[00:00:03]
ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THEE, TEXAS ONE STATE UNDER GOD ONE AND INDIVISIBLE.
A QUORUM OF THE SUPERINTENDENT'S EVALUATION AD HOC COMMITTEE IS PHYSICALLY PRESENT AT THIS LOCATION.
YOU'VE GOT A NEW ROLE. WHAT'S YOUR NEW TITLE? [LAUGHTER] OUR DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT, DR.
PAMELA LEAR, JOINS US IN PLACE OF DR.
ELIZALDE, WHO WILL JOIN US SHORTLY.
AND I AM BEN MACKEY, THE COMMITTEE CHAIR.
[5. Discussion Items]
TRUSTEES, WE REVIEWED THIS LAST TIME, SO I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO DR.THANK YOU, TRUSTEE MACKEY, AND GOOD AFTERNOON, TRUSTEE WEINBERG AND TRUSTEE CARREÓN.
TRUSTEE MACKEY DO WE NEED TO GO BACK OVER THINGS THAT WE DISCUSSED, OR SHOULD I JUST GO WITH THE FEEDBACK THE PANEL GAVE AND THE NEW TARGETS? I'D SAY HIT THE NEW TARGETS AND THE NEW UPDATES.
UNLESS I [INAUDIBLE] EVERYTHING.
THE LAST TIME WE MET, THERE WAS FEEDBACK THAT WAS GIVEN REGARDING THE GENERAL FUND BALANCE.
SO I'M GOING TO GO THERE FIRST.
IF WE CAN SCROLL DOWN JUST A LITTLE BIT, IT'S ACTUALLY ON THE NEXT PAGE.
YES. IS THERE ONE MORE? OH, YEAH. THERE. OH, UP A LITTLE BIT.
THERE WE GO. OKAY, SO WE HAVE GENERAL FUND BALANCE OR SURPLUS RIGHT TOWARD THE END OF THIS PAGE.
AND THERE WAS CONVERSATION AROUND WHAT THE TARGET SHOULD BE.
AND SO OUR POLICY STATES THAT WE SHOULD HAVE TWO MONTHS OF FUND BALANCE AT ALL TIMES.
SO TWO MONTHS OF FUND BALANCE IS $336 MILLION.
WE FELT THREE MONTHS AT $503 MILLION WOULD BE CLEARLY SUPERIOR.
AND THEN FOR SOMEWHAT SATISFACTORY WE HAVE 1.5 MONTHS.
AND THEN FOR UNSATISFACTORY WE HAVE ONE MONTH.
AND WE JUST USED WE USE THE POLICY TO GUIDE THAT DECISION.
SO I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANTED TO DISCUSS THAT ONE NOW OR WAIT UNTIL? YEAH, WE CAN TAKE QUESTIONS ON THAT.
DO YOU HAVE ANY. I HAVE ONE QUESTION AND THIS MAY NOT BE FOR THIS.
THAT'S IN POLICY HUH? CORRECT. THAT'S CE LOCAL.
AND THIS MAY NOT BE A QUESTION SO MUCH ABOUT HOW YOU MARKED IT.
THAT MAKES SENSE ON HOW YOU TARGETED IT HERE.
MY QUESTION FOR YOU, TAMIKA, IS, IS TWO MONTHS THE MOST? IS THAT BEST PRACTICE OR WOULD YOU RECOMMEND US CONSIDER LOOKING AT THAT POLICY AGAIN WITH UPDATED BEST PRACTICES? GOOD AFTERNOON EVERYONE.
BEST PRACTICE OR OPTIMAL PRACTICE, I'LL SAY, IS UPWARDS OF 90 DAYS.
BUT CONSIDERING THE SIZE OF OUR DISTRICT AND THE SIZE OF OUR PAYROLL BUDGET, I THINK THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO REMEMBER THAT AS A DISTRICT THAT HEAVILY DEPENDS ON LOCAL PROPERTY VALUES AND COLLECTING THOSE TAX DOLLARS, THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN UNTIL DECEMBER TO FEBRUARY. SO ESSENTIALLY FROM JULY THROUGH THE END OF THE YEAR, WE'RE USING OUR SAVINGS OR OUR FUND BALANCE TO HELP KEEP OUR CASH FLOW STEADY.
