARGET FOR EACH OF THOSE ELEMENTS. ESSENTIALLY, THE WAY IT GETS SET IS UNSATISFACTORY IS WHERE WE WERE LAST YEAR. UNSATISFACTORY WOULD BE IF WE DO NOT GROW OR WE FALL, A SUPERINTENDENT WOULD UNSATISFACTORY. SLIGHTLY SATISFACTORY, SS IS IF THE SUPERINTENDENT MADE GROWTH BASED ON LAST YEAR, BUT WE DIDN'T QUITE HIT OUR TARGET. THAT WOULD BE THAT SS COLUMN. IF THE SUPERINTENDENT HIT THE TARGET, THEN THAT IS FULLY SATISFACTORY, THAT IS WHAT WE EXPECTED THAT WAS WHAT WE PUT THERE. THEY WILL EARN THE FULL ONE POINT FOR THAT. THEN THE LAST COLUMN CS, CLEARLY SUPERIOR, IS WHERE THEY HAVE EXCEEDED THE TARGET BY A SIGNIFICANT MARGIN BY MORE THAN AT LEAST ONE PERCENTAGE POINT AHEAD OF WHERE WE WERE GOING TO GO. IF THAT IS THE CASE, THEY GET A BONUS ON TOP OF IT. IF THERE'S TWO POINTS AVAILABLE FOR THE PROGRESS MEASURE, THEY CAN ACTUALLY EARN THREE POINTS BECAUSE THEY CAN ACTUALLY GET A SCALE BECAUSE THEY HAVE EXCEEDED THE TARGET IN THAT AREA. AT THE HIGHEST LEVEL FOR THESE GOALS, AS DR. LEAR MENTIONED, IS FOR THE FIRST GOAL, AGAIN, EACH OF THESE GOALS HAVE 12 POINTS TO THEM. SUPERINTENDENT BASED ON THESE SCORE SCORED EIGHT OUT OF 12, WHICH SAYS, WE DEFINITELY MADE GROWTH, BUT WE WEREN'T QUITE ON THE TARGET BECAUSE WE DIDN'T GET THE FULL 12. FOR EACH OF THE OTHER FOUR, WE ARE IN 16, 15, 14 17 AND 14 RESPECTIVELY, ALL MORE THAN THE 12 THAT ARE ALLOCATED, MEANING, SUPERINTENDENT. EVERY TIME I SAY SUPERINTENDENT, I MEAN THE DISTRICT, EXCEEDED THE TARGETS THAT WE HAD SET IN EACH OF THOSE. THE WAY TO READ THIS DOCUMENT IS SUPERINTENDENT AND DALLAS ISD EXCEEDED THE TARGETS IN FOUR OUT OF OUR FIVE. IN THAT FIFTH ONE, WE DIDN'T QUITE HIT THE TARGET, BUT WE MADE GROWTH FROM WHERE WE WERE LAST YEAR IS HOW TO THINK ABOUT THAT. THIS IS A COMPLEX DOCUMENT. I WANTED TO ORIENT PEOPLE ON HOW TO LOOK AT IT BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF NUMBERS THERE. LET ME PAUSE THERE AND SEE TRUSTEE SANDERS, WILL START WITH YOU IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS BECAUSE I CAN'T SEE YOU, BUT CHIME IN, IF YOU DO. >> YOU ACTUALLY JUST ANSWERED THE QUESTIONS I HAD. I JUST NEEDED TO KNOW WAIT, I HAVE TO WAIT. >> GO AHEAD. >> I THINK I HAVE TO READ IT. THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD. I DON'T HAVE ANY ON THE TOPIC THAT WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THERE, SO I'M GOOD TO GO. >> IT IS THE SAME THING FOR THE CONSTRAINTS. [00:15:01] EACH OF THE CONSTRAINTS HAS A TARGET. SOME OF THEM STAY YEAR AFTER YEAR, THREE MONTHS OF FUND BALANCE YEAR AFTER YEAR. THAT IS OUR FULLY SATISFACTORY. IT'S NOT LIKE WE NEED TO CHIME IN, BUT SOME OF THEM, LIKE OUR STUDENT EXPERIENCE, THAT'S ONE WHERE WE DO HAVE SOME GROWTH. THAT STILL, AGAIN, IS THE TARGET FOR THE YEAR IS IN THE FULLY SATISFACTORY COLUMN. THEN IF WE EXCEEDED IT BY MORE THAN A POINT, THEN THAT WOULD BE WHERE IT IS CLEARLY SUPERIOR. THE NOTES HERE, ONE OTHER THING THAT DR. LEAR MENTIONED TO ME IS THE SIX BOXES YOU SEE THAT HAVE A GRAY HUE TO THEM DOWN HERE. THE LAST FOUR ON THE GOAL PROGRESS MEASURES. YOU SEE A GRAY ON THE FAR RIGHT HAND SIDE? THOSE ARE ONES THAT WE ARE PRETTY CONFIDENT THAT THAT NUMBER IS ACCURATE, BUT IT HAS NOT YET FINALIZED DATA. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT THAT COULD CHANGE SLIGHTLY, BUT THOSE WILL BE FINALIZED SOON. THEN THE THREE THAT ARE BLANK, STUDENT EXPERIENCE SURVEYS, WHICH ARE JUST CONCLUDED, AND OUR GAP BETWEEN PROFICIENT TEACHERS AT HIGH PRIORITY VERSUS NON-HIGH PRIORITY CAMPUSES, THAT DATA IS STILL COMING IN. AS SOON AS THAT NUMBER IS THERE, IF IT MEETS THE TARGET THAT'S LISTED UNDER FS, THE NUMBERS WOULD BE PLUGGED IN FOR US GOING FORWARD. FRANKLY, THE 99.5 CONGLOMERATE THAT DR. ELIZALDE EARNED OUT OF 100, THOUGH IT CAN BE UP TO 150 IF SHE WERE TO EXCEED ON ABSOLUTELY EVERYTHING, WHICH I'VE NEVER SEEN BEFORE. THIS IS THE CLOSEST I'VE SEEN BEFORE. MY GUESS IS THAT THIS NUMBER CAN ONLY GO UP FROM HERE. IT CAN'T GO DOWN. SOME OF THEM MIGHT CHANGE SLIGHTLY, BUT IT WON'T GO DOWN FROM THIS. WITH THAT, I WANT TO OPEN UP THE CONVERSATION TO ANY AND ALL QUESTIONS ON LAST YEAR'S EVALUATION, INSTRUMENT, ETC. