Betsy. Uh, welcome to the slightly delayed November 13, 2025 meeting of the Brookline School Committee. [snorts] Uh, I'll note that several of us are remote. Marrian O'Briga, Andy Lou, Carolyn Th,
and myself are um remote today. Um, and without further ado, let's get started. Consent agenda 1A is the the past record October 22nd, 2025 school committee meeting. Is there a motion to approve?
>> Second. >> Okay. All in >> Jesse. >> Jesse. >> Yes. >> Bob. >> Yes. >> Suzanne. >> Yes. >> Sarah. >> Yes. >> Donna. >> Yes. >> Carolyn. Yes.
>> Mariah, >> yes. >> Andy, >> yes. >> And I also vote yes. Uh, moving on to our next item, accounts payable report. >> Is there anything to report or are we just accepting the the report? >> We just Yeah, >> we just consent agenda. It
>> Well, I think she did 1 A first. >> We did one A for one being >> wasn't the whole consent agenda, but 1B is the copy of last week's. >> Yeah, it's just it should have been in the consent agenda. Sorry, I missed. >> [clears throat] >> We can we we can move to approve it.
I'll move it. >> Great. I'll second it. Jesse, how do you vote? >> Yes. >> Bob, >> yes. >> Sarah, >> yes. >> Suzanne, >> yes. >> Donna, >> yes. >> Carolyn, >> yes. >> Mariah, >> yes. >> Andy, >> yes.
>> And I [snorts] vote yes as well. Uh, moving on to administrative business, we have the acceptance of gifts and a possible vote to authorize BHS class of 95 to serve alcohol. We'll take them one at a time um but hopefully quickly with
uh gratitude to the uh donors. 2A is a gift from Larry Jordan who was the um the ACE learning center teacher for $5,000 to the ACE scholarship fund and the the Brooklyn High PTO with also with
with gratitude $8,950 to support the senior essay workshop. Can we take two A and B together? >> Yes, we can. >> Is there a motion? I I'll move to approve A and B with gratitude to the donors. I would just highlight that
finance approved them unanimously yesterday, too. >> Thank you, Mariah. Um, Mariah, how do you vote? >> Yes. >> Carolyn, >> yes. >> Andy, >> yes. >> Bob, >> yes. >> Jesse, >> yes. >> Sarah, >> yes. >> Suzanne, >> yes.
>> Donna, >> yes. >> And I also [clears throat] vote yes. And again, gratitude to the donors. Um 2C is a possible vote to authorize BHS class of 95 to serve alcohol during their 30th reunion celebration on November 29th from 7 to 10 at the high school. Is
there a motion to authorize? >> So move. >> Second. >> Bob moves. Jesse seconds. Bob, how do you vote? >> I vote yes. >> Jesse, >> yes. >> Farah, >> yes. >> Suzanne, >> yes. >> Donna, >> yes. >> Carolyn,
>> yes. Mariah, >> yes. >> Andy, >> yes. >> And I also vote yes. Um, moving on to our student report. Aditi, floor is yours. >> Hi, I'm going to share my screen now.
Okay. Hi everyone. This is the November VHS update. I don't have all that much to report from November, but some of the big things are that quarter 1 ended last Friday. So, and quarter 2 has just started. What this means is basically um
students are getting their report cards sent home for the quarter. And um for most students, this isn't going to be sent out to colleges, but for seniors, quarter grades are reported to colleges. for freshman through junior. For
freshman through juniors, these are just contributing to final grades. Then also for the past two Tuesdays, we've had no school. On the 4th, there was um a professional development day. And then this past Tuesday, the 11th, we had
school off for Veterans Day. And finally, um with the fall sports season ending, um lots of practices have ended. people have had their final games and meets. I know that crew has ended and um swim has
ended for the season and tryyouts are approaching for lots of winter sports. And that's all I have for today. >> Thank you very much. Any questions for our student? Thank you for your report. Um next up we have the superintendent's report.
>> Thank you. And so um I'll try to keep my update brief. Mostly I've been in schools concentrating on being in schools this week and last week I've been in um four of the schools and actually a lot of time in the high school and I had the pleasure today to
meet with um the students in LEAP which is the AAPI leadership and affinity group and there were about 30 or 40 students that were present and I really enjoyed um talking with them and hearing questions from them and so um there
there was that last week I was invited to be with the with the Beth Advisory of Board membership group for their annual breakfast when they're bringing those two groups together and um and that was really great to listen to them and and share some of the thoughts and hopes
that I have for the district as we look forward. Um the week before I was um also met with the LGBTQ task force and so that group is different because it has actually parents and students al together. >> Bella, I'm sorry to interrupt but um a
member of the public just told me that the big stream is not working. >> The big screen is not >> the big like the big live stream online is not working. But they're saying that it's still showing the Koolage corner picture. >> That's correct. I'm going to let them know that they need to alert the public
somehow. because it it it will not work tonight. >> Um so Bake has told us that the stream will not work tonight. We are recording it. Um we just thought to put a notice on so that people will see that. >> Okay. So there's no way for people to tune into the Zoom as attendees. Okay.
>> Well, audio is going to work. >> Sorry to interrupt. I just that's >> Let me um see if I can give something to big that they can put on that screen. So give us a couple minutes. But thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you. Right. Um, so, so over
the last couple weeks I've been at FRR, I've been at Lawrence, um, Driscoll, Baker, Pays, and Blanket. And, um, and while meeting with the principles, we talk about the things that we're doing to work toward our goals. So, around
vision of a learner, also the literacy implementation, how that's going, and actually, we talk a lot about supervision evaluation when I'm in their buildings 101. Um and I also want to appreciate all the hard work of our teams around OAF, OTL,
OSS and everyone will be presenting tonight. So as actually not OSF tonight, OSF last um OTL last time, not and but it'll be OSF and OAF. Um again modeling the use of data to inform our practice.
Um but also reflecting on the work we're doing around the budget and preparation for a possible override. Um there is we have been hard at work. I know that um we have a lot of committees working and seeking answers of us and um so you'll
hear a presentation by Deputy Superintendent Susan Given um for OAF on where we are in budget preparation and also in answering some of those questions. um she will present where
we're at right now, which is a a projection looking forward, but it doesn't reflect the work of efficiencies or um determining reorganization, restoration, or improvements moving forward. So, it's just where we're at
right now where we progress um on that work. And one last thing I just want to say about AI. Um actually AI has been um something that we've been talking about through the summer and um and just tapping into
professional development and policy state policy um leaders that are out there um checking where MASC is and also where DESI is on AI and so at this juncture I just want to make clear that
it's important to have policies that made clear that the use of AI all the policies around plagiarism and academic honesty uh and also acceptable use policies are connected. So sometimes when we
we don't make that explicit people may assume oh this is AI but um and and not be conscious of the implications of academic honesty. So regardless all of those play into the use of AI that's
that's one aspect of looking at um AI. The other aspect of AI and this is where currently looking at DETI and Mic is um everyone sort of is taking more of a wait and see posture seeing how this
technology will evolve and also um thinking more about the implications as we see how it how it how it will evolve. I will say ignoring that that is is is actually not
practical and um and actually not meeting our responsibility as we educate students for the future. Um, but what that might look like really takes some thinking. And so I would say we have to make clear that for academic honesty
that applies to all uses of AI and then how we use AI in terms of um learning, fostering learning and actually AI could be tools for deeper learning but that actually takes some training and some scaffolding to support that. So it does
take some thought, right? So just two different things. um or two two impacts that AI have on us. So one one is very practical no-brainer and the other part we need to sort of step back
and look at it and think about it but ignoring it actually is not an option. >> Great. Thank you. >> Thank you, Superintendent Wong. Any questions for the superintendent? >> Yeah, I have questions on on you know we're starting to get these letters of
the civics class at Lawrence 8th grade. We got two or three so far. They're delightful and they're well well done. And just personally, I'm I'm responding to every one of them with a with my own thoughts about what they wrote that they're hearing from a school committee member, an adult saying complimenting
them on it and and and thanking for recognizing this problem. In the absence then still of a of a policy though, are we relying on guidelines from some group within the district for uh teachers and
or um curricular coordinators, deans or principles to set something into place because we know it's being used already. Do you mean Oh, so with respect to the implications that academic honesty those apply
>> um with respect to how we use it to foster ways of thinking, deeper learning, that's still in process. Yes. And so I I think um there's a big conference coming up um on AI that I know that a a lot of
us are attending. So everyone's training right now. So um yeah it so we're we're looking to see how we're going to use that. >> One of the um one of the comments I got from a parent is that uh of a teacher
asking students to do their writing in class. So that sort of moves you out of the situation on which you're going home and then using chat GPT or perplexity or something to help you or to give you you know other than having to go through a tool and say does this look like it was written by an AI tool which there now of
those tools but that's to correct this issue of people using it. So one other option is to say go to the old method of writing down on paper and handing it to the teacher for writing assignments. If you're doing research, it's a whole different and look at it like Google. But in terms of actual writing, um you
know, the the educational um uh benefits of doing handwriting in those kind of situations where we take AI out of the picture template would be one potential solution or approach, >> right? There's definitely there's um actually there's some great articles
very recent articles and um New York Times or other other periodicals about it's the retention of learning. So when someone does it without use of technology and they're just generating
that text versus someone who generated a text after doing internet search to inform what they wrote versus someone who is an AI tool that generated the the text. When you ask someone to reflect on
what they recall of the text that was generated, the research does show that the person's able to recall most the one that was generated without the use of technology. >> So, it's it's whatever we do about it
should be really um again not not something we ignore, but to be intentional about it about how to use that tool. And um but it's going to be inevitably part of um our future.
>> And so it's best to it's best to think about how how we can again I think it can foster deeper learning um and just to be cognizant about the impact of um because I think retention is really important too. So we
reflect on that. Um but I think it's more to come in in and premature as most of um the larger bodies of thought um and developmental policies is that it's it's something to it's premature to to
know exactly how we want to guide it. Um but it it's um so we're we're working with them. >> Thank you. And Mariah, you're next. >> Thanks. Um, on the same topic, um, Bella, I just forwarded you some guidelines that work put out, which are
very non-prescriptive in how people should use it. I think are sort of reflecting some of the same comments that you're making now about what we don't know. But it really sort of offers guidance for educators. Um, it's not rules. It's sort of just guidance and things to think about. And so I just forwarded that to you. you might be
interested in reading that as well um as part of the exploration of how this would go forward. >> Okay, thank you. >> Thanks. Okay, next up we have public comment. Just to remind folks um we have
a three minute limit per person and um we do not respond. We listen we read all of the emails that are sent to us. We listen to public comment but we don't respond um as a matter of policy. So uh first up we have Sarah Bar who's
speaking for uh herself and Emily Jaffy from CPAC. It's okay to try to speak in the microphone. >> Good evening. My name is Sarah Bar. I am co-chair with Emily Jaffy of CPAC and we have a letter this evening that we would like you to listen to. I'm here tonight
to express concern about the number and types of non-federal holidays, no school days, and early dismissals proposed in the 2026 2027 calendar. I respectfully urge the committee to consider a policy that truly centered on our children and families, especially by closing schools only on federally recognized holidays
and by reducing or consolidating early dismissals as such as contract negotiations allow. to under to understand the impact of our current calendar. Let's look at Brookline public schools K through8 schedule. In November alone, beyond election day or professional development day, Veterans
Day, Thanksgiving break, and every Friday early dismissal, there are additional four early release days. The results, only nine full interrupted school days in November. Fast forward to April. Between Good Friday, April vacation, and more early dismissals,
students will just have 11 school days. Let those numbers sink in. How are young students expected to adapt to constant disruptions? We are working families. How are working families supposed to plan for such irregularities? And how can meaningful learning, especially for
students who rely on structure and consistency, students with disability and English learners, English learn language learners take place under these fractured conditions. When we talk about holiday closures, the conversation about diversity, inclusion, and equity should
not resolve revolve exclusively around religious and cultural observations. Religion and culturals are important, but they are not the measure of an equitable education. Brookline is home to families of diverse socioeconomic backgrounds and children with a wide range of abilities and needs. The
majority of Brooklyn families, many of whom cannot attend lengthy committee meetings, depend on reliable, predictable school schedules that reflect the realities of a working family, regardless of faith or heritage. Every out of school closure outside the federal holidays places a significant
and inequitable burden on working families, especially single parents, lowincome households, and families of students receiving special education services. Parents cannot work remotely, are often forced to take unpaid leave or scramble to find child care. Some is
unavailable or unaffordable. For families with limited financial resources via additional closures can mean a real loss of income and stability. Students with disabilities who rely on structured school environments for support services, lose critical learning and intervention time
when schools are closed irregularly. These children are already among our most vulnerable. school absences or further closures disrupt their progress. For families, children on IEPs, it is significantly more complex to find competent child care and the cost of such support is untenable for most
families. There is a deeper equity question here. If we make calendar decisions that feel inclusive or fair in some abstract sense, but don't consider how these decisions play out in real life, all families, we risk providing we risk prioritizing a feeling of equity
over real lived equity struggles in families. In other words, we we may add inadvertently marginalized very families that we intend to support. Additionally, current holiday schedules subjectively determine which holidays are viewed as most important to each religion or
culture while excluding other equally meaningful dates from a range of faiths. These selective inclusions risk signaling that some other religions or cultural traditions are more valued or visible than others even when that is not the intent. A federally aligned and low attendance days aligned calendar
avoids subjective determination altogether and ensures that the district does not inadvertently prioritize one set of beliefs over another. Research shows that attendance is a basic equity issue. Students from historically underserved groups, lowincome students,
students with disabilities, and students of color are disproportionately affected by absenteeism and disruptions. When decisions about the calendar days are made without evidence based justification, we are risking instituting policies that look fair on paper but are truly not equitable in
outcome. In fact, the best data practice literature emphasizes that interventions and policies in school should be grounded in real data roots about the causes of actual usage rather than assumptions. If the justification for closing school day is low attendance, but attendance data does not support
that claim, then the decisions essentially penalizes children who would actually attend school and receive services. By closing on only federally recognized holidays and reducing early dismissal dates, the calendar would offer predictable standard closure dates align with national practices and
schedules of working parents. Avoid policies that may appear equitable in theory but impose disproportionate burdens on many of households. preserves consistent instruction time for all students by limiting sporadic days off and maintaining a balanced schedule across all subjects and services and
allowed the district to collect and review attendance data for both students and staff to make informed evidence-based calendar decisions. None of this undermines the importance of the holidays or rest days. In fact, I recognize that students and families and teachers benefit from these breaks. But
to honor our commitment to equity, we should ensure that breaks we choose align with federal calendar and that any additional closures are solid solidly grounded in data clear benefit. Otherwise, we risk adopting holiday closures that marginalize the families who cannot absorb this extra burden.