AND SO I HIGHLY SUGGEST OR RECOMMEND THAT WE CONSIDER MORE THAN 90 DAYS TO BE
[00:05:09]
OPTIMAL OR BEST PRACTICE FOR A DISTRICT OF OUR SIZE.AM I ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION? YES, YOU ANSWERED THAT, AND I HAVE LESS OF A CONCERN ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR PART, BECAUSE YOU ALL HAVE DONE CONSISTENTLY ON EACH OF THESE, WHICH IS IDENTIFY WHAT THE POLICY OR THE GOALS ARE SET THAT AS SATISFACTORY AND THEN GO UP AND DOWN FROM THERE.
I THINK THAT IS HELPFUL FOR ME BECAUSE MY REACTION IS, OH, THAT'S LOW.
BUT THAT'S NOT A QUESTION FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT EVALUATION COMMITTEE.
THAT'S A QUESTION FOR US ON CE LOCAL.
CE LOCAL IS THE POLICY WHERE THAT INFORMATION IS STATED.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS HERE? OKAY. DR. LEAR, BACK TO YOU.
AND SO JUST FOR MY NOTES HERE, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU WANTED TO BE ALTERED FOR THAT PARTICULAR AREA IN THE EVALUATION? I WOULD DEFER TO MY COLLEAGUES, BUT TO ME THIS SOUNDS LIKE IT IS MORE OF RATHER THAN PICKING AND CHOOSING THE NUMBER EVERY TIME BASED ON WHAT PEOPLE SAY; I THINK WE NEED TO SET THAT IN POLICY, AND IT MAKES SENSE FOR THIS TO BE WHAT THE POLICY SAYS.
OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT GUIDANCE.
I'M GOING TO DRAW OUR ATTENTION TO GPM 5.3.
WE GOT NEW VALUES IN SINCE THE LAST TIME WE MET.
AND I'D LIKE TO GO OVER THOSE WITH YOU.
AND I HAVE OUR TEAM HERE IF WE HAVE MORE GRANULAR QUESTIONS.
SO I'M GOING TO START WITH GPM 5.3.
AND THAT'S LOOKING AT OUR LEVEL ONE AND LEVEL TWO CERTIFICATES.
AND WE JUST GOT THAT NUMBER IN AND WE'RE AT 470.
SO WE HAVE EXCEEDED THE ACTUAL TARGET.
AND IN SPEAKING WITH DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT LUSK, AND I THINK THROUGH THE STUDENT OUTCOME GOAL DISCUSSIONS THAT WE'VE HAD HERE AT THE BOARD, YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S BEEN FAR MORE INTENTIONALITY WITH CCMR. AND SO WE'RE EXCITED ABOUT THOSE GAINS.
AND I KNOW THAT WE HAVE EXCEEDED THE TARGET.
WHAT WE HAVE PUT IN PLACE HERE IS ANYTHING THAT'S BELOW THE TARGET 445 WOULD BE UNSATISFACTORY.
AND WE STAYED WITH THE FORMULA AND KEPT THE TARGET AS IT IS, THE ONES THAT THE STUDENT OUTCOME, GOALS AND TARGETS THAT WERE ADOPTED BY THE BOARD AT 445 AND THEN CLEARLY SUPERIOR WOULD BE 450.
THIS IS ONE THAT DOESN'T FOLLOW THE FORMAT.
WE HAVE BEEN JUST ADDING ONE POINT HERE.
AGAIN, I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING TO CELEBRATE.
THE VALUE THAT CAME THROUGH WAS 65.1%, WHICH EXCEEDS THE TARGET FOR THIS YEAR.
SO AGAIN, FOLLOWING THAT SAME FORMULA, ANYTHING UNDER 61% WOULD BE UNSATISFACTORY.
WE HAVE NOTHING AT SOMEWHAT SATISFACTORY.
THE NEXT VALUE IS 61 AT FULLY SUCCESSFUL.
AND THEN ADDING ONE MORE POINT AT 62.
IF WE GO DOWN TO GPM 5.5, THAT'S LOOKING AT OUR PERCENT OF COLLEGE ENROLLMENT.
THIS PARTICULAR TARGET ACTUALLY WENT DOWN AND WE'RE AT 55.9%.
THE TARGETS THAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING FOR THE SUPERINTENDENT EVALUATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR GPM IS ANYTHING BELOW 55.9 WOULD BE UNSATISFACTORY.
SET 57 ADDING A POINT WOULD BE SOMEWHAT.
FULLY SUCCESSFUL WOULD BE 64%.