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> GO AHEAD, TRUSTEE SANDERS. >> WAITING FOR THE CAMERA. >> DO WE NEED TO BRING HIS FACE UP? >> YES. >> YES. >> THERE YOU ARE. >> TRUST MAGE REAL QUICK, OR REALLY ANYONE WHO HAS AN ANSWER TO IT. I KNOW WE'RE WAITING ON CONSTRAINT RESULTS FROM CONSTRAINT CPM 1.11 0.3, IT LOOKS LIKE OR AT LEAST A COUPLE OF THOSE ROWS. WHAT'S THE ETA ON THAT? IF YOU COULD JUST GIVE ME A LITTLE BIT MORE UNDERSTANDING ON THE HOW WE COMPILE THAT INFORMATION NEXT YEAR. >> SURE. TRUSTEE SANDERS, I CAN DO THAT. WE CURRENTLY HAVE A SURVEY OUT TO OUR STUDENTS, AND THE STUDENTS ARE SURVEYED ON THE CAMPUS CLIMATE, SAFETY, AND SENSE OF BELONGING. WE HAVE A WINDOW OF TIME WHERE STUDENTS START AT THE BEGINNING OF OCTOBER THROUGH THE END OF OCTOBER. WE SHOULD HAVE THOSE RESULTS THE END OF OCTOBER, AND WE CAN BRING THOSE TO THE BOARD FOR NOVEMBER. >> GOT IT. DR. LEAR, YOU'RE SAYING THAT THE SURVEY THAT IS OUT RIGHT NOW IS ASKING ABOUT THE PREVIOUS YEAR? >> IT WOULD ACTUALLY BE FOR EVALUATION PURPOSES, THAT WOULD BE INFORMATION THAT WE WOULD HAVE FOR THIS EVALUATION. >> MAYBE I CAN ADD SOME EXTRA HERE. IT'S NOT ALWAYS AS CLEAN AS THE SCHOOL YEAR. THE DATA FOR THE TESTS ARE, OBVIOUSLY, IF IT'S STAR, IT'S AT THE END OF THE SCHOOL YEAR. THIS WAS ONE BECAUSE IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE. I THINK I KNOW WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT THIS ORIGINALLY, THE ADMINISTRATION OUGHT TO BECAUSE THIS IS A SURVEY ABOUT THE GENERAL SCHOOL EXPERIENCE OVERALL. THERE WAS CONCERNS WITH DOING IT AFTER TESTING WHEN NOT AS MANY KIDS ARE THERE OR IT'S AT THE END OR WHEN IT'S STRESSFUL, ETC. SO IT WAS DETERMINED WITH, I THINK, WORKING WITH PANORAMA TO DETERMINE THAT ROUGHLY OCTOBER, NOVEMBER IS THE BEST TIME TO GET A SENSE OF THAT. THIS WILL BE A DATA POINT FROM THIS YEAR'S CURRENT SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT. BUT AFTER THAT POINT, ANY CHANGES THEY MAKE OR HOW THEY ARE GOING TO DO THAT ARE GOING TO IMPACT NEXT YEAR. THE TIMELINE IS SLIGHTLY OFF, BUT IT STILL FITS IN THIS EVALUATION [00:20:01] BECAUSE IT'S WITHIN THAT MORE OR LESS THE CALENDAR YEAR. IT'S CLOSER BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY THE SCHOOL ENVIRONMENT THAT IS HAPPENING IN OUR SCHOOLS CURRENTLY, A MONTH AND A HALF INTO THE SCHOOL YEAR. IS MOSTLY DUE TO THE WORK THEY DID OVER THE END OF LAST YEAR AND INTO THE SUMMER TO CREATE THAT ENVIRONMENT. THAT'S WHY THERE'S A SLIGHT DATA LAG THERE AND WHY IT WAS CHOSEN TO GIVE AT THAT TIME. BUT IT'S NOT AS CLEANLY AS THIS WAS LAST YEAR'S KIDS AND LAST YEAR'S GRADES. BUT EACH YEAR AS WE DO THIS, WE SHOULD STILL SEE THE SAME TREND THAT WE WANT TO SEE IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PAYING ATTENTION TO. >> THE LAST THING I'LL ASK ON ON THAT QUESTION, AND I APPRECIATE WE WORKED WITH I'M ASSUMING WE WORKED WITH A CONSULTANT GROUP THAT HELPED US IDENTIFY, THE BEST TIME TO TAKE THAT SNAPSHOT. ON THE GO FORWARD, I GUESS I AM INTERESTED IN WHAT ARE THE DIFFERENCES THAT YOU WOULD TYPICALLY SEE BETWEEN A BEGINNING OF THE YEAR END OF THE YEAR THING, BECAUSE IT FEELS A LITTLE NOT OFF, BUT I GUESS I CAN TELL YOU THIS. EVEN JUST AS A DAD, I KNOW OFTENTIMES HOW A CHILD FEELS ABOUT THE SCHOOL YEAR IS HEAVILY PREDICATED ON HOW THEY FEEL ABOUT THEIR TEACHERS THAT YEAR, AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SET OF TEACHERS. THAT'S THE ONLY THING NET EFFECT, I GUESS, IN THE WHOLE AVERAGE, PROBABLY EVENS OUT THE WASH, BUT THAT'S JUST INTERESTING FROM A DATA COLLECTOR STANDPOINT. THANKS. I NEEDED A LITTLE CLARIFICATION THERE, AND I THINK I GOT. >> JUST TO MAKE SURE I HEARD YOU CORRECTLY, SO IT BE HELPFUL TO KNOW WHY THE SURVEY WAS CHOSEN TO BE IN OCTOBER, ESSENTIALLY COMPARED TO OTHER TIMELINES. >> WHAT INFORMATION DID THEY NEED OF? >> GOT YOU. >> LIKE, IF THERE IS RESEARCH THAT'S AVAILABLE, IT TALKS ABOUT HOW SURE THE OCTOBER TIMELINE IS AS OPPOSED TO THE END OF THE YEAR. GIVEN THAT, IT'S EXPANDING THE OBSERVED TIME THAT WE'RE USING FOR ACCOUNTABILITY. >> THANK YOU, TRUSTEE SANDERS. TRUSTEE GARCIA, ANY QUESTIONS HERE? >> HERE WITH WITH THE STUDENT EXPERIENCE. I GUESS I'M THINKING. YOU MENTIONED THAT THIS IS ABOUT THEIR EXPERIENCE AT THE SCHOOL. HOW DOES THAT ALIGN WITH SURVEYS THE STUDENTS RECEIVE IN TERMS OF THEIR WITH TEACHER EVALUATIONS? THESE ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SURVEYS, OR I GUESS I'M TRYING TO DECIPHER THAT? >> YES, IT IS. THE SURVEY THAT THE STUDENTS ARE TAKING NOW ARE REALLY FOR THE