Thank you for considering these concerns and your dedication to ensuring that all students and families are served equitably and compassionately. Thank you, Sarah. Next, we have um Kai Duben from the Brooklyn Youth Council.
>> Hi, my name is Kai Duben. I live in Precinct 17 and I'm here representing >> Excuse me. Is everybody here? >> No, not >> and I'm here representing the Brooklyn Youth Council. The Brooklyn Youth Council urged the school committee to
select option C for the 2026 to 2027 schedule. The public schools of Brooklyn are made up of an incredibly diverse body of both students and staff, and it's important that the days that they have off from school breakfast. Removing the existing holidays
that are currently off forces students to choose between their religion and culture and their education. For students who don't observe the holiday, it gives them a break from school, allowing them to prioritize hanging out with friends and catching up
homework. During March, the schedules that don't include the current holidays there are no days off. And this is a major time for students to experience burnout as well as staff to experience burnout. For these reasons, youth council encourages school committed
schedules as it embraces diversity. Thank you. >> Thank you very much. Um, next we have Carrie Goldberg who I think is remote is in the room. Great.
So, here's my telling of the calendar story. Back in the 60s, there were so many Jewish students and teachers in Brooklyn who went to synagogue on the high holidays that the schools became ghost towns. So, those days were designated days of low attendance and the schools closed for them based mainly on operational considerations. Fast
forward to the 2020s and religious observance is way down in America. Well, a very powerful current of progressive ideology emphasizes group identity as paramount. It's a worldview that's taught extensively to our children here in Brooklyn. So, it's not surprising
that various groups called for their holidays off, even if that means disruption for the vast majority of students who don't observe them. I'm sorry that this is a divisive issue, but I think the bright side is that this is a teachable moment to convey that group identity is a thing, but it's not the
only or always the most important thing and feelings do matter, but facts matter more. I'd like to propose some other values to be guided by in this decision. Number one, truth. In order to make Eid and Lunar New Year days off, the
district categorized them as days of low attendance. Even though attendance records show they are not days of low attendance, the district cannot base a policy on falsehoods. Number two, rule of law. Our federal and state constitutions require a strong separation between church and state. I
am rooting for Dr. Wong with every pompom waving. But when she said last week that we should have all these holidays off because we embrace diversity, it hurt my heart because that does not follow. And it goes against our most fundamental legal framework. We can
and do embrace our diversity, but our public schools have no business observing religious religious holidays by closing. I know one parent wrote to you saying basically, what if say the fire or police or parks department wanted to shutter for religious holidays? I I don't understand how as
the largest consumer of town revenue, the schools can step away from their core duty suspend the essential service of educating our children to honor religious worship. Number three, clarity. If this administration wants holidays off to show respect for
diversity, it needs to say so in writing, which it has not, and lay out its criteria, like we will grant a day off to any religious or cultural group that comprises at least 1% of the population and can marshall 25 passionate emails and a dozen passionate
speakers at public comment. Those seem to be the pretty arbitrary criteria right now. And if so, you need to make them explicit and face the potential lawsuit. Not from me, from me. Probably from some group that doesn't make the cut, like what about Diwali and no rules
and Day of the Dead and Catholic Epiphany and Orthodox Epiphany. And I could go on. Number four, being data driven. Some people are calling for a survey. Others are saying we should have federal and state holidays only and see what the attendance is. Part of what makes this decision so difficult for you is that you do not have current data.
Maybe you just need to get it before you can decide. And finally, and most important, mission. The district's mission is obviously education. Sprinkles day off. Sprinkle days off do have educational as well as logistical downsides. As we just heard, the stakes
may seem low, just a few days a year, but for me, this is it. This issue is an acid test of whether our leadership is willing to prioritize learning to be ruled by reason and data rather than emotion. and to seek solutions that
optimize operations for all and especially I would add for students and parents with special challenges. Thank you. >> Thank you Carrie. Next we have Marina Reduea and I apologize if I mispronounced that.
>> All right. >> Hi everyone. My name is Marina. Thank you for so much for opportunity to speak and thank you for your amazing ability to hear and listen beautiful skill. I'm here to once again express my
support for keeping our public school calendar unchanged, meaning we should keep all holy days honored. I won't go into the details of why it is so important for our bookline community as a lot has been already said and said
well. Instead, I want to suggest that we could save a great deal of time and effort by starting a more productive discussion about beginning school year earlier. This seems we all uh it seems that we all agree that learning
experiences are more effective at the beginning of a school year rather than at the end. Focusing on the start that date could be um a great solution here especially since we know we will
otherwise have to revisit the painful issue of school calendar again and again. As a mother of four Muslim kids, I want to say they are Muslim, they are American, and this is their beloved and cherished land. And I don't think they
are disappearing or going anywhere. I know the same is true for every child and of every religion, ethnicity, and culture, in our schools, in our country. We are all here to live together in harmony and as a one big nation.
I guess what I'm trying to say is that this is not the only town that is that is and will be going through positive changes and adjustments. This is life. Human beings have been adopting and adjusting
forever. Having said that, I would like to bring your to your attention the fact that well over 100 80 uh 80% of US public schools are already in session by September 1st. They have um moved away
from the old post labor day calendar for practical reason. I believe it allows for more logical academic structure. Starting in late August isn't about cutting a long summer short. It's about structuring the academic year for
maximum effectiveness. The fact that vast majority of schools in our country have adopted this model is a testament to its benefit for students and teachers alike. Thank you so much again. By the way, it's my
birthday today. I to give me a gift. >> Happy birthday. >> Happy birthday. Uh thank you. Next we have uh Nor Mosa. And again, apologies if I mispronounce your last name. >> Um, I don't see Nor here. I know, um,
her mother mentioned she had track practice and was hoping to get here at 6:45. So, >> okay. Um, so if Nor is not there, going once, going twice, that concludes public comment. Uh, next on our agenda is our
first presentation. I believe this is Dr. Given FY25 budget close. Um, Susan, are you going to do that or do you want me to cover it from when Finance did it? If you want to do it, that's great. You looked great. You were running up there.
Perfect. >> Unless you can't hear me. I'll speak as loud as I can. I'm a soft spoking kind of a girl. So, >> we can hear you. And I think as long as you speak into the microphone, everybody can hear you. >> I'll do my best. He's my outside.
So we'll start tonight with um a little summary of the FY25 board quarter report which is our end of the year close. So um at the end of the year we closed um in deficit as we had
um predicted for the uh most of the year last year. Uh so the budget was spent in full and in addition uh we had to move off the operating budget a little over a million dollars. So the million dollars was uh shifted over the expenses were
shifted over to the FE revolving fund um and the material fee revolving fund which were carrying a um a fund balance adequate to absorb those for one year. And so beep uh the beep revolving fund
uh absorbed uh $358,000 and the manuka material fee 664,000 um as we close. So, as we know there there were several areas that were uh as we say running hot for the year. Uh one
of those was transportation and when we closed the year uh our transportation overall was in deficit uh $1,451,000. Um tuition settlements. Um so that's out of district tuition and settlements that
um are tuitionbased um uh did a little bit better in net. So there was about uh 32 $33,000 in deficit at the end which was significantly improved from where we had anticipated it earlier in the year. Um from the
first quarter report on uh we were carrying um an unfunded uh segment of our extra compensation budget. Uh we began the year in deficit of a little over 700,000. At the end of the year it was about 665. So those were the three
real drivers in the end uh that caused uh our budget to uh be out of balance and uh as I said in the end uh we closed um the year about a million dollars over but we're able to fund that through our own internal resources. In terms of um
FY25 special revenue funds, uh we closed 21 grants in uh by the end of the year, which is great. Uh using every dime of resources we could um and also making our uh special revenue funds current. So
that's great news. Um base as we know was struggling has been struggling for a number of years and in the end uh they closed the deficit um as as we um uh as we closed the year and then as the program closed in August. Um so again uh
beep and uh material fee fund balances were reduced as a result of the deficit that we had to absorb at the end of the year. So that is my summary of the FY25 close. Thank you, Susan. Any questions on that? And thank you for presenting that at
finance yesterday. Okay, seeing none, we'll move on to the FY26 first quarter budget report. >> Um, Val, I wonder if I could make a special request. Um, Nora just arrived. Would it be all right since we're at a break? Sus, would you mind if I um speak
>> since she returning to public comment at our very strange online meeting today? Um, >> welcome. As soon as you're ready, you will have uh three minutes to speak. >> Um, microphone built into that.
>> Thank you, Val. >> Hi, my name is Musa. I'm in seventh grade and I go to Pierce School. I've already talked to here about like getting. I'm so happy that I was able to and I'm really sad that it's like eat
and a lot of other holidays are going to like people are thinking about taking away. I think it's like not fair because like kids want to celebrate their culture and they want to embrace it and it's because especially like if I live
in Egypt where I'm from I would have been able to embrace my culture so much more but because I live in America I me and like a bunch of other kids can't really embrace our culture as much. So being able to have a day off is amazing
and I was so happy to like I was planning like me u planning the eat fair and all my friends are coming you're talking about it so excited and like I was excited to celebrate my holidays with my other friends because um I've
holidays are so special and they everybody and special to the heart and like it's really it really brings it like real world example like examples like you get to like think like about it
and like understand everything and I think it's just really special that you get to that if you get to do that and I think it's really important to do that and yeah >> thank you very much
>> thank you very much and appreciate you coming from practice to the school committee room um >> thank you Susan allowing each other. >> Appreciate that, Susan. Going back to the FY26 Q1 report, >> always
willing to accommodate a student. >> Thank you so much. Absolutely. Absolutely. >> Um, so now we're going to move to the first quarter of 26. So, I'll give you the highlights there. Um, the salary budget overall is trending favorably.