AND ADDING ONE MORE PERCENTAGE POINT WOULD BE 65 AT CLEARLY SUPERIOR.
SO DID YOU WANT TO STOP AND TALK ABOUT THIS? THIS IS OUR SECTION ON GOAL FIVE FOR CCMR. THANK YOU AND I WANT TO WELCOME DR.
ELIZALDE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.
YOU'RE FINE. TRUSTEES DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THESE?
[00:10:01]
I APPRECIATE YOU ALL STICKING WITH THE FORMAT FOR IT.I THINK IT MAKES COMPLETE SENSE.
I KNOW SOME MIGHT SAY, WELL, WHY ARE WE IF WE ALREADY EXCEEDED IT, WHY ARE WE STAYING WITH THAT? BUT I THINK JUST AS I KNOW THIS BOARD, IF IT WERE LOWER, WOULDN'T ADJUST TO BE LOWER, NOR SHOULD WE PUNISH THE SUPERINTENDENT.
SO I THINK IT MAKES TOTAL SENSE TO HAVE THEM HOW YOU DID.
AND I WOULD ALSO NOTE, I THINK THE 450 ALMOST FOLLOWS EXACTLY THE SAME FORMAT.
FIVE MORE STUDENTS IS 1%, SO I THINK IT MAKES TOTAL SENSE.
OKAY. WE WENT OVER GENERAL FUND SURPLUS.
SO OUR NEXT AREA IS ACTUALLY IN CONSTRAINTS.
THE NEXT NEW NUMBER IS ACTUALLY FINANCIAL SOLVENCY.
SO MATERIAL WEAKNESSES AND SIGNIFICANT DEFICIENCIES.
AND WE DID GET THAT INFORMATION IN WHICH IS ZERO.
DID YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING? YES. I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT WE WILL BE PRESENTING THAT INFORMATION FORMALLY IN NOVEMBER.
OUR EXTERNAL AUDITORS ARE FINALIZING EVERYTHING AND WRAPPING UP THE DOCUMENTS.
BUT I DID MEET WITH THEM TODAY TO GO OVER OUR FINANCIALS.
AND THE INFORMATION THAT'S SHARED HERE IS ACCURATE.
SO IT'S DEFINITELY SOMETHING WE'LL CELEBRATE WHEN THE TIME IS RIGHT.
AND YOU CAN SEE THE TARGETS THAT WE'VE SET WE'VE REMAINED CONSISTENT.
AND ANYTHING THREE OR OR ABOVE WOULD BE UNSATISFACTORY.
AND THEN CLEARLY SUPERIOR IS ZERO.
WE TALKED ABOUT CONSTRAINT 5.2 LAST TIME, AND WE HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL AREAS THAT I'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU.
WE HAVE OUR OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION THAT CAME IN AND THAT'S USING OUR.
CAN WE SCROLL DOWN PLEASE? LET'S SEE IF WE CAN.
UP A LITTLE FURTHER ON THE LAST PAGE, PLEASE.
THANKS. WE HAVE OUR OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION AND THAT'S USING OUR LET'S TALK PLATFORM.
AND THAT'S WHERE OUR PARENTS AND OUR CONSTITUENTS CAN HAVE INTERACTIONS WITH STAFF AND DEPARTMENTS ON CONCERNS OR QUESTIONS OR THOUGHTS THAT THEY HAVE.
SO THAT'S THE CUSTOMER EXPERIENCE.
THE SCORES THAT WE CAN HAVE IS ANYWHERE BETWEEN 1 AND 10, TEN BEING THE HIGHEST.
AND SO WE FEEL THAT AN 8.0 IS A SATISFACTORY LEVEL OF CUSTOMER SERVICE.
WE'RE PRETTY PROUD OF THIS NUMBER.
THIS TIME WE WE SCORED AT 8.4, WHICH WE THINK IS PRETTY PHENOMENAL.
YOU CAN SEE THAT WE'VE INCLUDED 8.4 AS FULLY SUFFICIENT OR FULLY SATISFACTORY.
AND WE DID THAT BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT A CONTINUUM OF ZERO OR 1 TO 10, WE BELIEVE THAT A SATISFACTORY LEVEL WOULD BE AN 8.0.
SO HAVING AN 8.4 IS, WE THINK, STILL A HIGH BAR.
SO ANYTHING UNDER 8.0 WOULD BE UNSATISFACTORY.