CLIMATE AND CULTURE OF THE SCHOOL, THEIR SENSE OF BELONGING, AND THEIR SAFETY. WHEREAS WHEN THEY TAKE IT IN APRIL, THEN THAT'S MORE AROUND THE TEACHING SETTING. FOR THAT TEACHER. >> IS IT ALL STUDENTS FOR THE CURRENT? >> IT'S FOR GRADES 3 THROUGH 12. >> TWELVE. >> IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL, I KNOW WE CAN SEND THE QUESTIONS THAT STUDENTS ARE ASKED SO EVERYONE CAN SEE. >> YEAH. I'M NOT QUESTIONING THE METHOD. IT'S MORE OF LIKE GAINING AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT STUDENTS RECEIVE, SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU KNEW I FIRST TIME WE'RE HERE. >> WELL, I WOULD SAY, I KNOW WHEN THE BOARD WHEN WE MADE THIS ADJUSTMENT, I DON'T KNOW IF IT WAS THREE YEARS AGO OR SO NOW, FOR A WHILE, THE ONLY SURVEY WE GAVE FROM PANORAMA WAS BASED ON INDIVIDUAL STUDENT CLASSROOM LEVEL. WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY ASK ABOUT YOUR HOLISTIC SCHOOL EXPERIENCE. YOU MIGHT HAVE A CHALLENGING CLASSROOM SITUATION IN WHICH YOU'RE SCORING THAT ON. BUT YOU MIGHT HAVE A GREAT SCHOOL EXPERIENCE OR VICE VERSA. YOU MIGHT HAVE A GREAT TEACHER, BUT YOU MIGHT BE STRUGGLING IN THE HOLISTIC SETTING. THE DETERMINATION WAS MADE AT THAT TIME, BASED ON THIS WAS TO DO ONE HOLISTICALLY ABOUT THE CAMPUS SEPARATE FROM WHAT WE ALSO DO SPECIFICALLY ABOUT THE CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE. THIS IS THE SCHOOL ONE. >> THEN IN TERMS OF THE STUDENTS WHEN THEY TAKE THIS SURVEY, SO IT'S ON THE PREVIOUS YEAR. WE KNOW WHERE THEY WERE. I KNOW WITH TRANSIENT STUDENTS, THEY COULD HAVE BEEN AT A PREVIOUS SCHOOL. I'M JUST THINKING BEYOND, OBVIOUSLY THE EVALUATION AND THINKING THROUGH, WELL, IS THAT INFORMATION THAT WILL HELP OBVIOUSLY SUPERINTENDENT, BUT ALSO GUIDE IMPROVEMENTS IN OTHER SCHOOLS? DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> ONE THING I WOULD JUST SAY BEFORE YOU ANSWER ABOUT HOW YOU WILL USE A SURVEY. IT'S NOT ASKING THEM ABOUT LAST YEAR. IT'S ASKING THEM ABOUT THEIR CURRENT SCHOOL. >> SORRY. HOW LONG THE WAY I GOT THAT CONFUSED. PERFECT. [00:25:04] >> INSTEAD OF USING LAST YEAR SCORE BACK IN SEPTEMBER, BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS ONE BEFORE THE CLOSURE OF IT, WE'RE USING THE MOST RECENT ONE BECAUSE IT'S THE MOST ACTIONABLE DATA. IF WE WERE TO TRY TO ALIGN IT TO LAST YEAR, WHAT WE WOULD BASICALLY SAY, IS LET'S USE LAST YEAR SURVEY SCORE FOR THIS, NOT LOOK AT THIS ONE UNTIL YEAR, WHICH WAS IN THE CONVERSATION WAS, WHY NOT USE THE MOST ADVANCED ONE, EVEN IF IT MIGHT NOT EXACTLY ALIGN WITH THE YEAR? B THAT'S THE ONE THAT'LL BE MOST ACTIONABLE. BUT NOW, DOCTOR LAYER, DO YOU WANT TO ADD HOW YOU ALL LOOK AT? >> WELL, NO, I THINK THAT'S IN THE PIECE. ONE OF THE THINGS. I HAVE A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES OF QUESTIONS THAT STUDENTS HAVE. HOW FARE ARE THE RULES AT THE SCHOOL? HOW WELL DO PEOPLE AT YOUR SCHOOL UNDERSTAND THE KIND OF PERSON YOU ARE? THOSE ARE I MEAN, ONE FALLS UNDER SENSE OF BELONGING AND ONE FALLS UNDER CLIMATE. THAT'S A SAMPLE. >> WELL, THAT CLARIFIES IT BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE WERE OVER-COMPLICATING IT, MAYBE. I WAS LIKE, OH, HOW ARE WE TYING THAT, BUT THAT MAKES MORE SENSE. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT'S ALL FOR NOW. >> GO AHEAD, SCI SANDOZ. >> REAL QUICK. I WANT TO NOTE AND ACKNOWLEDGE WHAT SUPERINTENDENT LIZALE WAS SAYING AT THE VERY BEGINNING ABOUT THE CONTINUITY OF ACCOUNTABILITY FROM THE TOP ALL THE WAY DOWN. IN DOING SO, WE PRIDE OURSELVES ON HOLDING OUR CAMPUSES RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RESULTS. I KNOW THIS IS MY FIRST MEETING HERE, BUT I KNOW ENOUGH TO KNOW THAT THIS KIND OF PERFORMANCE IS ATYPICAL. I WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT ONE, I APPRECIATE THE PREVIOUS BOARD'S WORK ON BEING VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT THE THINGS THAT WE'RE MEASURING IN THE FAIRLY HIGH STANDARDS AND SAYING THAT YOU GET ZERO IF YOU DID AS WELL AS YOU DID THE PREVIOUS YEAR, EVEN IF WHAT YOU DID THE PREVIOUS YEAR WAS PRETTY SOLID. THAT'S A REALLY HIGH STANDARD. FOR EVEN OUR PRELIMINARY RESULTS TO BE WHERE THEY ARE RIGHT NOW, I'M NOT, JUST TOOTING THE HORN, BUT I DO THINK IT'S WORTH AT LEAST STATING ON THE RECORD THAT THIS IS PRETTY EXCEPTIONAL PERFORMANCE FOR A DISTRICT