Um, in the first quarter, we added eight new FTE. Uh, 1.8 Aid of that uh came from our extra sections and uh 6.2 were through realignments. Realignments meaning that we eliminated one position
or a type of position to replace um or create a new one. So that's 8ft in the first quarter. Um ESY closed uh the summer about $30,000 in deficit, but our project discovery summer program um had
about $38,000 to the goods. So the two um um offset one another. Um in grants, we had some funds shipped off the grants um and other funds shipped onto grants. Um and so our title one, we um received
additional uh money from the government for title one this year, which is great. Um some of those resources were used to shift some of our salary expenses off into the title one. But um on the idea grant when we were going through the
budget process, we had um anticipated we be able to use some of those resources in IDA to pay for some professional development um and some curriculum development associated with our literacy program. But uh lo and behold, in the end we were not able to do so. So that
shifts it back to the operating budget. So the two again washed one another out. Um uh so some variation up and some variation down. Totally typical for any school year to have these kinds of um shifts uh when you're implementing the
plan that you had uh created. On the non- salary side, um the majority um of our transportation um and special education expenses make up uh the non non um salary [clears throat]
expenditures. Uh in fact, more than half of the money that we have available on the non- salary lines goes to those kind of mandated core services. Um that leaves less than $9 million for everything else. Um so uh right now at
this time um special education costs are are looking to be in good good shape. Our transportation though is is kind of on the brink. Um so on this report in first quarter you'll see approximately $36,000 to the good. Um, however, we have not encountered the money for the
elementary school shuttle that we had to add in September to reduce the uh length of our uh roots at the elementary school um grade level. So, uh once we uncover that in the next quarter, then we'll kind of be at break even. However, we do
see um a a more significant population of McKenna students who um need to be transported and so um if those numbers continue through uh the remainder of the year, we'll probably wind up investment.
The good news is that we will um look like we can cost share for some of those expenses and so we're exploring that as an opportunity to recover some of the the expenses that we're having in that area. But as of the first quarter, which is only 20 days into the school year, um
you know, we're kind of at a break even level for the transportation. And then the last highlight there on the non-sary side is that we had $240,000 in um copier lease expenditures that was inadvertently missed. And so um
obviously we need our copers and we've had to pay that expense. But the good news is is that we have sufficient funds available on the salary lines right now to cover the um the um deficit in the non- salary lines. Um so that is it for
the um operating uh budget on the special revenue side. Little bit of news there, you know. Thank you Karen [laughter] and thank you Robin. our other deputies did a terrific job of getting our federal grants written and um sent again before the school year
began. And so therefore, uh we started the year in a much better place than we did in the last several years where the grants were not submitted um before the school year began, which means that you cannot uh use those resources until they have been approved. So, um thank you
very much for your efforts to get those um written and in um prior to the school year beginning. Um the base again closed in deficit and um we're still getting a few uh leftover bills and so I I should be able to close that out by the end of the second quarter, but right now it's
looking about a $30,000 uh deficit that will then have to be absorbed in the FY26 operating budget. You cannot close um a revolving fund in deficit. So um we'll have to accommodate that within our operating resources. Good news. So I
like to end on a good note. Um uh circuit breaker. So at the end of um FY25, uh the state had a little bit of extra money. So they increased the percentage of reimbursement for circuit breaker eligible transportation. um we received
the money in uh July and so uh that was 607,000 which will help to um reduce the amount of money that uh we allocated against the expenses to support our our expenses in the in the current year. So
that's that's the good news. Um that's it. >> Thanks so much. Any questions for Susan? >> I have a question. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Susan. No, go ahead, Jesse. >> Jesse, and then Suzanne. >> Uh, my question is is that the 240,000
for copy releases is currently being covered by positive variance on the salary side. As the year moves on and perhaps positions get filled and salary goes back to saying come together with what I thought I'd spend, I'm going to spend, where will the $240,000 then go?
>> So, I won't make any kind of adjustment till the end of the year because there'll be fluctuations as they go along. So some things will come in positive and some things will come in over. Um so I always wait until the end of the year before I actually transfer money out of the salary account. So the reporting I'm giving you today is to say
that all in all as I look at the bigger picture that that we should be able to at this point in time as I look um close the year in balance. Um though it will vary from quarter to quarter. I'll give you an update in another few weeks on how we end the second quarter and we'll
see if the the variances continue to uh >> so so it's not necessarily just salary variance could have been anything >> it can be anything to an area where we do have capacity >> right so that you would have some sense that even though we have a deficit over
here I'm seeing that we have some surplus over there >> thank you >> thank you Suzanne Mine was similar. It's the 240 for the quarter. So it's the 240,000 >> for the year >> year. >> For the whole year. For the whole year. Oh, okay.
>> I mean, that's a lot. >> But it's for the full year. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> A lot of changes. >> Okay. Anybody else? So, moving on, I think, to the main event, Susan, the the five-year PSB um projection.
>> Great. So in your packet um you will see what is a forecast. This is not a budget. So I want to say that uh loud and clear that a forecast is not a budget. Um that it is um a forecast of expenses based on
trends um expected changes and some assumptions. Right? We haven't built the FY27 budget. So this is not the budget. I just want to be clear about that. So folks know that this number here is not going to be what our budget is. Right? Bella said so well um at the beginning
of the meeting that you know it's these are estimates. These are estimates and they're based on on some assumptions. So I wanted to talk a little bit about what those assumptions are and um and then we can um take a look at you know kind of what the numbers are um as we look out
over the next five years. And again these numbers will change um okay so on the on the wages. So we'll start off with wages because that's represents you at all over 85% of our budget. Um that I'm making the assumption that the
staffing levels remain constant. Okay? So I'm not making any adjustments to the FTEEs as I'm going through and making this uh forecast that enrollments are flat. Okay? It's not taking into account dips, you know, increases or decreases.
This is just based on a flat enrollment, which of course it will not be flat, right? It'll be a little up, a little down. We're predicting, as you know from last meeting, that the numbers are going to go down slightly, but according to proper mcgivven that it's going to then trend up about FY29. Okay. But I cannot
predict what that's going to be. So the forecast is just assuming level enrollment. Okay. Of course, enrollment uh and programming drives staffing. So staffing is at at a level um steps and lanes. So in this um
uh forecast I had to use the only information that I really had. So this last year when I built the budget I tracked uh pretty meticulously the impact of steps and lanes um on our expenses and so I have last year's information but one data point does not
create a trend right so I'm but it's the only data point I have so I use that as the baseline when I build the FY27 budget I will do the same you know um analysis again and then I'll know was that number reasonable is that um you
know where it should be is my step and lane impact too high or too low for this prediction. Since I only had one data point, I used what I had. Um we'll see in another month or so um how close uh last year's lane and steps are compared
to this year's and then we'll start to develop. If this is done annually, then you can start doing some predictions. Um, but you have to take the time to like methodically uh collect that information as you're building the budget. So, um, so I use FY26
information. So, that would be um 1.877 um, uh, million um, for steps and 165 in laying expenses. So, that's the base for 26 and then we built off of that. All right. Um, also a note here that at the
close of the um the settlement of the BEu contracts, um, so we did 2.75% um, that's built into our current year budget, but uh, just before the uh, close of that contract, there's a 1% adjustment, right? Which means that we
enter into FY27 with a 1% without having settled the contract. So when you look at FY27 and you see the 9%, it's because it's carrying a few of these items um that were known um that we're going to
have for kind of a a little a little adjustment as we move into the 27. So um OSS. So we made some assumptions here. I want to be clear about what they are. I'm assuming that the circuit breaker revenue increases at the same
rate as the out of district tuition. Um the audit district tuition we estimated it's estimated to be at 4%. Couple of years ago it was at 14%. You know um that's not something that we can predict. You know what is it going to be next year? What is it going to be the year after? So we used a 4% um for this
um as an assumption for this forecast. Um and also that circuit rate would therefore go up by 4% as well. So our revenues are going to go up by 4% and the expense is going to go up by 4%. that may not um hold true but that is what the assumption is in this forecast.
Um another assumption that is not you know um because I I can't forecast otherwise right is that the students are going to remain in the same placements. Of course they're not but I don't know where they're going to go. So there's no way to predict that. So I just want to be clear uh that the assumption is that
they're in the same placements. Um of course and the same number of students that are in now. So some will graduate out and be successful and we're happy about that. And then there'll be others that are identified, right? So the replacement rate is assumed to be the same as a graduation rate on that. Um so
again that's that's flat. Again, when we build the budget, you know, we will be able to like not look at out years, but certainly in 27 where we believe the impacts will be um for the current year as we build that. Um, another note, uh, just as a reminder, and this is hitting
in 27 on the forecast. We know that we have the structural deficit, right? So that's hitting in 27, which is another reason why 27 is higher than the out years. Um, so that's a little under $2 million um on transportation. So that's another
big expense that we have. Um again the assumption is that the same student population the same number of students that need services uh today need services tomorrow and in the years ahead. Um the that is there that's variable and so we could see in my earlier report McKenni Bento you know
was has spiked a bit you know but there's no way to really forecast out what that is. So so I used an average um of what those expenses are that could be high that could be low for 27 28 29 etc. Um, a couple of other notes on transportation because when
transportation contracts expire, there's always a bump up. Um, and so, um, our special education contract expires in 29 and we'll have to go out and rebid. So, there'll be an adjustment in that year. It's never been an adjustment down and it's never been at like a cost of living
raise. It's usually what happens is is when you enter into a contract with the transportation company, they buy their vehicles and then they advertise them over the course of the the life of your contract. Then when they you you sign a new contract, then they have new vehicles and the new vehicles then have to be advertised. And of course, the
cost of those are higher than the ones that you just got out of the the the uh the loan for, right? Um so regular education transportation expires at 28. So in 28 I have a bump and in 29 I have a bump um in transportation expenses
there. Um price adjustments during those contract periods. My assumption is it's going to bump by 20%. Which is what has been kind of typical in this day and day and time. We don't have a lot I know we don't have a lot of vendors out there that that provide these services and
even when they do sometimes for the inner city areas like Brook Brooklyn there just aren't aren't a lot of new vendors coming into the field um and those that are settled into their roots and have their drivers and uh all of that tend to kind of stay with the the
uh communities that they're currently working with. So those are the assumptions. Um when we look at the the um the actual uh forecast itself um as you can see in FY2026 that's the budget that's approved right
now. That's the funds that we have available to us in the current year. Um I'm looking at forecasting out of these expenses that we have right now that that would increase by 9% in the upcoming year. Okay. And the 9% is carrying some expenses that um we're not
going if funded, right? if funded the deficit as well as this 1% then it puts us in a better position as a forecast looks out into the future. So that's why you see it at 9% a big nut in the upcoming year and then it kind of moderates right it moderates down to a
4% then a five and a five and a four again when you're looking at the increases the contract ends at 28 it's going to impact you in 29 contract at 29 is going to impact you in 30. So that's why you're seeing kind of the 5% bump on those two years and it goes back down to
4%. 100 things are going to change before we get to the end of the five years and whatever happens the the best um the the closest uh numbers that we had at this time would be for the first for 27 28 and 29 right we know more about what's in front of us than we
would five years from now 100 things can happen who anticipated we would have uh you know pandemic in 20 right which had major implications for education and and everybody in this in in the country so that is um the basics behind this
five-year expenditure forecast. Um and I'm happy to take some questions. There may be some questions I've not u uh able to answer tonight because you know we do have contract negotiations coming up and so there are resources built into this but I am not going to
share what we have aside for those kinds of expenses. >> Thank you uh Susan Mariah. >> Thanks and thanks Susan for doing this. I just have um Oh, can you put it back up wherever it went? Sorry. Um
thank you, Betsy. So, that made me lose my train of thought. I'll start with my second question first and hopefully the first Oh, the first one came back. So um this is based on for the non-s salary um the the it's essentially based
on this year's amount that we know was quite low already but this doesn't reflect any future adjustments you will make. Is that correct? >> Um in 27 anything that was an obligation for example the 240,000 in copers is built into the 27. So anything that I'm
aware of uh like that is included in the 27. >> Okay. But otherwise like of it was a roll forward of the 26 um reduced numbers >> plus well plus anything that we're obligated to. Right. So we had pushed
off uh leases for um for our Chromebooks that's back in in 27 because we have to be >> right. So anything that we're obligated to in 27 is in the 27 forecast. >> Okay. But it hasn't been adjusted more broadly. That will come later in
>> So no efficiencies. Again, this is in the budget. This is >> no recommendations, no efficiencies. >> None of that. Nope. >> And then my second question is this is more of a statement, but um the the I'll confirm my understanding. The
percentages here when people think about those, they should be thinking about them. um and they're thinking about possibly override numbers and such that this is this is not in above and beyond the normal growth to our um that we
would see from normal growth. So like we normally would see any anyways in our in our revenues a 3 and a half to percent 4% um growth in revenues and so this is um inclusive of that not in addition to that
>> right so whatever revenue is allocated to the schools would reduce this percentage that's what you're saying right Mariah >> that's exactly what I'm saying thank you >> thank you um other questions or comments I haven't had enough.