SHOWING PROGRESS WOULD BE 8.1, FULLY SATISFACTORY, 8.4 AND THEN CLEARLY SUPERIOR WOULD BE 8.5.
THE LAST VALUE THAT I'D LIKE TO SHARE WITH YOU IS TAX PAYERS.
SO EVERY YEAR WE HAVE HANOVER WHO DOES AN EXTERNAL REVIEW OR A SURVEY TO OUR TAXPAYERS.
SO THEY'RE NOT NECESSARILY PARENTS.
IT'S JUST ANYONE WHO LIVES IN OUR ATTENDANCE AREA.
AND WE'VE RECEIVED THE VALUE BACK.
WE HAVEN'T RECEIVED THE REPORT, SO WE SHOULD GET THAT REPORT.
THEY'RE TELLING ME BY THE 20TH OF OCTOBER, BUT THAT SCORE IS A 57%.
SO IT DID GO DOWN SOME FROM LAST YEAR.
AND WE HAVE TARGETS SET AT ANYTHING UNDER 57 WOULD BE UNSATISFACTORY.
AND WE ADD A POINT FOR EACH COLUMN MOVING FORWARD.
SO THOSE ARE THE NEW VALUES THAT WE RECEIVED SINCE OUR LAST TIME MEETING.
[00:15:02]
AND WE'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.THANK YOU, DR. ALFORD-STEPHENS.
TRUSTEES, ANY QUESTIONS ON ANY OF THOSE ITEMS? VERY TALKATIVE BUNCH WE HAVE.
SO STAYING HERE AT A CERTAIN POINT, AGAIN, I DON'T THINK IT'S BEEN A SECRET.
I THINK ONE OF THE HARDEST THINGS FOR ME ABOUT THE EVALUATION IS WHEN IT MOVES EVERY YEAR AND JUST ADAPTS INSTEAD OF SETTING WHAT THE GOALS ARE, SO EVERYONE CAN BE CLEAR ABOUT IT. ON SOME OF THESE, I'M WONDERING, LIKE THE OVERALL CUSTOMER SATISFACTION, I ALSO WOULDN'T WANT IT TO BE THE CASE WHERE YOU KEEP MAKING PROGRESS EVERY YEAR AND THEN YOU GET IT TO 9.9, AND SO THEN 9.9 BECOMES FULLY SATISFACTORY.
FOR THESE COULDN'T WE SET WHAT WE TRULY THINK BASED ON NATIONAL NORMS OR WHATEVER IS UNSATISFACTORY, IS FULLY SATISFACTORY AND IS COMPLETELY SATISFACTORY, AND IT JUST IS WHAT IT IS. SO FOR INSTANCE, IF EIGHT IS THERE LIKE EIGHT STAYS UNSATISFACTORY, FULLY SATISFACTORY IS 8.5 AND COMPLETELY SATISFACTORY IS NINE.
AND THEN IT JUST IS WHATEVER IT IS, WHEREVER YOU FALL IN THAT? I DON'T KNOW, I'M NOT NECESSARILY TIED TO THOSE NUMBERS.
SAME THING FOR PARENTS AND TAXPAYERS.
THESE ONES THAT HAVE BEEN CONSISTENT LIKE IS TAXPAYERS IS 60% THE BAR THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT HANOVER DOES NATIONWIDE THAT WE SHOULD BE AT, I DON'T KNOW, I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S A LOT OF WORK FOR YOU ALL EVERY SINGLE YEAR.
AND IT'S HARD FOR ME AT LEAST, TO JUDGE HOW THIS FITS IN THE GREATER THING RATHER THAN JUST SETTING IT, EXPLAINING THAT THIS IS HOW THESE HAVE BEEN SET AND THEN IT JUST GETS PLUGGED IN. SO I'M CURIOUS, ANY THOUGHTS OR REACTIONS TO THAT? MAYBE NOT FOR THIS YEAR, BUT FOR FUTURE YEARS.
SO, YOU KNOW, LIKE IN THIS CASE, WE WERE AT AN 8.4.
RIGHT. AND SO IF WE SET FULLY SUCCESSFUL AT 8.0 THEN WE WOULD EXCEED IT.
I MEAN, WE'RE HAPPY TO DO THAT BECAUSE WE WANT TO STAY ABOVE AN EIGHT.
YEAH. LIKE I MEAN I HAVE NO CONCERN WITH THAT.
RIGHT. LIKE THAT MIGHT BE 8.59 OR WHATEVER.