THAT DEALS WITH A LOT OF THE SIZE AND THE SOCIOECONOMICS AND EVERYTHING ELSE THAT WE HAVE TO, THAT WE WORK REALLY HARD TO OVERCOME. A CREDIT TO THE WORK. DOCTOR AZALDE, AND I KNOW YOU WERE GOING TO SAY IT A TEAM EFFORT, AND IT IS, BUT LEADERSHIP MATTERS. I THINK THIS IS IMPORTANT TO AT LEAST HAVE STATED ON THE RECORD TO AT LEAST FROM MY END THAT THIS IS PRE PRETTY POWERFUL. >> THANK YOU, TRUSTEE SANDERS. COULD HAVE SAID IT BETTER. WE HAVE TWO OTHER ELEMENTS ON THIS. THAT'S THE EVALUATION INSTRUMENT. SEPARATE AND AS PART OF THE SUPERINTENDENT'S OVERALL CONTRACT AND PACKAGE. THERE IS ALSO PERFORMANCE BONUSES. THE WAY THAT WE HAVE DONE THIS HISTORICALLY IS TO ALIGN THOSE TO ACHIEVING THE GOALS OF THE SYSTEM. ESSENTIALLY, THE WAY WE HAVE SET THIS UP, AND THE PERFORMANCE INCENTIVE BONUSES THAT WERE ADOPTED LAST YEAR WERE, DID THE SUPERINTENDENT AND THROUGH THE SUPERINTENDENT, AS A TEAM EFFORT, THE DISTRICT, MEET THE GOAL TARGET WE HAD. FOR EACH OF THE GOALS THAT WAS ACHIEVED, SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT, FOR INSTANCE, IN THE FULLY SATISFACTORY COLUMN, THE GOAL ITSELF. IF THE GOAL STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT INCREASE ON STATE ASSESSMENTS AND DOMAIN ONE WILL INCASE IN 46 TO 58, IF WE ACHIEVED THE FULLY SATISFACTORY SCORE OF 45, THEN THAT WOULD TRIGGER THE BONUS. IF WE DIDN'T MEET THE GOAL, THEN THAT WOULDN'T TRIGGER THE BONUS, JUST BECAUSE THOSE ARE ALIGNING THE INCENTIVES TO THE GOAL OF THIS. THE WAY I READ THIS, AND AGAIN, DR ELZ, DR. LEAR, CORRECT ME IF I'M INCORRECT HERE, IS WHEN YOU LOOK AT EACH OF THE GOALS IN FULLY SATISFACTORY, WE HAVE MET, AND IN THIS CASE, EXCEEDED IN FOUR OUT OF THOSE FIVE. ONE OF THEM, WE SHOWED GROWTH, BUT WE DIDN'T MEET THE TARGET. WE WERE VERY CLOSE. WE DIDN'T MEET THE TARGET. BUT BECAUSE WE HAD MET OR EXCEEDED FOUR OUT OF THE FIVE, THE SUPERINTENDENT WOULD EARN FOUR OUT OF THE FIVE BONUSES BASED ON THAT. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT INCENTIVE ELEMENT OF THAT? THE INCENTIVE PLAN. [00:30:09] SEEING NONE. AS PART OF THIS DISCUSSION, TRUSTEE SANDERS, I THINK YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD. WE ARE HERE FOR MORE THAN JUST A PERFUNCTORY, MAKING SURE IT'S THE CASE. WE ARE THE FIRST ONES TO LOOK AT THIS EVALUATION AND SEE THIS. THIS PERFORMANCE IS CERTAINLY ATYPICAL, AND THERE IS NO ACTION REQUIRED ON WHAT I'M GOING TO SAY, THIS IS JUST PART OF THE DISCUSSION. WHEN WE HAVE A SUPERINTENDENT'S APPRAISAL THAT COMES BACK PRELIMINARILY AT 100 OUT OF 100, AND WE'LL GO ABOVE THAT. I THINK IT IS RECOMMENDED IS OUR RESPONSIBILITY HERE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF THE OTHER ONES, I WOULD PERSONALLY BE SUPPORTIVE. I THINK IT IS WHEN WE HAVE THIS KIND OF SYSTEM PERFORMANCE, IT SIGNALS A LOT MORE THAN FLASH IN THE PAN, A ONE POINT DIE, AND DOCTOR ELIZALDE AND THE TEAM HAVE BEEN DOING THIS WORK FOR A LONG TIME. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF THE TWO OF YOU ALL HERE WOULD JOIN ME AND GOING THROUGH OUR REGULAR PROCESS TO REQUEST THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER AND LOOK AT THE CONTRACT OF DR ELIZALDE AT A FUTURE TIME. WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE ANY DECISIONS ON THAT HERE, BUT PER OUR POLICIES, WE CAN HAVE THREE TRUSTEES, WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD SOMETHING TO THE AGENDA, AND I THINK A SCORE LIKE THIS WARRANTS US MAKING THAT RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD. AGAIN, WE'RE NOT GOING TO TAKE ACTION ON IT, BUT IF YOU BOTH ARE AMENABLE, WE CAN MAKE THAT REQUEST THROUGH A SEPARATE CHANNEL ALIGNED WITH OUR BOARD OPERATING PROCEDURES. I WANTED TO SEE FROM MY FELLOW COLLEAGUES HERE IF THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU, IF YOU HAVE ANY THOUGHTS AROUND THAT, BUT I JUST THINK BASED ON THIS SCORE AND THE WORK THAT HAS HAPPENED TO GET THIS, BECAUSE THIS IS A LOT OF YEARS OF WORK, I THINK IT IS A WORTHWHILE CONVERSATION TO HAVE WHEN WE HAVE A SUPERINTENDENT LIKE YOU, DR ELIZALDE. TRUSTEE GARCIA? TRUSTEE GARCIA FIRST, AND THEN TRUSTEE SANDERS I FIGURE OUT YOUR NAME. >> FIGURE OUT YOUR NAME. I'M LIKE, TRUSTEE GARCIA, YES, THIS IS ME. WELL, I WOULD BE IN SUPPORT, OBVIOUSLY. THIS IS A VERY EXTENSIVE APPRAISAL INSTRUMENT, AND I CAN TELL YOU THAT PEOPLE IN OTHER INDUSTRIES