>> Yeah, I I just wanted to I I I know Mariah understands everything that she's asked of Susan and Susan understands Mariah's questions too, but I just wanted again to reiterate that this projection
is just moving things forward without the efficiencies, without reorganization, without restoration, without improvement. And so that's what that number does reflect um compensating for the deficit in terms of using the
circle breaker reserve to fund this year's budget. And as Susan said, it's it's reflecting that 1% that was negotiated in the contract. So that so just why there is that bump. And so it's
a it's not like a regular bump. It it includes these other things. And then again, as Mariah just clarified with Susan, it doesn't reflect what you typically get from the town allocation.
All right. So, so this is without that mitigation. So, this is not the override numbers because it doesn't it doesn't reflect what the town contribution would be to to that overall
budget cost. Right? So again, this is we just want to be really clear what this represents. Um, also everything that Susan presented tonight, the budget close out, the first quarter report are things that would
typically be would need to be done. This is not this is only being done at this time >> because we are anticipating the possibility of an override and there are many people that are looking and reviewing our numbers to be able to
address that question or not. So this is not something we would ever be doing at this time. So, I also want to call out I have never seen the person in charge of finance operations
um do what Susan has done. Close out FY25. Give you the first quarter report for FY26. She did the enrollment report last week
and now she's giving you a five-year projection forward. I have never seen anyone do that all in this time period. Close at FY25, do the first quarter report, and now do this projection on top of
preparing for negotiations. Um, sorry, >> I think we're fine. >> Oops. as long as as well as preparing for negotiations. I also want to remind everyone that in the district level offices we are short staff. So the
website um also falls under under Susan's sort of supervision and monitoring. Also transportation is new. He's first year in. HR is a little over first year in.
And so I just want to commend Susan for the amount of work she was able to do in this time period. And so as we move forward, but um it's I've just never seen anyone do all of that. >> Thank you, Superintendent Wong. And and
thank you um Susan for all the work that you've been doing on this. It it does not go unnoticed. So thank you. Carolyn had her hand up. Do you still have a question, Carolyn? >> No, I'm good. Thank Okay. Anyone else in the room?
>> So, yeah, I guess I have a question. Um, so this is sort of love service. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um, it seems it seems to me that with the change being over $10 million and assuming the town uh side gross its
revenues about the same as it did let this year till next year, no reason to. I mean, we could ask Melissa, we will at some point. Um and the split is about 60% 40% 60% of schools more or less that
this um 13 million or so plus the town's existing deficit of at least 3 million is a very large number um given uh again it's pre-efficiencies and and amalgamations and integrations I get it but it's um still a big boat
>> um and with no um uh with with no confidence that that the overarching can pass as well. So this is interesting to see and you know as more work gets done to see how it unfolds. I think the um as I look at it and as I
did the work I think the hope is and I think it and because I've heard you know the pace at which the school district's expenses are growing is unsustainable and what this and I feel good about this
right that we have a gap but once we hit the gap right it moderates >> our expenses are not going and going and going up, right? We have a problem that has to be attended to. And I feel good
that the work that we've done um the team, this administration um and the administration prior to get a handle on what our expenses are is coming to bear now, right? I feel good about what the gap is. I don't think that when the gap
is filled that you're going to have another gap and another gap and another gap. I'm t talking to my predecessors recently. This gap has been going on a very long time. So it's my hope that when we pass this override this year and I say that when we pass this override because I believe
that to be a positive uh trajectory for all of us and the right thing for kids and for the community is that we'll be in a better place on the other side of it. >> Thank you. >> Oh, sorry. Just quick though, >> I don't have a question.
>> Oh, [clears throat] sorry. >> Hang on. >> I want to say that's a really important takeaway. So, I'm I'm glad you shared that and I appreciate that. >> Thank you, Donna. Um, anything else for
Susan? Susan, thank you for going three for three with us. Next, we have um Dr. Schmuckler, who's going to talk to us about our response to the Desi finding of significant disproportionality with regard to our um special ed
identification. >> The floor is yours, Karen. And welcome back. >> Evening everybody. Um so as Bal said we're talking about um our response to our disproportionality
um citation from D um it's both a dense and complex um topic to address and difficult to distort um but I'm going to do my best to try and um provide you enough of a framework to sort of understand where disproportionality sits
in terms of both at the federal and state context and then also where we are uh in terms of the district. So we can't talk about um disproportionality without talking about equity. Um and so the citations around disportionality come
down from the federal government. It's embedded within the IDA. Um and it is really about making sure that districts the intent of um the awareness around disproportionality is really making sure that districts are really operating from
a place of equity for our students. Um and really looking at at it uh in terms of when disproportionatality arises within districts. Um what is happening in terms of equitable learning environments for students and what is
driving the disproportionality and so all states have distinct equity requirements under the sections of the IDA and there are three different areas. So states need to report to the federal governments to areas around discrepancy and discipline
areas around disproportionate representation. So are different demographic groups represented differently within special education and then is there disproportionality in the identification of students in terms of certain disability types certain
placements in terms of level of restrictiveness your LE or least restrictive environment and navigating discipline and it is in this category as you can see that this particular citation um is around in terms of the error of identification
in your disability categories. Um and so as I said identification, placement and discipline. So states are pretty wide birth in from the federal government in terms of how they
set their disproportionality requirs in order to address and site for disproportionality. The risk ratio threshold um and then what is the definition of reasonable progress. So when you get cited you first get given an at risk designation.
So you get a letter from JC which says based on your data you are now in an at risk category and the expectation is that you do a a risk analysis and you look at what are your root causes and you provide interventions and services
and supports so that you don't continue to remain in that at risk category. Um and so in Massachusetts um there is a formula that all states use. Um Massachusetts has a risk ratio of three 3.0 or higher for three
consecutive years. So when they site you so for example we were initially cited in um FY20 you're given three years to say can we see you make reasonable progress. If you make reasonable progress in reducing
your level of disproportionality, you do not get a formal citation of having significant proportionality. If you don't make progress over those three years, you are then in the position that we are in now with being cited for
significant disproportionality. So for DESIE and for the federal government if proportionality and unit should be 0%. That is the expectation that districts don't have a level of disproportionality in any area of special education. Um and as I just said
districts are flagged for further review if for three consecutive years your risk ratio continues to be 3.0 or higher. Any questions on that? Go ahead. >> I'm not How did they determine
inappropriate identification? Like can you what's an example of inappropriate identification? >> So for example, and I'm going to talk more about No, no, no. It's a good question. So we this designation is around we have a disproportionate number of students who identify as black and
African-American in the disability category of specific learning disability in SLB. So you can be found to have disproportionality in certain disability categories on more students who identify with a certain racial identity higher
than uh what you would typically expect uh within that category. >> Got it. >> Carolyn, >> Dr. Schmuckler, are you going to talk later about what reasonable progress
>> looks like? Y. Thank you. So as so the risk ratio threshold in Massachusetts is 3.0. So what that means that you are three times more likely for a group of students in this case students who are black and
African-American to be identified in the category of specific learning disability um than other students. And so Carolyn to your question around reasonable progress um so the for
example so if you look at the chart in the first two examples district one year one was 5.6 they then in year two went down to 5.3 and year three went down to 5.2 and while they're still very disproportionate
they're making progress in the right direction. So that's what would be considered meeting reasonable progress that you your data showing that your ratios are going down, right? Your levels of disproportionality are being lowered year after year. Um so
that's that's really the pretty simple way of of how they're concerned. And if you look at district three, you see year one was 4.7, it then went up to 4.9. It went back down to 4.3. But you don't have a trajectory of a downward trajectory over the three years. Um, so
that's how Jesse looks at um, reasonable progress. >> Karen, I'm sorry to interrupt. Can you remind me, was the finding in SLD reading, SLD math, or was it a combination? >> Um, SLD reading. >> Thank you.
And >> so, as I said, we've been identified twice by Desi. So we were designated with an at risk status uh in FY20 and then we were found with disproportionality and then we were designated again with FY25.
We currently have an at risk status this year and so we're both within a significant disproportionality of being at risk for students um to be identified in the category of intellectual disability. Right. So we've we have a citation for SLD and we
currently have an at risk status for intellectuals. Um and again we were found because there was no reasonable progress to lower the risk ratio over those that period of time. Um and so right now we obviously have been disproportionality resentation in this
area. >> Karen, I'm sorry could you repeat what was the for the atrisisk status which um group was that and for which area? So it's students who identify as black and African-American and and in a disability category or intellectual.
>> Thank you. >> And so this is this chart comes from Desi. So you can see when you look at so our risk ratio for students who identify as African-American black is 3.22. And then you can see if you look it down
um with students who are digitalized Asian, Hispanic, Latino, multi-racial, you don't have students Native American, American Indian, Alaskan Native, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and and then white. Um and so your risk ratio is
based on the number of students in that category who are found within that disability category um divided by the number of students overall. Um, and so that's what you're seeing when you look at the percentage of students with
SOD, which is your furthest column. >> And so our risk ratio pretty much is remaining stagnant um at 3 3.22. >> So So this is K to 12. The 7104 likes the whole district. So >> correct. >> Okay. Correct.
>> And that's what it's cut on top of decline year. It's 23 24. >> Yeah. So that's 2324. >> Yeah. And so you cited in 20 and then this is this was your your three years >> Carolyn
>> even though I'm sure this would be a small number I'm curious just how this works. So um total number of students and the is the identification
does it qualify as identification when it's identification by us or what if a student enters our district already having been identified? >> Yeah. So there's no differentiation.
It's point in time. So there's no differentiation whether a student moves in um on an IEP with an SLD or it's a student who we we identify with an SLD and again so disproportionality is the over representation of students in
certain categories in special education. It's also the under representation of student in different areas as well. Um, another definition that people use in terms of disproportionality is the structured probability with which students of color are more likely to be
documented as disabled. So, they're not more likely to be disabled, but they're more likely to be documented as disabled. Um and that's really the essence of the work around disproportionality in terms of equity and in terms of looking at what are the
root causes around that documentation of disability um as a structured pro probability within your system. So this comes from Zaretta Hammond and I think so there's a disproportionate research and work is a huge field um in
the area of special education um and a lot of there are a lot of researchers who look at things like poverty um and a cultural poverty um and it's not borne out by the data right there many districts with similar demographics who
don't have um there are many states where you would expect disproportionality and where you don't see it. So really look across districts and across states. Um the data is highly variable. Um and so so Ra who
wrote cultural responsive teaching in the brain and who's done a lot of research and work in this area really speaks about um what happens in the classroom and what happens at the level of instruction uh in terms of growing students cognitive skills and abilities
when students have academic gaps. Um and academic gaps do not necessarily claim to disability. And so what happens systemically when we either do or don't think about how do we address instruction and curriculum within the
classroom so that we're making sure that that variation that we see we're catering to from an instructional design perspective. And so when we look at our data um and 41% of students uh who identify as black
African-American and are also designated as low income are on a PS right and so this is when we start to disagregate our data. When you look at our students who are black and are not designated as low
income, we see that that does not shift um our IEP rates. In fact, when a lot of sort of people ask well is it about is it about techology is it about uh early experiences is it about access when we
just aggregate our data um it's not about ecom service and it's not about poverty and so then we have to dig deeper and look at what's happening in our system and in our institutional processes that this is what our data
looks like um and it's what our data doesn't look like over time in terms of when you think about a citation in 2020 and here we are in 2025 with not only a designation but another atlas status what's happening systemically so that we
can really address at all sort of levels of the system um and really thinking about and I think it's really hard for a district like us who really um passionately put equity or try and put equity quantum center to talk about
things like inequitable practices, right? What is happening that in terms of processes and procedures and practices that we have um that we have data that reflects this and and how do we address it, right? And it is about
policies, procedures, practices, beliefs, mindset and um and you have to address all of those things. So, as I've just shared, even though disproportionality comes from special education law and regulation, it's
actually most often not a special education issue, per se, and its solutions are often not do not live within special education either. Um, it's a it's a real combination of things. Um in terms of as we know
special a education is built on the foundation of general education. Your special education system is only as strong as the foundation on which it's built. And so when we look at what are the conditions and how do we how do we
address this? um we have to look at all aspects of the system really starting with what's happening um within a general education within our general education setting. Um so this is just what DESI expects when you get a
citation. So if you look on the right I'm going to start there. So when you're designated as at risk, which is what we've been designated this year in FR25, um districts are expected to look at what are the factors contributing to your disproportionality.