LIKE WHEN WE JUST THINK ABOUT GRADES IN GENERAL, RIGHT? 90% IS GENERALLY LIKE THAT'S AN A THAT DOESN'T CHANGE.
IT'S LIKE, WELL, YOU KNOW, MR. MACKEY GOT A 90 ON THIS TEST.
SO NEXT TIME IN ORDER FOR HIM TO GET AN A, WE WANT HIM TO GET A 95.
AND CONVERSELY, THAT WOULD BE TRUE ON THE OTHER END.
RIGHT. TAXPAYERS CLEARLY WE'VE HAD A DIP HERE.
CERTAINLY ASKING OUR TEAM, WHAT DO WE THINK HAS AFFECTED FROM A 65 TO A 57.
AND THERE'S THINGS WE CAN DO TO DIG INTO THE DATA.
BUT IF WE HAD SET 60 AND I'M JUST THROWING THAT NUMBER OUT AS WELL, IF WE HAD SET 60 AS THAT IS WHAT WE THINK IS YOU KNOW GOOD, THEN WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE SOMETHING ABOVE THAT TO BE, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY AT THE CLEARLY SATISFACTORY AND SO ON.
BUT THAT WAY YOU WOULDN'T HAVE A MOVING TARGET AND SO I THINK IN SOME OF THESE, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM WHEN YOU'RE SETTING STUDENT GOALS THAT YOU'RE ALWAYS TRYING TO IMPROVE UPON. BUT THESE ARE, THOSE KINDS OF LIKE THE THINGS THAT HAPPEN EVERYWHERE.
AND YOU'RE JUST TRYING TO SAY WITHIN THE SCHOOLS THAT HANOVER DOES, WHAT DO THEY THINK IS X, Y, AND Z? SO OUR TEAM CERTAINLY CAN BRING BACK FURTHER DATA ON WHAT THAT WOULD BE.
AND I'LL MAKE SURE TO MEET WITH HANOVER TO SEE WHAT THAT NATIONWIDE DATA STATES.
AND THEN WE CAN IT SOUNDS LIKE WE'RE AMENABLE TO CHANGING THAT TO BE THE NATIONAL AVERAGE FOR FULLY SATISFACTORY. YEAH, I MEAN, I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE.
PERSONALLY, I LEAN ON MY COLLEAGUES OR WHATNOT.
YEAH. EXACTLY YOUR POINT ABOUT.
ALL RIGHT. YOU GOT AN A THAT'S NOT AN A FOR YOU ANYMORE, 95 FOR YOU.
LIKE THAT DOESN'T QUITE MAKE SENSE.
AND I THINK IT'S TO YOUR POINT, DR.
SO ON THE ONES THAT WE DON'T HAVE DATA ON, PARTICULARLY STUDENT EXPERIENCE AND OKAY, STUDENT
[00:20:09]
EXPERIENCE IN THE GAP.OR HOW ARE WE GOING TO CALCULATE THE FULLY SATISFACTORY, I GUESS, IS MY QUESTION BASED ON WHAT THE DATA COMES BACK IN? RIGHT. AND BASICALLY WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DOING BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TARGETS FOR CONSTRAINTS, IS WE BASE THE PERFORMANCE TARGET ON THE VALUE THAT WE GET FOR THIS YEAR.
BUT WE HAVE A. THAT MAKE SENSE? WE HAVE AN END TARGET FOR CONSTRAINTS.
YES WE DO. WE HAVE AN END TARGET FOR.
SO FOR 1.1 THROUGH 1.3, IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT ON THIS EVALUATION TOOL BECAUSE WE'RE COMBINING THEM ON THE CONSTRAINTS DOCUMENT. THEY'RE ALL DISAGGREGATED BY YOU KNOW SO WE HAVE CPM 1.1, 1.2, 1.3 THAT ARE SEPARATE.
RIGHT. BUT THEN WE ADD THEM TOGETHER RIGHT.
YEAH. AND SO WE ADD THEM TOGETHER. CORRECT. DO WE AVERAGE THEM OR DO WE ADD THEM.
YEAH. COULD WE? SO WE CAN THEORETICALLY THOUGH, LOOK AT THE CONSTRAINTS.
AND IF THE GOAL IS 68, 58 AND 64.
AVERAGE IT. AVERAGE THOSE FOR THREE YEARS AND THEN CUT IT IN A THIRD, A THIRD, A THIRD UNTIL WE GET THERE? WE COULD. WOULD YOU LIKE THAT? I MEAN, I JUST THINK, AGAIN, IF WE'RE TRYING TO GET THERE, IT'S GOT TO ALIGN TO THAT.