WOULD RUN FROM THIS, AND I KNOW THAT SUPERINTENDENT TAKES IT ON HEAD ON. FOR ME, I THINK WITH ALL THE PROGRESS, ESPECIALLY WHEN I THINK ABOUT DISTRICT 4 AND SO MANY OF OUR OTHER SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS WHERE THERE HAD BEEN CHALLENGES. I MEAN, THIS SHOWS US THAT WE'RE HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION, AND SO I WOULD DEFINITELY SUPPORT REVISITING AND MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE DOING ALL WE CAN TO SUPPORT DR AZALIDE. >> THANK YOU, TRUSTEE GARCIA, TRUSTEE SANDERS. >> BUILDING OFF OF WHAT I SAID PREVIOUSLY. IF WE CAN'T HAVE THAT CONVERSATION AFTER THESE KINDS OF RESULTS, THEN, I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED WHEN WE WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE THOSE CONVERSATIONS. YES, I WOULD BE SUPPORTIVE OF IT. OBVIOUSLY, I KNOW THERE'S MORE STEPS, BUT IT MEETS THE SMELL TEST WITH ME, FOR SURE. >> GREAT. THEN WHAT SEPARATELY THROUGH THE REGULAR BOARD OPERATING PROCEDURES IS I WILL EMAIL THE BOARD OFFICE. IT'S PER I FORGET THE POLICY AT THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I'LL SEE SEE BOTH OF YOU, AND THERE IS A RECOMMENDATION THAT THREE TRUSTEES CAN REQUEST SOMETHING BE ADDED. AGAIN, WE'RE JUST ADDING A DISCUSSION. THAT WILL BE A BOARD DISCUSSION AT THAT TIME. THEN THE LAST STEP HERE IS ONCE WE UNDERSTAND THIS INSTRUMENT, [6. Action Item] IT IS OUR JOB TO RECOMMEND THE INSTRUMENT TO THE FULL BOARD BECAUSE WHILE WE CAN TAKE A RECOMMENDATION ACTION HERE. WE DON'T ACTUALLY GET TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS, AND THE BOARD HAS TO OFFICIALLY APPROVE THIS. IT IS MY RECOMMENDATION, AND THIS IS WHERE I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION IN A SECOND, IF WE WANT TO ADVANCE THE SUPERINTENDENT 24 25 EVALUATION INSTRUMENT TO THE FULL BOARD, ONCE THE NUMBERS ARE FINALIZED, AND ALSO ALLOW MISS HOSKINS TO SOLICIT FROM ALL THE TRUSTEES THE BOARD OF TRUSTEE STAKEHOLDER FEEDBACK. WHAT THAT WOULD MEAN IS IF WE TAKE A VOTE HERE AND SUCCESSFULLY VOTED OUT OF THIS COMMITTEE IS THEN THIS WILL BE THE DOCUMENT. EVERYTHING IN HERE THAT IS FINALIZED IN WHITE IS GOING TO BE UNCHANGED. DR AZALDE AND THE TEAM WILL PUT IN THE FINALIZED VERSION FOR THE NUMBERS THAT ARE IN GRAY STILL AND FILL IN THE TWO STUDENT EXPERIENCE ONES AS WELL AS THE GAP BETWEEN PROFICIENT 1 TEACHERS AT HIGH PARTY CAMPUSES AND NON HYPER PARTY CAMPUSES BASED ON THE QUANTITATIVE DATA OUT THERE. THEN THAT WILL COME TO THE BOARD IN EITHER NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER FOR FULL VOTE ONCE WE HAVE THAT IN, THE BOARD WILL STILL LOOK AT THAT, DISCUSS IT, ETC. [00:35:02] BUT THAT WOULD BE THE NEXT STEP. ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT BEFORE I TAKE A MOTION? >> SEEING NONE. DO I HAVE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE FULL BOARD, THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS 24 25 EVALUATION INSTRUMENT TARGETS AND INCENTIVE PLAN ONCE THE DATA IS FINALIZED AND END THIS. DO I HAVE ANY MOTION FOR THAT? >> MOVED. >> MOVED BY TRUSTEE SANDERS? SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, RAISE YOUR HAND OR BYRON. WE CAN SEE HIS HAND, GREAT. >> MOTION PASSES 3-0. >> SHE QUICK ON IT. THANK YOU. THAT'S ITEM 1. THANK YOU, DR. ELIZALDE FOR YOUR WORK ON THAT, AND DR. LEAR AND THE ENTIRE TEAM. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM 5.02, DISCUSSION OF THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS EVALUATIONS INSTRUMENT, AND '25/'26 TARGETS AND INCENTIVE PLAN. BEFORE WE BEGIN ON THIS, TRUSTEE SANDERS, DO YOU HAVE ACCESS TO THIS DOCUMENT AS WELL? >> I BELIEVE. >> IT SHOULD LOOK VERY SIMILAR, THOUGH A LOT CLEANER, HONESTLY. I DON'T KNOW HOW Y'ALL DID THAT. >> VERY NICE. >> IT REALLY UPDATE HERE. WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT NOW, AND WE WON'T BE TAKE ANY ACTION HERE, BUT IT'S JUST TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS. AGAIN, WE HAVE FINALIZED THE GOALS AND CONSTRAINTS, WE ARE WAITING ON FINALIZING THE PROGRESS MEASURES THAT THE ADMINISTRATION IS GOING TO BRING BACK TO US, AND WE'LL LOOK AT AND MAKE SURE ALL IS WELL THERE. BUT ESSENTIALLY, THE STRUCTURE AS BASED IN POLICY HAS NOT CHANGED. WE ARE GOING TO GO THROUGH AND JUST LOOK AT IT. IT IS SET UP EXACTLY THE SAME. IT SHOWS THE SAME