Um you're supposed to conduct a review of the policies, procedures, practices, and then you're supposed to create an action plan. Um so this is what the district did in FY20. Um and I'm going to speak to that work. when you've been identified, which we
are in this current year for our um FLD category, it goes further than that. So, as you saw when you looked at the IDA grant, 15% of your IDA funds need to be allocated to what's called comprehensive
coordinated early intervention services. Um and so this is to look at when you look at those root causes 15% of your IDA funds need to be targeted to try and address some of those root causes root causes and the targeting of those funds
is for all students. So it's not just every other component of the IDA grant is only for students with disabilities. the CCIS funds which you get targeted and you need to target for disproportionality is for all students um both the general
ed and special ed and so one of the things when you are in an at the status is we need to do a root cause analysis and that really needs to look at again as I said what's happen what's happening systemically what's happening institutionally in terms of
understanding how to address it and what we know is it's an interaction of school practice right what are the inputs what's happening in terms of inputs that are leading to student outcomes I know you had the MCCAST presentation so similarly right our data
looks good on the aggregate when you start to disagregate you look at outcomes for different student groups that are vastly different um one of The things that we need to look at in terms of special education and in this area is really understanding what's the difference in terms of diversity in
terms of differences in terms of diagnosis and and disability. We are a very diverse district. Um and in terms of looking at uh students come in at all different levels. We have multilingual students. What is the difference between
language acquisition and learning differences and disabilities? And then also understanding sorry what are the processes and mechanisms that allow for individual and group decisions that create and perpetuate disproportionality.
And so while we've had sort of five years of really being addressing this and being cited and having a disproportionality work which really is across the district and across system look at this. we're still in FY 2025
um really dealing with the same sort of systemic and structural issue. Um and so how do we really dig kind of deep into the data and really look at our sort of systemic processes and practices? Um and so the district
did a very thorough root cause analysis uh on this um really leveraging a team. Uh we've just pulled a team together again. We actually met this afternoon with our new at risk piece to say okay what's happening. We're digging deep into the data around intellectual
disability which is what a cross district team did this afternoon just to say what is our what is our data showing us right what do we understand at the student level at the system level so that we can address it um and so if you leverage team we look at our data and
then we have to look at what's happening in terms of our our biases our beliefs and our mindsets because as we know decisions at an IP meeting are made by a group of people um and they're socially mediated um and so while many disability
categories and in fact interestingly enough SLD and intellectual disability categories are seen as some of the most objective categories um that's not what we're seeing in our data uh in terms of what's what's reflected
and so you have to look in terms of your root causes as I said the three keys policy practice procedures what's the system lens of your route and then what's the student data lens of your root and so the group that met today. We dive deeply into our student data. We
actually looked at every student who's being categorized with an intellectual disability disability category. We went deep into their evaluations. And so the team we called the evaluations of all these students to look at
is the identification accurate. Right? One of the assumptions with disproportionality is you're making inaccurate disability designations. Um, and so that's the work that this team did when we they looked at the SLB categories uh in 2020 and 21. And that's
what the team is doing again as we look at what's happening again with another disability category. And then again as this student we look at what's happening from a database decision- making what's happening from a culturally responsive the work of Zoretta Haven in terms of culturally
responsive teaching um what's happening in our poor instructional programming and there's good news there which I'll talk about a little later in terms of the shift in our literacy work um some of which which actually came out of the root cause analysis that was done in
FY20 a new teacher center which worked on what's happening within what was then called child study which is now called student intervention teams actually came came out of that um and then what's happening in assessment right so that's the piece that special ed has locus of
control over what's happening when a group of people look at assessment data in an eligibility meeting um and then what's happening with our interventions and supports and again there's good news there and I'll talk more about it in a bit in terms of the work that's happening around NGSS
in the district. >> Question. >> Yeah. >> And these the population that your team is looking at are only the students that you refer to here, >> the black and black regardless of income or this is all across. >> So the deep dive so we're looking at so
for example within the intellectual disability category we looking at all students within that category. Right. So we're looking at are we overidentifying one group of students and underidentifying other groups of students because that also can lead to a disproportionate designation. Um so
we're looking at everything. What we did today specifically was the group of students who identify as black and African. We looked at each one of those to look at is there something happening in how how we identify students. But we're looking at the totality of the
group as well. But diving deeper into human level. >> And to follow up, how do you identify the ones that are have an unidentified disability >> if there's ones that are unidentified? >> So in terms of the the data that I have, it's only students who've been identified, but it's all students. It's
not just students who identify as black and African-American. We looked at all students within that disability category. >> Oh, yeah. Within the disability category. >> And >> yeah, go ahead. Yeah, thanks. Um I I don't know whether this question is kind of repeating Jesse's maybe um to put a
different point on it. I mean looking at that slide with all the numbers on it like I'm not sure does the concept of disproportionality apply both to over representation and to under representation because you know Asians seem to be under reppresented even more
drastically than black students are over represented right that risk ratio is 0.09%. you're less than 10% as likely to be identified um you know if you're Asian as if you were part of the the general poll which suggests that there might we might have
quite a few students who might be entitled to services or could benefit from them but are simply never identified um and is that something that even gets addressed in um in the desi review and in sort of our response to it
>> yeah so not so desi doesn't look at in terms of sighting districts in terms of where you're under represented. We certainly look at that data and I'm actually you're going to a little later as well in terms of and also around disability categories right in terms of
um where students are found eligible often is also along racial lines and why is that and what happens in terms of services and supports with different disability categories. Um so Newent teacher um did a pretty
comprehensive root cause analysis in FY20 and published their report in FY2021. So this is directly from the new teacher center report. Um and so 21% of PS students are designated as having an
SLD. 20% of the students in this SLD category of black African-American when they dug deeper underneath that and looked at what's happening prior to students being referred from special education. And one of the things you
know when you say that SLD is one of the more objective >> um disability category categories is there it's a very robust criteria in which teams actually have to go through in order to find a student with an SLD.
And one of the things that you there were a whole number of criteria that are called exclusionary factors. And so you have to look at things like language you have to look at things like attendance. You have to look at things like did the student receive evidence-based
instruction with fidelity. And if a student hasn't had access to good instructional services and supports with fidelity, it's supposed to exclude a student from being found eligible with an SLT. Um and so what you teacher
center found is that 45% of the students referred have not had any general education intervention prior to referral. So strictly speaking again if you're going through and being very strict with those criterion those students should not have been found
eligible for SLD because one of the single most important criterion had not been met. And then the last thing of the students the 55% who did get interventions many of those that were provided were not targeted meaning if a student might
have had an area of deficit in family awareness the intervention might not necessarily have been focused on that student getting support in awareness. They might have been in a general group doing other things regarding literacy but not necessarily targeted. And then
many of the interventions were not delivered with fidelity. So that that was sort of the finding that that so I wanted to emphasize that earlier Karen had said we're talking about probable disproportionality and so she's saying
this is there's all these objective criteria. There are things that should have excluded a certain amount of students and we know that they didn't get it. They should have been excluded but they were still identified in this category of disability.
The other probable is um 21% of PSB students are categorized as having a a SLD but the typical percentage is actually single digit. Yes. So that's the other probable
indication that there's a disproportionate identification. Do are you okay to say what the typical number is? It's usually like a low single digit. >> So it depends on what state. So, one of the things that we do know in Massachusetts is we have higher
disability um students in special education than many other states. Um so in general it under 10%. >> Yeah. So so that's this is all the probable disproportionate identification. But
>> what is it in Massachusetts or what range? >> Generally it's over 20%. >> In Massachusetts in Massachusetts. >> Oh so the 21 is not In terms the whole state is >> over identified. >> Yeah. >> In terms of students in special
education, we have we have a higher proportion of students served in special education than in other states. >> Not all states. >> Carolyn has a question than Mariah. >> And thanks. Um Dr. Schmuckler,
bear with me for a sec. So, I'm really interested in this third bullet. 45% received no general education intervention prior to referral to special education. Can you just roll that back
to refer to? So, is that 45% of the black or African-American identifying students? 45% of PSB students in special education.
No, the former of of the group that were identified in terms of disproportionality, 45% of the students who identify as black and African-American received no general ed intervention prior to >> and how does that 45 do you know how
that compares to other racial groups? >> I don't I don't at that at that point in time. Yeah. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Sure. >> Thank Mariah. >> Thank you.
>> Mariah, Suzanne, Sarah. >> Um I have a question about um the 21% being high because I thought that data shows that dyslexia is prevalent in about 20% of the population as well.
That seems to be what the the the at least the data we hear shows. So is is it that Massachusetts is overidentifying or that other states are under identifying? >> I mean what what the build uh looks at
is that we we have higher rates uh in than other states and that we are I think people look at it as overidentifying uh in in Massachusetts compared to other states and it's you know there's extremes. I mean, for those
of you who didn't follow sort of special ed, there was, you know, a whole lot of federal action, for example, against Texas many, many years ago because they set caps, right? So, there's sort of the extremes. Um, we're definitely on the high end in terms of special ed identification.
>> But is being on the high end bad if it's accurate and commensurate with the actual rate of the disability in the population? Well, I think the what the data and research um looks at it that it is in commensurate and you know I don't make
any judgment on whether it's bad or I think in the in the field it's seen it's high. >> Okay Suzanne and then Sarah >> Thank you J. This is a lot here. So just
you know I'm really thinking about this 45% >> uh and this was in 2020 the best report 2021. We've since pretty much implemented dibbles at the lower grades. Do you is it too early to say if that
has an impact on this? I would and I would hope and I would think just from the little that I've seen that that is having positive impact and I think that's really the bright news I think that we can talk about in terms of action plan and what's actually
happened in the district since then uh in terms of both doubles and and the work and while you know our systems of support are a work in progress I think the district's made enormous progress since since uh in that direction um and and you know
we're also have you know the dyslexia regulations came in and so there's also been a lot at the state level and legislate legislatively um that we are following and monitoring and resables um to really you know both
track and identify and really intervene um and so we should we really should be seeing um impact in our data >> and so and you know the other part too is that Sometimes uh teachers bring a student to
uh a team meeting ask for an IEP because they feel that's the only way students will get the intervention when in fact there are many ways to get interventions and we actually in Brooklyn have a lot of staff that can provide interventions
besides special ed. >> Yeah. >> Right. We have reading specialists and we have coaches and so I I would hope this is 2020, >> right? >> I would hope using the dibbles getting the interventions and resources into the students where we need them in the
classroom would help us get to a number much lower than 45% not having interventions. >> And I and I think you know one of the things that I think it's important to note is that when teams come together, people just want to do right by a child, right? They just want to make sure that
the child gets what they need. And when you're at that point, because people will say, well, you know, you look at that and say, well, they didn't have a general education intervention, so then how are they found eligible? Right? It's it's really groups of people who want with the best of intentions want to get
a child services and support. And when you think that that's the place that they're going to get it, right, the services are in that box. You're going to put the child there to get the services and support, right? And so hopefully as we create a much more um
systematic system within general education that will not be the case. People will not feel like that's the route that you need to go in order to get student services. Thank you. >> Just a comment. I mean this was 2021 and the data were taken in 2020 and that was
during the pandemic. Why the surprise about like things I mean this seems like a strange period of time to be focusing. >> Yes. So the the disproportionality data excluded pandemic years. >> Um >> okay. So this so this report was not
based on was based on data like 2017 2018. Correct. Y >> shared. Yeah. So districts were given a pass. >> Sure. >> Yeah. >> For the pandemic years. >> Okay. So this is >> oh sorry I think Sarah had sorry sorry
>> so just to go back where you ended with Suzanne so do you feel that we have the budget we have like so say a student needed for awareness um reading tutoring and they weren't in special education do
we have that in place we have a budget >> we have it in place Um and I mean I think to your question we have the budget. I mean yes because we have you know we have people and we have the structures and we have the processes. So I would say I would say
it's not a it's not about budget. Um I think it's systems structures processes. If you needed an intervention for reading and you weren't in special education, >> you can get it. >> You can get it because there's um your classroom teacher has the skills to do
it. >> Amazing classroom teachers. We have amazing literacy specialists across all of our schools. So, yes, >> no, let Bob go, please. >> No, no, go, go, go. I don't like going after him. >> What? I know. I'm always after you. Um
I'm curious about this data and if if we have any more recent data on the disproportionality findings are there students concentrated in particular grade bands or we don't have that type of information.