SO I WOULD JUST WANT TO KNOW, LIKE WHAT THE FORMULA IS TO GET THOSE RATHER THAN AGAIN.
OKAY. WE WILL ONCE THAT DATA COMES IN WE WILL WORK ON A FORMULA FOR THAT CONSTRAINT.
AND WE'LL NEED TO DO THE SAME THING FOR 4.1.
YEAH IT SEEMS LIKE 4.1 IF THE GOAL WAS 8.5, IF 5.5, AND IF IN THREE YEARS 2025, 24, 23.
SO IT SEEMS LIKE IT MIGHT BE 7.5 AND THEN 6.5 AND THEN 5.5.
RIGHT. WHICHEVER YEAR WE'RE IN.
OKAY. OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. WE WILL LOOK AT THAT AND BRING IT BACK.
SO ON. THAT'S SO SMALL ON CONSTRAINT FOR THAT YELLOW IS ON CONSTRAINT FOR THE 2ND NOVEMBER, RIGHT? YES. IT'S 4.1.
AND SO I DON'T HAVE THE INSTRUMENT FOR ME.
SO YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A NUMERICAL GOAL OF REDUCTION FROM 8.5 TO 5.5.
AND THEN YOU HAVE A GAP CLOSING GOAL FOR CPM 4.2.
IS THAT REFLECTED ON THERE? YES.
AND 4.1 IS THE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS WHO HAVE PROFICIENT ONE OR HIGHER TEACHERS.
OKAY I CAN SEE IT UNDERNEATH THERE.
THANK YOU. I JUST DIDN'T HAVE THE REVISED IN FRONT OF ME.
[LAUGHTER] ALL RIGHT. THOSE ARE ALL THE QUESTIONS I HAVE ON THIS.
SO WITH THAT WE CAN MOVE ON TO 5.02.
OKAY. AND CONGRATULATIONS, DR.
ALFORD-STEPHENS ON THE ZERO FINDINGS.
SO TRUSTEE MACKEY NOTHING HAS CHANGED FROM THE INCENTIVE PLAN.
ALL OF THE VALUES ARE ALIGNED WITH FULLY SUCCESSFUL.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT, WELL, THEN, THERE YOU HAVE IT.
WE HAVE. OH, WE DO HAVE THE AGENDA.
I'D JUST LIKE TO SKIP AROUND, SO WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM 6.01.
[6. Action Item]
CONSIDER AND TAKE POSSIBLE ACTION TO RECOMMEND TO THE FULL BOARD THE SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS EVALUATION SYSTEM EVALUATION INSTRUMENT AND 2023-24 TARGETS. AND SO DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOVE TO APPROVE. SECOND.OKAY. IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
OKAY. CAN I JUST SAY ONE THING? SO I JUST WANT TO DRAW TO YOUR ATTENTION WE'RE STILL WAITING ON TWO VALUES.
[00:25:05]
VALUES. BUT IF YOU DON'T AGREE TO MOVE FORWARD, WE WOULD NEED TO SCHEDULE ANOTHER AD HOC COMMITTEE, PROBABLY IN NOVEMBER, SO THAT YOU CAN SEE THOSE TWO VALUES.YEAH. AND SO THAT'S THE REAL QUESTION IS DO WE FEEL COMFORTABLE MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS FORMAT WITH THE VALUES AS DISCUSSED THAT WE WOULD THEN LOOK AT? AND OF COURSE ANY CHANGES CAN BE MADE AT THAT TIME AS WELL OR WOULD WE LIKE TO HAVE IT COME BACK TO US WITH THE FULL VALUES BEFORE WE RECOMMEND IT? DO YOU ALL HAVE ANY STRONG FEELINGS ON THAT? FEELS LIKE WE'VE GOT THE MATERIAL FULL, NUMERICAL EQUATION FILLED OUT.
SO I THINK THAT THOSE WHICH CAN BE DISCUSSED IF NEEDED LATER.
SO ALL RIGHT THEN IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED.
ARE THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR? WE'LL VOTE BY HAND.
SO ALL IN FAVOR OF MOVING FORWARD TO RECOMMEND TO THE FULL BOARD RAISE YOUR HAND.
ALL RIGHT. IT PASSES THREE TO NOTHING.
AND THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.