BREAKDOWN. WE STILL HAVE FIVE GOALS, 12 POINTS FOR EACH GOAL, DIVIDED UP SIX FOR THE GOAL, AND TWO FOR EACH PROGRESS MEASURE. YOU HAVE FOR THE GOALS, WHICH WE HAVE NUMBERS, THE SAME SET UP HERE, SO FULLY SATISFACTORY IS OUR TARGET, WHICH WE HAD SEEN IN THE LAST SUPERINTENDENT'S REPORT. THEN IF THERE IS NO GROWTH, IT'S UNSATISFACTORY, IF THERE IS GROWTH TOWARDS OUR TARGET, IT IS SLIGHTLY SATISFACTORY, IF WE MEET OUR TARGET, IT WOULD BE FULLY SATISFACTORY, AND IF WE EXCEED THE TARGET BY MORE THAN ONE POINT, IT WOULD BE CLEARLY SUPERIOR. THAT'S WHAT YOU SEE ON THE FIRST TWO PAGES BASED ON EACH OF THOSE. THEN THE CONSTRAINTS, WE'RE STILL WORKING ON, THE ADMINISTRATION AND STILL FINALIZING SOME OF THE THRESHOLDS. THE ONE CHANGE THAT I KNOW WE HAD TALKED ABOUT WAS NOT NECESSARILY EVERYTHING WILL BE A GROWING EVERY SINGLE YEAR. WHAT THE BOARD IS LOOKING AT IN TERMS OF THESE THRESHOLDS ARE, WHAT IS THE MINIMUM NUMBER OF VIABILITY THAT WE FEEL GOOD ABOUT THAT? IT'S IRRESPONSIBLE IN MY PERSONAL OPINION, FOR US TO SAY, EVERYBODY WILL BE HAPPY, WE'LL HAVE 100% SATISFACTION ALL THE TIME. THAT'S JUST NOT THE REALITY OF A SYSTEM. WHAT IS THE NUMBER THAT WE FEEL LIKE WE HAVE A GROUP OF FOLKS, WHETHER STUDENTS OR STAFF OR WHOMEVER, WHO'S SATISFIED WITH THE SYSTEM BECAUSE THEN WE CAN CONTINUE TO WORK ON THE GOALS THAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. WE HAVE GONE IN THIS ROUTE OF THRESHOLDS, WHICH IS THE TARGET WE WANT TO BE AT YEAR AFTER YEAR REGARDLESS. IT'D BE GREAT. I KNOW THE ADMINISTRATION IS NEVER SATISFIED WITH THAT. THEY'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO TRY TO PUSH IT HIGHER, BUT SOME OF THOSE MIGHT BE WERE WE'RE AT ON MAINTAINING THAT THRESHOLD. SOME OF THEM WHEN WE WHATEVER FINALIZE THE THRESHOLDS, THERE MIGHT BE SOME WHERE WE SEE GROWTH, IN WHICH CASE, IT STILL WOULDN'T BE EXPECTED TO BE AT THE THRESHOLD IMMEDIATELY, IT MIGHT BE YEAR OVER YEAR GROWTH, THOSE NUMBERS ARE NOT YET FINALIZED, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE GOING TO LOOK AT. BUT THIS IS HOW IT IS SET UP IN THE EXACT SAME WAY AS PREVIOUSLY. THE SAME PERCENTS HERE, ALL OF THAT AND HOW THIS IS SET UP. I WILL TURN IT OVER FOR A MOMENT FOR DR. ELIZALDE, DR. LEAR, IF YOU WANT TO ADD ANY OTHER CONTEXT OR DRAW OUR ATTENTION TO ANYTHING, THEN WE'LL TAKE QUESTIONS FROM TRUSTEES ABOUT THIS SET UP. >> THANK YOU, TRUSTEE MACKIE, THERE IS ONE AREA THAT AS I LOOKED AT WHEN WE WERE REVIEWING THIS THAT I WANT TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT, AND THAT'S ON PAGE 204. I THINK WE MAY EVEN HAVE TO TAKE THIS BACK TO THE BOARD ITSELF. IF YOU'LL NOTICE ON GOAL 4, OUR HISTORICAL OR ACTUAL DATA FOR THIS YEAR FOR THAT GOAL IS 49. A POINT ABOVE THAT WOULD BE 50. WE REALLY SHOULD HAVE UNDER THE FULLY SATISFACTORY, THAT SHOULD NOT BE A 49, THAT SHOULD ACTUALLY BE A 50, AND THE SUPERIOR OR CLEARLY, [00:40:03] WOULD BE A 51 IN ALL LIKELIHOOD, I HAVE TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT THE LINEAR GRAPH THAT WE CREATED BASED ON OUR HISTORICAL DATA. I'M GOING TO NEED TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT THERE BECAUSE IF YOU NOTICE IF YOU'LL GO BACK, FOR INSTANCE, TO EVEN JUST LOOK AT GOAL 3, GOAL 3, WE'RE AT A 51, AND YOU'LL NOTICE 52 IS FULLY SATISFACTORY. NOW, IN GOAL 2, WE ACTUALLY HAVE TO ACCELERATE, SO WE ARE PLANNING TO GO 41 TO 42.5. BUT ALL OF THEM ARE ABOVE WHERE WE CURRENTLY ARE FOR FULLY SATISFACTORY, EXCEPT FOR GOAL 4. I DO KNOW SOME OF THIS WAS, AS YOU MAY RECALL, WE WERE CHANGING, THIS IS GOING TO BE EIGHTH GRADE MATH PERFORMANCE, WHICH WE HAVE TO CALCULATE DIFFERENTLY THAN THE STATE DOES, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO GO GET ALL THE EIGHTH GRADERS AND ONLY EIGHTH GRADERS THAT TOOK THE EIGHTH GRADE STAR MATH, AND THEN WE HAVE TO GO GET ALL OUR EIGHTH GRADERS THAT TOOK ALGEBRA ONE, AND THEN OUR TEAM HAS TO GO MAKE THAT DATA CORRECTION, IF YOU WILL, IT'S A DIFFERENT AGGREGATION OF THE DATA, BECAUSE THE STATE DOESN'T DO IT THAT WAY, THE STATE ONLY DOES IT BY TEST TAKEN, NOT BY THE GRADE OR THE COURSE THAT THE STUDENT WAS IN. IT'S AN OVERSIGHT, BUT I CAUGHT IT EARLIER TODAY, AND THAT'S THE ONLY AREA THAT I WOULD WANT TO INCREASE JUST BECAUSE I WANT TO BE CONSISTENT AND TRANSPARENT. >> THANK YOU, DR. ELIZALDE. TRUSTEES, ANY QUESTIONS? WE'LL START WITH TRUSTEE GARCIA. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, THE STATE YOU SAID THEY DO IT BASED ON, AND NOW I'M GETTING IT FLIPPED IN MY HEAD, WHAT GRADE THEY WERE IN. THEN WE'RE MAKING SURE WE'RE DESEGREGATED AND RECALCULATING BASED ON THE COURSE THEY WERE. >> CORRECT. THE STATE JUST REPORTS OUT ALGEBRA 1. BUT THAT ALGEBRA 1 NUMBER INCLUDES EIGHT EIGHTH GRADERS, A FEW SEVENTH GRADERS AND A LOT OF NINTH GRADERS. BUT FOR THIS METRIC, WE ARE WANTING TO KNOW HOW ARE OUR EIGHTH GRADE STUDENTS DOING, AND SO THAT'S GOING TO REQUIRE US TO CALCULATE THAT FROM THE DATA THE STATE GIVES US, BUT WE HAVE TO AGGREGATE IT DIFFERENTLY. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT. THANK YOU. >> TRUSTEE SANDERS, I CAN'T SEE YOU IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS. >> JUST ONE. I'LL WAIT FOR MY FACE. THERE IT IS. FOR CCMR, TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, WE DON'T EXPECT ANOTHER CHANGE IN HOW THE STATE IS GOING TO BE ASKING US TO OR I GUESS WE'LL BE HOLDING THIS PARTICULAR ELEMENT ACCOUNTABLE? >> THIS NEW SET OF PERFORMANCE TARGETS, AS WE PRESENTED TO YOU AT THE BOARD MEETING, DOES REFLECT THE CHANGES MAYBE THAT YOU'RE ALLUDING TO, TRUSTEE SANDERS, SO YOU'LL NOTICE THAT OUR ACTUAL IS 91. SOMEONE MAY BE ASKING, WELL, THEN WHY IN THE WORLD ARE YOU SAYING FULLY SATISFACTORY IT'S GOING TO BE A 80? WELL, THAT'S BECAUSE THERE ARE NEW RULES OF WHAT IS COUNTING AND NOT COUNTING AND SO TO THE BEST OF OUR ABILITY, BEING ABLE TO RECALCULATE, ALSO KEEPING IN MIND, THIS IS A YEAR LAG DATA AS WELL, WE HAD TO TAKE BOTH OF THOSE ITEMS AND THEN DO OUR BEST ESTIMATE APPLYING THE NEW RULES AND STILL MAKE IT AN AGGRESSIVE BUT ATTAINABLE TARGET. TO THE BEST OF OUR KNOWLEDGE, THIS SHOULD RESULT IN AT LEAST SOME STABILITY FOR, I WOULD SAY THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. THAT'S CERTAINLY WHAT WE'RE WORKING TOWARDS, BUT IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING THAT TO YOU AS A BOARD AND SAY, THERE ARE SOME CHANGES THAT MIGHT AFFECT THE CURRENT TARGETS. BUT AS OF NOW, WE'VE INCORPORATED THEM INTO OUR PREDICTIONS. >> I KNOW. IT'S ALWAYS A BIT OF A HOT POTATO OR TRYING TO PIN THINGS DOWN, BUT YOU ANSWERED THE QUESTION I WAS THINKING ABOUT. I ACTUALLY UNDERSTOOD THIS YEAR'S CHANGE, [00:45:01] BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IF YOU HAD A IMPRESSION ON HOW SOLID THE STATE IS SAYING THIS CURRENT PERMUTATION IS GOING TO CONTINUE ON. WHAT IT SOUNDS LIKE I HEARD IS, WE'RE ANTICIPATING MAYBE SOME STABILITY FOR FIVE YEARS. OF COURSE, WE'LL REVISE IT, IF NEED BE, BUT JUST STAY ON THE RECORD. IT HELPS US WITH COMMUNICATING TO OUR COMMUNITY THE MORE STABLE THEY KEEP IT. GOT IT. THANK YOU. >> I HAVE ONE COMMENT THAT I WANT TO MAKE SURE IS CORRECT, AND THEN A QUESTION, WHICH IS ON CPM 1.2, THIS IS AROUND THE HABITS OF MIND INDEX. THIS IS ONE WHERE WE CURRENTLY HAVE 0% ALLOCATED TO THIS. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS IS SOMETHING WE ARE BUILDING FROM SCRATCH. IT DOESN'T EXIST, WE'RE BUILDING IT THIS YEAR. WHAT WE ARE THINKING ABOUT IS, OVER TIME, WE ARE GOING TO SEE WHERE OUR STUDENTS ARE AT, AND THEN EXPECT TO GROW TO WHATEVER LEVEL WE THINK IS THE NECESSARY THRESHOLD FOR THAT. BUT I BELIEVE THIS IS GRADE OUT, BECAUSE WE JUST FUNDAMENTALLY, THIS IS BRAND NEW. WE WILL NOT HAVE A BASELINE THIS YEAR AND CERTAINLY NOT GROWTH FROM A BASELINE TO WHERE WE'RE AT. THAT IS WHY WE ARE NOT HAVING A NUMBER HERE THIS YEAR, THOUGH IN FUTURE, I WOULD ASSUME WE ARE ESTABLISHING THE BASELINE THIS YEAR, AND THEN NEXT YEAR, WE WOULD SEE A TARGET, IS THAT ACCURATE? >> THAT'S ACCURATE. >> GREAT. I THINK THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING. I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD JUST LIKE SHOOT IN THE DARK AND GUESS A BASELINE AND FIGURE IT OUT. I THINK IT'S MUCH BETTER TO HAVE THE RIGHT DATA AND HAVE A YEAR DELAY ON SOME OF THOSE. MY QUESTION THEN IS, ARE THERE ANY OTHER AREAS? IN TERMS OF ALL OF THE GOAL PROGRESS MEASURES THAT WE HAVE, I SEE HERE, AND CONSTRAINT PROGRESS MEASURES, ARE THERE ANY OTHER ONES THAT WE DO NOT THINK IS FEASIBLE FOR US TO HAVE BOTH A BASELINE AND A TARGET FOR THE END OF THIS YEAR? >> YES. I THINK WE DO HAVE PAUSE WITH JUST ONE AREA, AND THAT WOULD BE THE READING, WRITING, GPMS, MOSTLY RELATED TO GPM 1.2 AND 