>> Um I mean in terms of findings around SLD it's often around fourth grade third fourth grade. So you do see sort of the founding concentrated in you know when students are first found with an SL is generally
third >> and that is that also do you think that's also true in this data the 20 the new new teacher center data meaning the 20% of students in the SLD category
that are black African-American are probably also for a grade. I mean point in time they weren't you know when you look at our broad district data that is where students are most often found eligible but when you looked at this data students were all over the
all in all grades in for this group that was cited. So it was all over the students who moved into the district at various grades. So they may have been found eligible in third grade including our and including our own students. >> Okay.
And I I too am sort of like stuck on that 45% number. Um, and maybe I'm not sure you'll if you'll talk about this at all. Um, but could
enhancing or um improving access to our child study teams or student intervention teams. Could those fall under general education interventions? And I assume then those
would help us differentiate between students who need targeted interventions versus those that need evaluations and whether child study teams or student intervention teams would those qual with does that qualify for the 15% that CCIS
funding? I mean you can >> theoretically you can use some of those CCIs and some of the >> outcome of the new teacher center work was really looking at what's happening in child studies. So they as part of
this report they looked at this data but they also went across all the elementary school and really reviewed what was happening in our child's study process. And so there's been a lot of work and improvement within subsequent to this uh within the student intervention team
process and we're still looking at refining that process because there is a level around particularly around the SLD where >> it needs to be data right so when you make a referral to special education should be data driven right and so that's that's sort of a piece of work
that's happening now in terms of student intervention is making sure you know to Suzanne's question that that student has had intensive tiered intervention so that we know it's not about instruction and intervention, right? Because when we make a referral for special a because
there's a suspected disability, not because a student hasn't had internship. Um and so again, multi-istic causes, but also multi-istic solutions. So there's been a lot of work um with SIT as well. >> Okay. I am so I would be really
interested to hear more if that's ever if that coming down the um network. >> Yeah, thank you Karen for your wisdom. >> So there's a rather dramatic overidentification of black and African-American with special education.
There's a dramatic under representation in Asia. It's >> what what research has been done recently, not so recently that can identify the reasons for that and what
can we learn about the underidentification, traumatic underidentification of Asian kids that we what can we learn that we can apply to the overhead?
How's that? >> What time is it? Um so you know I think a lot of the work that's been done on mindset and mental mindset and bias applies in both areas applies in both directions. uh in terms
of both under identification um of students to identify Asian and the over identification of students who are students of C. Uh in terms of when you look at you know when you sort of look at the data and you look at um sort of
bias and perception plays a huge role in over identification um and so I think it works both ways. student by expectations in a sense >> teacher expectations um teachers understanding of academic gaps
how teachers view certain kids in terms of >> in terms of expectations. Um unfortunately has a huge role to play and it's sort of why you know if you do real deep proper equity work why that's so important in disruptive
disproportionality because it's such a critical component of it. So you're saying expectations for Asian kids are high, maybe expectations for black and African-American kids are too low. >> That's some of the >> So how do we make that better? >> Right. Well, I think that's some of the
research and and then around and so it's why you do the work around >> and you know it just I mean just it's always frustrating for many of you who you know have been involved in this stuff for a long time and we still have the same data.
>> Why our data over time has improved. I think one of the twists and again having you know being in districts like like the lines is it requires sustained system work and accountability
or system. So I think the district for many years was really no designations or citations at all. Um, but you can't take your eye off the board, right? It's we can't just we can't just say we have an equitable system. We have to continually
work to create a structure that continues to be equitable. Um, because it's also there's a whole sort of historical context to this that is still sort of part of the research and part of what people look at. You know, I think
that's where, you know, the work of Zor Handle is so important because it really looks at what's happening at the future instructional level uh in terms of educating students who might not come in with all the access and opportunities. You know, people talk about the achievement gap, but often it's an
instructional gap. It's a it might be an access gap. It might be an opportunity gap, but it isn't work that you fix and then you can say, "Okay, we will do something else." And I think particularly in districts like Bookline, right, where again we looked at the MCAST data. So on
the face of it, it looks really good, right? We look like we're doing really well. And when you just aggregate, you get under the hood to say, okay, well, how is it that certain groups of students persistently um their outcomes are consistently
different from other students? And what do we what do we do about that? In the 1980s, Jeff Howard, John Sappier, a whole bunch of people were focusing on that. That was that's 45 years ago, 40 years ago. And we still have the issue.
We still have the problem. >> Agreed. Agreed. >> Go ahead, sir. So to address implicit bias, of course, we would look to um teacher PD and um
one of the things that I think that changed is we used to have a um have seed for teachers where they could address implicit bias and then we changed over to be offering maybe more ideas and that seems to me if I'm not
mistaken to be a little bit more aligned with pedagogical as opposed to addressing implicit bias. In my view, seed was more to address bias within oneself. >> Sorry. I think seed was ongoing at least
as of last year at the high school. Sorry to interrupt, but I believe seed is [clears throat] ongoing. So when we make that shift to do less of C and more of ideas
um in your estimation is that something that we should look at is the PD that we're offering teachers. >> I mean I think it's a yes to end. You know I think to me what has always been most effective is actually showing
people the data. And I don't think I don't think we do enough of that here. I think we're driving to do more of it and to model it. I think what shifts people because again people want to do what's best for kids right and so you make individual decisions and then you pull out and suddenly you look at your system
data of all these individual decisions driven you need to sort of you systemic data and I think what moves teachers and what moves the system is people knowing their data um so I think we so I think it's a
yes to end I think the you know good professional learning and development around bias coupled with data is what moves people and what can really >> and do we have good professional learning around implicit bias in your estimation currently
>> currently I would say not >> well we've had a lot of star hits and misses and starts and stop [clears throat] we have everything that we don't have any and I think it's not a it's not about a professional
development it's about what we do all the time as part of you know when we say equity is for all students what do we mean by that and how do we live that you know so some of it is through good professional learning um but it's also about you know we leader in the system
having this be sort of front and front and center but that we also look at our data um and I think we again that's another area of you know it's a glimmer right because that is really work that's happening um right now. It's happening with our literacy work.
>> Um and we'll come to do it more and more even though we don't have a data person. >> So we're putting a plug for that. Um but it's really integral because I think when you know as I say like a group of us made today and we looked at the data and this is people who are immersed in
the work and this is people who've self- selected to come be part of this group who are very invested in it. The data is what kind of moves you to say okay wait let's let's look at why do we have you know why do we have this when actually the data doesn't support it and then the
next step is okay well what can we do about it right and how do we every educator needs to change their practice is how you get systemic change >> and I would put that looking at data under PD as well and you have to have time for for teachers that was those were some leaders I I think I understand
you were together with a group of um leaders that were educators there too. There were also teachers there too. >> This was some years but mostly educators. >> So I guess I would put in the in the category of PD is giving teachers time to look at data. >> So
>> and I think it's Yeah. Go ahead. It's sorry I was um the change doesn't happen unless it's intentional and it has to be based on your data. it no change happens and so it it has to be on the data and
adjusting the data it doesn't just happen. So, so I appreciate that you've got a team and they're probably looking at the district level, but again, I think also again if it needs to happen at this classroom level and so that's where I always put a plug in for professional
learning community and grade level team meetings because that's where teachers in a small group of their peers can look at each student in their in their classes and compare and see what what the data is telling
>> and that's just invaluable. So, it's not just PD. It's kind of an ongoing way of thinking about the data of your students and and having conversations about what do we do about this one and this one? How can I help? >> And to your question about the doubles,
some of our principles are doing exactly that. They're diving deep into the doubles data, but also into the subcategories of the doubles data to really look at, you know, and then cross referencing that with MCAST data. So it's it's happening which is which is really positive.
>> Karen, I I I know we're sort of jumping around in your presentation, but in the action plan you talked about family engagement as a note. Can you speak to that a little bit? >> I can and that's definitely in its infancy stages. I don't think we have um
we need to engage families more uh in that both in um interventions and what we have available um but also being very transparent with when with our data when we run the dles um to sort of what Suzanne has also said we do have a lot
of supports and resources and it's making sure that we're maximizing them and we're also targeting them for the students most that need and so sort of when I put sort the family engagement. Um it's that's what I think is some of the work that we need to be doing with
family uh in terms of this work and also sharing the data with families. You know, I think we share out the doubles data and families get the stay data, the star data. Um but it's often we send it to them and then that's right. And so I think as we're sort of really thinking
about how do we how are we doing how are we targeting students who need intervention and how are we matching the right intervention with the student at the level of need when they need it. We have to be engaging families at the very beginning of that process.
>> You should probably let Karen finish the root root cause analysis. >> Yes. >> Right. Okay. Okay. stuff. Um, and I think we've actually spoken um to a lot of this, so I'm going to go through this pretty quickly. So again, a lot of their and again this comes from new teacher center and there was a a
disproportionality group that was led by Matt Dvoir um with many other leaders and teachers and psychologists at the time and then obviously new teacher center as well. Um so again inconsistent tier one registered reading practices
and curricula. Now remember this was prior to the new adoption of the new curriculum um were not aligned with the science of reading at the time. Um and then a lot of inconsistencies across the schools in terms of practices with how students were identified, how
interventions were targeted, how we measured them, often students were being pulled out of tier one instruction. So you're getting your literacy services during a literacy with block, right? And so we know that that's not best practice
and all of that is uh being addressed. And then one of the things that we saw in the evaluations and we certainly looked at evaluations today as well is that again data that was just below age expectations um was seen as impaired and
weaknesses were seen as being indicative of disability. Right? So that's the work that has to be done within special ed. Um and then a lot of pressure in the system for eligibility finding right and that's we need to help this child. We need to find them eligible to pressure
from within the system and also pressure from outside towards the system in terms of finding students eligible. Um again academic needs being um administered in
inconsistently and then we spoke about this a lot a lot of and Mr. came from the teacher was mindset needs around how teachers thought about students with academic skill gaps and what students needed and who needed to be providing
that intervention um when skill gaps were present. And we do we have a lot of neglected. And so sometimes when you have a lot of people external to the classroom that often pushes us to think that interventions, instruction and support should happen outside of the
classroom for perhaps more students than it needs to happen. Um so that and then again and this is more around um as we look at sort of procedures um again just some of lack of process and
procedure. again all of this um through the work that the team did in the last two years moving into this year with MTSS um we're already seeing huge improvements in terms of our processes and procedures it's definitely a work in
process um people are getting used to the new curriculum it's a lot for teachers as everyone knows the first year adoption of a new curriculum um is is very challenging is it and it is a huge look for teachers But all of this work is that's still happening on
parallel. As I've said without a lot of these instructional procedures, it really hampers team to say has a child been given effective instruction or not. If you don't have data at a team meeting, it's very hard to say is that council contributed to a
child's difficulty or are we looking at a disability? And so this is again um participant disproportionality identified tier one instruction as a significant contributing factor. Um and
so a lot of the discussions around curriculum and instruction um as well as our tiered systems generated um from some of the programs Karen is Dr. Can I ask a question about
the slide before this? Um, so it's so is it is it inaccurate to say it's not an access issue? So it's it's not a matter of access to general education
interventions. It's more about um pro these it's more process issues that >> um is there an access issue do you think or at the time that this root cause analysis was done or was there was it
was there an access issue meaning we didn't have enough support or ED or um educators in place to do some of the Sounds to me, Donna, like that it
depends how you define access. >> Yeah, >> they weren't sent. We may have had staff, but they weren't kids weren't sent for tier one and tier 2 interventions >> is how I understood >> and and again, you know, I think, you
know, people do a root cause analysis point in time looking at sort of data and processes. I think what it spoke a lot to was sort of systems systems and processes and procedures things like we don't have a wellestablished PLC system from the
district anymore used so that is not something that is consistently happening across the district where people are coming together and you're looking at data and it's just I mean we're trying to reestablish it and it's stronger in some schools than others they're not I
think again at this time they wait a lot kind of what you would expect in terms of those kind of instructional process and procedures at the student level but also at the teacher level. Um you know I think time is a huge issue um always for
teachers and certainly a huge issue this year within your curriculum but having like structured time where you are looking at data and looking at it in real time so that it can inform your instruction tomorrow those kind of systems and processes and procedures
were not in place for them. Thank you. Sure. Okay. So, I'm going to go kind of quickly through this. This is just our demographic data. This is from Desty. So, it's just in terms of looking at the English
learners, students with disabilities, high needs, low income compared to the state. This is our special ed data. And so again you can see the you know the and so what when people look at just proportionality the expectation is that
you would see more of a a parallel. What's the old representation within the population that should you should see the same parallel. So when you look at our students uh who identify as white, you see a pretty onetoone correlation, right? And then um similar to students
who identify as multi-racial and non-hispanic where you start to see your over representation and your under representation again are students who identify as Asian where as you said you're seeing um under representation and then students who are African-American, black and identify as
Hispanic, Latino, you are seeing over representation. It's not three times so we wouldn't be cited but it is former stoppage right in both of those categories and then significant under representation. >> What year was that data from? >> This is current okay
>> so this is current this is our current data and so that's just what it looks like in terms of your special ed representation. Um so the blue is what's expected right and again that's based on the expectation that
it's you have a parallel process and then the actual is what the current representation of students in certain categories are within special education. So this is a busy slide. I'm going to give you a minute. It just represents
and you can sort of see again because we were talking about SLDs. This is a breakdown of district disability category by racial identity. And so as you can see students who identify as black and African-American, you see that
huge turquoise block that identifies the SLD. So it's just a visual representation. What's often interesting as we talk about um as you can see around disability categories and how students end up in disability
categories. One of the things that we looked at even today when we looked at our intellectual disability category is there are some categories that are more palatable um for families. And so sometimes teams will depending on what's
happening go with one disability category over another. Um and so you see you get a lot of variation in terms of what that looks like. And interestingly when you disagregate by school you get a lot of schoolwide variation. And that's because as we said decisions are made in
teams and they're social mediated by groups of people at team. And so you see a lot of that um variation but that just sort of you can sort of clearly see that this large block in terms of SLB. Okay. And so as we said it's complex it
requires multi systemic and sustained work. Um and it's really just the interaction of our policy over there. Okay. So, um, and I think often people look at the data and sort of to what Bob was saying like why why
is it still where it is and it can it can sort of feel like intractable problem uh, which it certainly isn't. Districts have mastered this and have been able to really do sustained work over time to disrupt what are systemic and institutional patterns. Um I think
this speaks to Sarah what you were talking about in terms of some of the work that teachers who understand the social construction of racial ability um and their their own kind of makeup and how they come to the work do much better
in terms of educating all students. Um >> and I just want to underline that we don't have seed in our schools anymore just as we say that. >> Yeah. Yep. And it's within all of our reach to become more conscious about how we step into the work and just what the
sort of social political context around the work is because as you know it's it's not neutral. So this is the action plan and what's what's kind of happening to date. Um so at the system level um as we've heard and we've heard from Robin um really
exciting work happening in literacy around curriculum and instruction again this is year one um of K5 it's been piloted um at the middle school level um and so it's going to take time um and and teachers are working incredibly hard
um and doing amazing work exciting work we're still working with new teacher center that's been um grant funded um and really doing excellent uh work and they're bound to begin with working with the district team again and bringing and
pushing this work out onto the high school. So that's very exciting. Um the disproportionality work group is has reassembled um and we're really diving deep into the data and really thinking about what are the lines of accountability that we need to set up in
the system to disrupt some of the institutional patterns that you know and those are things like looking at all evaluation decisions and having a group of people who look at it and then feed that data back to fleets. One of the
things we did when we looked at Dale today is say all of the things that people are proud to say okay now we need to go back and take all this information to the school teams so they can act upon it right and so that's the work around sort of datadriven work and datadriven
accountability looking at our student intervention team process there's been a lot of work done already to date and really thinking about how do we shore that up and how do we make sure that again it's embedded with data um we've spoken a lot about the Wilson and Gillingham training that we're doing for
special educators and some general educators. Again, that's really making sure we're infusing all of our educators in the system with real started robust expertise um doing paraprofessional training and literacy supports. Number of our
paraprofessionals are being trained in heity which really supports the work that teachers are doing at the younger grades. Um and then making sure we are constantly looking at eligibility alignment and making sure that we're looking at that across the system. Some
of the things that have been put in this year through the CCIS money um and also through some of our title grants is high dosage tutoring um we're forming a flexible behavioral support team that also came out as in well secondary in
the root cause analysis um after school and vacation literacy tutoring and then as I then shared in terms of Val's question really making sure that we are having structured and systemic ways of engaging families in the process early
and in an ongoing way. >> Yes, >> thank you. This is um really uh a lot of information and a lot of important information and I know we've asked a lot of questions. Sorry, but I'm wondering
um if you can also talk about whether there's a way we're tracking um whether or are the corrective actions might shift the balance too far in other directions. So either underidentifying
students of color or overidentifying I assume this work is also happening for Asian students to for that disproportionality right >> and I think to your I mean I think there's always a piece where people are like oh so now we're not going to find students eligible no right so again it's
making sure that there are lines of accountability so that students who are have a disability are found eligible. I think one of the things that's really hard is many students are struggling without disabilities, right? And so we serve struggling students in special education which is not the most
efficient or effective way to serve students without disabilities, right? And so that's really what the work is about and you know I think what I say to people is when a student doesn't have a disability and they are struggling that's when the work has to begin as to
as to so what do we do now? it can't be that you get services and support in one box, right? And so we really have to think about and again I think that's where the the work that's happening is hopeful and there's a lot of um kind of glimmers in um to really be able to say
absolutely we can support students who are struggling but who don't have disabilities. So that's where um you know in terms of the concern about are we going to suddenly now underidentify no but I think it's really to sort of push the system to say we need to
frontload interventions instruction services and supports in a wraparound way for students who are struggling and there are students who struggle you know may struggle persistently over time and we need to provide a high level of intensive services to those students
for as long as they need it you I think we have sometimes a very short tolerance for students who are struggling to say you get an intervention for 6 weeks or 12 weeks and then you go to special education right and that's you know that's not borne out by data or by
instruction or pedagogy or anything like that so I think it's more around that >> but I but I hear you because I think often the concern is often the concern of the parents when they hear this is like oh my goodness is they now going to be um you know under identification which is not work.
>> And I think it's really important for people to hear that you're thinking about that, too. Yeah. >> And that you're building those um you're building those into the work they're doing. >> Yeah. There a couple of notes I made. Um
this is reading, right? We're talking about Okay. So, what about screen time? How does that buy into this particularly? >> Meaning meaning that all the time these kids spent on Chromebooks. Like the same article I read that Bel talked about
about kids who write their paper versus kids who do it on a computer versus want to go to Google versus want to use AI tools. >> Yeah. >> These guys who are writing it by hand have the best retention. >> You know, the research that's been done reading's got to be similar. That reading
>> when you're looking at ink on paper is different than when you're reading your screen all day. Um so is and and tied into that is these kids who are more vulnerable. >> Um uh not only are forced to go to a screen which may not be the best place
for them but it's the easiest for teachers to put them in front of because every kid has one. So they can design a curriculum for them but you know to them to [clears throat] do on screen which may be innately difficult. And then just to jump to a different topic is that these are also the kids probably that need the most consistent and the most
regular exposure to the tutoring or to the learning that they're doing. Which ties in again to this calendar conversation that having regular times for these kids who are the most vulnerable and may not be able to get their schedules into high dosage tutoring and may not be able to be around for after school.
>> The number of days isn't changing. It's still we're still have the same number of days. So there's still going to be the same hours, >> right? I think but the continuity is different with it's interrupted
just like having every Wednesday operation. >> Jesse, I'm not sure how that what that has to do with a disproportionality finding. I mean, are you suggesting that only that that black kids disproportionately are on screen? I'm not I'm not
understanding the connection you're making. >> It's a more general comment. I think it may have, you know, in the same in the same way as as the writing uh pencil to paper does something cognitively deeper to a
student or to an adult than than reading it from a screen or doing it having a computer give it to you to help you think. um reading uh uh paper ink on paper compared to
reading on a screen. You may not have the the same outputs. That's what I was saying. Sure. >> I know that Donna already thanked you, but it's worth saying again that it's just so nice to have such a um broad
understanding of the situation and I really appreciate that it's not just yours that you had conversations with other people and brought all of this to us. So, thank you. >> Yes. Thank you, Karen. This has been incredibly helpful. It's incredibly
disturbing. It's incredibly eye opening, but it also um the light at the end of the tunnel is that you're leading this this work and that you've identified such um a robust strategy for um continuous
engagement >> and I think what's really important is the work is really OSA and OTL >> um and so it's really and and a superintendent and um but that it's really a a real integration of um work
at at sort of all the department levels um in terms of um really a continuum of services and supports that begin as um going through special education and that that's really critical in terms of
systems work is that it really is integrated um at all levels of the system. Just one one more question. What about comparable districts? Like in other words, how are there models that Brooklyn can take from other districts maybe not right around 128 but in the
state >> who have beaten this already? Well, I mean Bob was saying it's been a problem. I'm sure it has been. There got to be some districts that have solved this problem. >> They're good examples. You know, again, I haven't looked at their data more recently. Lexington had done, >> you know, medium for example. There were
actually just an article published on medium's work about literacy and so they definitely are um and you know Brooklyn over the years has also um you know been in a position where this was not sort of part of their uh data in as significant
a way as it is now. Um but there can be other districts both you know statewise and also across the country where again demographics are similar and and outcomes is so looking good practice examples.
>> Yeah. Well thanks again for these details because we certainly have our eye. >> Thank you so much Karen. Um one comment too just as you so as as we look at these um presentations that
are being made to and she and um Karen will have another big one on 124 around student services um as they tie into funding. So this committee protected funding for the literacy implementation but understand too that a lot of the
work that parent described is supported by grant funding and um there was a time in the summer we weren't sure if title one was coming or not but it did and then we weren't sure about title 2 three and four so as we build on the budget I
think we're we are not assuming title 2 three and four will be funded and so just all of to remember when we when we move forward and we're looking at the budget when we say this is what we need the funding for this is this is what
we're talking about but also that that um on December 4th is another bigation >> thank you um Superintendent Wong moving on to our um next agenda item a discussion and possible vote on the 26
to 27 school calendar I invited Susan Harris to uh just lay out a little bit of what was in her memo from last year and also to speak to um a little bit of what we've heard in the community about
days of low attendance and um separation of church and state. I I think that it is good for us to have an understanding from town council on um the sort of contours as we as we have this conversation.
Thank you. I appreciate the opportunity to speak with you tonight. Um, first on the the topic of days of low attendance since I know that question has been coming up. Um, I understand the district used that language to describe category 1 holidays or days off school and that
may have created some confusion. Um, I want to clarify that the law does not require that days of low attendant that days be of low attendance in order for schools to close. It's not the only reason why schools may close on particular days. The school committee does have the discretion to set the
calendar. Although that decision, like all the decisions you make, cannot be arbitrary. That's really what the memo from last year got into. I do recall that when um eat was added as a day off last year, the rationale discussed included the importance of the day to
students and families and the district's commitment to diversity and inclusion. The other question that I know has been coming up has to do with the separation of church and state in our constitution. Certainly the government cannot coers anyone to observe religion, to attend
church or otherwise engage in a religious exercise. But there is a difference between acknowledging religion on the one hand and excluding or coercing non-believers on the other hand. We think it's very unlikely that the school closures you're discussing would be seen to violate the
establishment clause. So, I hope that helps clarify those issues and and frame the conversation tonight. Happy to answer any other questions that come up. >> Thank you, Susan. Um, as a reminder, we have Carol, hold on a second. As a reminder, we um eliminated
two calendars from our discussion uh last week. So, we have four remaining calendars. Um Carolyn, go ahead. And then we're going to go around once a person and see if there's a motion. You're on mute.