1.3. THERE COULD BE A HANDFUL THAT WOULD AFFECT 1.1, BUT DEFINITELY 1.2 AND 1.3, AND THAT'S BECAUSE, AS YOU ALL WELL KNOW, WE EMBRACE OUR DIVERSITY, AND WE HAVE A LARGE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS THAT ARE IN OUR BILINGUAL OR AN ESL INSTRUCTIONAL MODEL. THOSE STUDENTS SPECIFICALLY IN SPANISH, WOULD BE TAKING AN ASSESSMENT THAT WOULD BE SPANISH AND I READY, AND THEY HAD NOT YET ACTUALLY CALIBRATED THAT BECAUSE THE SPANISH ACTUALLY BECAME AVAILABLE JUST OVER THE LAST YEAR OR SO, AND SO THEY REALLY NEED A MINIMUM OF THIS FIRST SEMESTER, BUT OBVIOUSLY, THEIR STATISTICIANS, ALONG WITH OURS, REALLY RECOMMEND THAT A BEST PRACTICE IS AN ENTIRE YEAR OF CALIBRATION ON THAT ASSESSMENT BEFORE. IT HELPS TO ENSURE THAT THERE AREN'T ANY JUST UNFORESEEN PEAKS AND VALLEYS AS THEY REALLY WORK TO ENSURE THAT THE TEST IS MEASURING WHAT IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE MEASURING. WE ARE ANTICIPATING THAT FOR GPM 1.2 AND 1.3, WE WOULD RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD, CERTAINLY TO THIS COMMITTEE AND THEN TO THE BOARD, THAT WE BE ALLOWED TO DIVIDE BY FEWER POINTS, SIMPLY ELIMINATING THEM, UNTIL THE FOLLOWING SCHOOL YEAR FOR THE '26/'27 SCHOOL YEAR, WHEN WE WOULD HAVE AN ENTIRE YEAR OF DATA COLLECTION, THAT WOULD ALLOW US TO SET A GOOD BASELINE. ALL THE OTHERS WERE VERY COMFORTABLE. >> THEN, AND WE WON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT THIS TODAY, COMMITTEE MEMBERS, BUT THAT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WE WILL COME ONCE I THINK WE KNOW WHICH OF THESE WE HAVE BASELINES AND WHAT THE TARGETS ARE FOR. ACTUALLY, LET ME JUST ASK THAT QUESTION, WHAT IS AN APPROPRIATE MONTH IN WHICH WE THINK WE WILL HAVE BASELINES FOR ALL OF THESE AND TARGETS FOR ALL OF THEM? BOTH THE GOAL PROGRESS MEASURES, AS WELL AS THE CONSTRAINT PROGRESS MEASURES AS WE FINALIZE THOSE. >> I THINK NOVEMBER. >> NOVEMBER? GREAT. WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE THEN COMMITTEE IS IN NOVEMBER, WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE ANOTHER ONE OF THESE ONCE ALREADY NOVEMBER, DECEMBER, SOMEWHERE IN THAT RANGE, WHERE WE WILL ACTUALLY THEN LOOK AT EACH OF THE TARGETS. I KNOW THE BOARD WILL HAVE TO SEE ALL OF THE PROGRESS MEASURES AS WELL, BECAUSE I KNOW WE HAVEN'T FINISHED THE PROGRESS MEASURES AS PART OF THAT SO THAT MIGHT COME ON TO THE BOARD AGENDA SEPARATELY FROM THIS. [00:50:01] BUT ONCE THE TARGETS ARE ALL SET FOR OUR PROGRESS MEASURES, AND THE BOARD ADMINISTRATION FEELS GOOD ABOUT IT, ETC, THEN WE WILL COME BACK AND APPLY THOSE TARGETS IN THE ANNUAL TARGETS TO THIS FORM RIGHT HERE, SO WE'LL HAVE THOSE NUMBERS. IN THAT INSTANCE, AS DR. ELIZALDE JUST MENTIONED, IF WE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE HAVE A MEANINGFUL BASELINE AND A TARGET ON 1.2 AND 1.3, THEN THAT'LL BE A DECISION OF THIS COMMITTEE TO DECIDE HOW TO REALLOCATE THOSE POINTS. DO WE JUST STRIKE THEM ENTIRELY AND NOT HAVE THEM? DO WE REALLOCATE THEM UP SO THAT THE GOAL IS WORTH TEN POINTS AND THE ONE PROGRESS MEASURE WE HAVE IS WORTH FIVE POINTS? DO WE PUT THEM SOMEWHERE ELSE? THAT'LL BE THE CONVERSATION WE'LL HAVE. I'M SURE ADMINISTRATION WILL HAVE A RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN WE CAN MAKE WHATEVER DECISION WE WANT TO RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD. BUT WE ARE NOT IN ANY TIMELINE TO RECOMMEND THIS BECAUSE WHILE WE DO WANT TO FINALIZE THIS RELATIVELY SOON, SO DR. ELIZALDE KNOWS WHAT SHE'S WORKING TOWARDS THIS COMING YEAR, I DON'T SEE US BEING FAR OFF FROM THIS. THAT IS WHAT WILL BE COMING NEXT ON THIS. TRUSTEES, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS AS IT RELATES TO THE '25/'26 APPRAISAL INSTRUMENT? >> NO. >> WELL, THEN THAT CONCLUDES OUR FIRST SUPERINTENDENT EVALUATION COMMITTEE MEETING THIS MONTH, WE'LL LOOK FORWARD TO HAVING ANOTHER ONE ONCE SOME OF THIS DATA IS AVAILABLE. AGAIN, ACTION STEPS HERE IS WHEN THE PROGRESS MEASURES ARE FINALIZED WITH BASELINES AND TARGETS FOR BOTH CONSTRAINTS AND GOALS, I WOULD EXPECT THE BOARD WOULD SEE THAT. BUT THEN WE WOULD THEN REVIEW IT IN RELATION TO THIS INSTRUMENT IN NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER AND MAKE ANY FINAL RECOMMENDATIONS. WITH THAT, THE TIME IS NOW 4:57 P.M, AND THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.