Thank you. Um I'm trying to sort of understand. So Susan, last year you advised [sighs] the school committee um to think through and preferably articulate the substantial evidence
underlying its decision on the record. So have you seen evidence that the school committee to my understanding we have not codified
a rationale and you went on to say that your decision will require some line drawing. So have you seen that we have either
cottified a new rationale that is not religious in nature when we added a religious holiday >> or that >> we have established criteria
for line drawing in the future. Good questions. So, obviously, um, you know, lawyers like to see as much evidence as we can get. Um, what we did talk about last year was the importance of having, um, a rationale for the
decision that that the decision would not be arbitrary. And like I said, I think the record of the discussion supports what the rationale was, um, including the importance of the day to students and families and the district's commitment to diversity and inclusion. Sorry. Can I
>> can I ask because what you're saying I is sort of central to my question. I hear the word you're saying except it's difficult to for me and it sounds like for members of the public to understand or or sort of I guess accept
that the primary purpose of closing school on a religious holiday that was requested in order for religious celebration was not religious in nature. is that you're saying that the primary
purpose is not religious. >> I think I've addressed that. I think I've explained the rationale discussed included the importance of the day to students and families and the district's commitment to diversity and inclusion. Like I said just just a moment ago, there's a difference between acknowledging an institution and
excluding or forcing others. And so I we don't have establishment clause concerns about the holiday. I do, you know, I hear your your earlier question about um about line drawing. That was certainly something discussed in the memo as to,
you know, if there are future requests for holidays um for other holidays, it's something for the school committee to be really cognizant of that anytime you're put in the position of making a decision where you're drawing lines between one religion and another
religion. Um that the reasoning for doing so has to be neutral and non-discriminatory. So that is something um to certainly be aware of. Um I don't believe there have been any um criteria set for you know looking forward and how to handle that in the future. I'm not aware of that.
>> Okay. Um so I'm going to do it this way. I'm going to go through one by one and if you have nothing new to add since our last two discussions on this, you can just say pass. Um Donna, >> I hate when you start with me. >> We didn't start with you. We start with
Carolyn. >> Oh, that's true. Yes. Thank you. Um, I actually um took some time because I've really been thinking a lot about um about the the conversation the the conversations we've had, the emails that
we've received, um the discussions I've had with folks offline and of course um it was important for me to hear what Superintendent Wong um had to say. So, I took some time to write something down. I hope it's okay if I read it. Um,
I believe based on the strongman vote that we have the votes tonight to pass option C. So, my vote won't necessarily change any outcome. But I also want to take um this moment to highlight how we can use tonight's decision as a starting
point to set the table for a more comprehensive stu student centered discussion about um how we build our district calendar. Uh for me this is not a vote about religious holidays or cultural observances. It's not about taking away anyone's ability to observe
their faith or celebrate their identity. I do hear and recognize um those worries. Um but again I want to be clear for me that's not what this uh conversation is about. um instead and I said this uh last week I think um I
believe our responsibility is to define a fair and transparent framework for developing our district calendar and one that's evidence-based that can be applied consistently and that keeps uh student learning at the center. Um if
we're no longer using the low ident attendance data as the basis for decisions um then we have to establish a new set of guiding criteria and without that our choices will will feel peacemeal or reactive. So
we owe it to our students and our families and our staff um to create a framework that is clear evidence-based and can be applied consistently. So rather than designing a calendar that solves everything for everyone, I would
like to um agree on a few clear principles that we can return to year after year. Um, for me, those principles have to do with adequate instructional time, uh, evidence-based criteria to guide decisions that promote student
outcomes, ensuring, uh, fairness and inclusion for the many, many, many families and students we have not heard from. Um, and ensuring that our calendar remains manageable and, uh, simple enough to implement for staff across
schools. Um my hope is that we use tonight's vote as the beginning of a more comprehensive and thoughtful conversation. Um ideally that conversation will take place in policy subcommittee at some point. Um and I think if we do that
we'll be better positioned to make calendar decisions that are fair, transparent, and focused on what I think matters most to all of us. Um effective teaching and learning for every student in Brooklyn. Thank you.
>> Thanks, Donna. Um, Suzanne, >> yeah, I was say before I start, I just want to say two clarifications. One, early release states is part of our contract. So, that's not part of the conversation with the calendar. And starting before Labor Day is also part
of the contract. So, that's not part of this conversation on the calendar. I It came up several times to really. Yes. So, I'd like to say a few words if I could, Val. Um, I'm actually kind of starting where Terry Goldberg started, but I'm going to end up in a different place, so bear with me. So, 50 years
ago, the school committee and the community took a bold step and recognized the Jewish High Holy Days, and we put into action Brooklyn's values of diversity, inclusion, and respect. Since then, our demographics have changed as we have welcomed significant
numbers of Asian-Americans and Muslim Americans into our community. And so, as a welcoming community, we have expanded our circle to be more inclusive. I don't know if you're aware of the circle and people on the outside. So, you just draw the circle bigger. That's the idea I
have. Um, so as a welcoming community, we have more work to do, but we know that belonging is critical and for the success of our students and our families, we are making a lot of progress. And we heard that tonight from one of our students who said this really
helped her feel as though she's belonging to this community. In the past few years, our students have felt a greater sense of belonging. They feel seen and heard and recognizing important holidays and holy days is meaningful to
them. And they know that because we saw that information from the surveys that Matt Duvo shared with us about a month ago that uh feelings of belonging to the Brookline public schools community has increased significantly over the last
couple of years. So belonging has paid off. We have recently been named as number one middle school programs in the state and we have recently been named as the number one district in the state. So the idea of belonging and being
celebrated and heard has direct impact on students learning and achievement and success. So, as we strive even imperfectly for inclusivity, diversity, and belonging in our welcoming community,
when it's time, I would move to accept uh calendar C as supported by Superintendent Wong. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, Suzanne. Sarah, >> well, that was excellent. And so, it doesn't leave me with too many new things to say because I just loved what
you had to say there. I do support the superintendent's calendar and I just want to highlight that we heard from the youth council today and that was really helpful in my thinking about this. >> Thank you Jesse. >> I don't want to repeat what I said last
week so I'll take it a little different direction. A few comments. First is I don't believe the statement that uh was made a minute ago that the um decision to close the schools 50 years ago had anything to do with a religious respect or dignity. Not that there wasn't, but
that was not the reason. The reason was practicality. It was a ghost town as Carrie pointed out. And as my wife who grew up here and went to run school in VHS uh used to tell me as well um 50 years ago or 60 years ago she was in the
Brookline schools there was no school because there were no students and there were no teachers and that's why the schools the school committee at the time I read the the minutes of those meetings um as they were provided to us um from the um archives last year. The reason
had nothing to do with respect or um or disrespect. It had nothing to do with it. It was clearly a practical reaction to the fact that the demographic within the district left the schools untteachable situation. There was just not enough
kids. You would sit uh kids who were still in school sit in an auditorium. They'd watch a movie. They'd have free time. They'd play basketball. Whatever it was, it was not a teachable time. Demographics have changed now. And so we're in a different a different situation. But I want to be clear, we don't leave the public with the idea
that that was the reason the decision was made. I think that um not to repeat what I said last week that I think our un unless there's a significant reason that we need to vote the cal a calendar this evening in order to move forward. I would recommend that we do what I
suggested a year ago but never have which was for the school committee to work together uh in a workshop setting or some other mode to discuss the framework that Donna talked about alluded to as well in the same way that
we you know Mariah and I had worked and then Bella had worked and then we brought it out to more people then committee worked on budget guidelines that was an intense process it took several weeks of getting together and it resulted in a docu document that we were all comfortable with as a group of nine
um to give to our superintendent and that'll be good for some period of time. Who knows maybe it be good for even next year's budget guidelines, right? We put a lot of effort into it. We have not put that effort into the calendar very clearly because each time it comes up we see a divided uh school committee and so
um it's not about diversity. We have a very diverse community. It's about practicality. And uh truth be told, the most religious observant families and students within the district will take off when their holidays happen whether or not school is closed. School being
open on a religious holiday is not a statement about the quality of that religion, the importance of that religion or the respect that the whole community gives to that religion. It's simply a statement that school can operate and teach and teachers can come to school when um five teachers and 20
students aren't there or even if they're I don't know 30 30 teachers when you can find substitutes and 200 kids aren't there. It's the the question in my mind about kids missing a day of instruction is as old as kids are sick and they miss a day of instruction. They deal with it.
parents take kids out of school for a hundred reasons and the kids uh the parents and kids deal with it and they move on. So um my my suggestion is rather than get into the weeds on the various calendar issues would be that we take the time to step back, focus on
coming up with a group decision about how we're going to handle the calendar through a framework and then um do that work first so that it's really like not emotion that's driving a lot of these things because religion is a very emotive experience but that it's
evidence and and uh and and equity in the sense of how to deal with all of the competing factors that run into how to how to uh how how to run our schools. >> Bob, [clears throat] >> okay, the school calendar.
>> Um, this is complex because our community is complex and organizations are complex. I must be honest, I am struggling with this decision and I find myself listening carefully to each
presentation, each email, each text, each phone conversation and each personal interaction and there's been a lot of all of those. The arguments which is which is which is frustrating are always compelling. So come away from
all these conversations saying that makes a lot of sense and I appreciate your perspective. Okay. Today our school calendar is doing a few things. It provides 180 days of instruction. It provides time for
faculty professional development. It provides provides time for parent teacher conferences. and it honors and respects religious and cultural observances by closing school on five days, allowing our friends and neighbors to celebrate their holidays unencumbered
by the demands of a school day. The most recent additions to these religious and cultural school closures were Lunar New Year and Idalf ali. Those last two were in response to strong advocacy by members of the Asian and Muslim
communities and others and in particular by students representing these groups and the school committee responded and voted to close schools on both lunar year six years ago in Idol fitter last year. So today tonight we might vote on
the 20 26 2027 school calendar. Superintendent Wong is advocating for a start before Labor Day, not controversial as this contributes to an earlier June ending to the school year. And that's a good thing for teaching and learning, which is our primary goal. And
Superintendent Wong is also supporting the continued closing of schools on the five religious and cultural observances. I will support superintendent superintendent Juan's 2026 2027 calendar recommendations.
At the same time, I acknowledge the advocacy of many of our constituents for a different calendar, one that does not close schools on religious and cultural observances, one that begins school year in late August, and that
reconsiders impact on families of the many early release days. As school committee members, we hear from most of our engaged constituents. We do not hear the opinions of most of the community.
>> So, I'm proposing tonight that we design and administer a survey of all parents and caretakers and faculty members and perhaps Brooklyn High School students that will provide us with data on the larger community's perspectives on a
school calendar. With that data, we can have the conversation that Jesse just re recommended and we can make more informed decisions on future school calendars. Other communities have done that successfully, including Lincoln Subbury. Brookland can and should do
that. And I want to make one more comment because I'm uh supporting um option C, but I also like the idea that we close that we close school the day before Thanksgiving and switch a professional development day to March, which has a long stretch. So I don't
know if we can amend C to add that, but that's what my proposal would be. Thank you very much. >> That's awesome, >> Andy. Thank you. Yeah, I don't think I need to repeat what I've already said on this topic. Um, I would only add, and this is kind of a supplement to what Bob has
said. I hope that the next time we have a calendar discussion, we can be focusing not on one or two holidays that have recently been added, but on the early release days, if our focus is really going to be on continuity of instruction and quality of teaching and learning. >> Thank you, Mariah.
Yes to all that and focusing on um the other categories that are in the uh documents or at least in prior year documents and making sure that I think um that that the days that we have whether no matter when they are are
being used to the maximum. I also just want to second what Jesse said about if we talk about some of these things um over multiple sessions and um divorced from an actual calendar in front of us.
I really do hope we'll come to some conclusion because I think we all have similar things. We all want to see um all well I won't say all of us but there's a lot of strong competing interests in the community and I think that we can come to some sort of compromise that will give everyone some
of what they want a lot of what they want if not all of what they want and ultimately is a stronger calendar um for the students and faculty and staff and it needs to cover these things but it also needs to cover what Andy talked about and it also needs to look at some of the categories and and I would like us to make progress on that but I will
be supporting the calendar that um I guess let's see. >> Okay. I I have a few things to say because I'm hearing a lot of this hasn't been comprehensive. We haven't it's not student centered. And I wholeheartedly disagree. We've had
multiple conversations here this year and last year. And just for historical context until last year, this was a a process that was brought by the superintendent. They presented a calendar
and the school committee voted that calendar. It was so whoever said that it would be unemotional. It was unemotional. The superintendent spoke with the union. They worked out the start date based on the contract. I agree that we can work on things in the
contract for uh some of the half days and things like that, but we can't do it outside of CBA. And it was very unemotional. Last year, we added a holiday and it became very emotional and and we didn't have
disagreement with a um I'm not going to quote this properly, but with a a divided school committee until last year. Before that, it was a very it was a quick um five minute vote supporting the superintendent's calendar that uh
she had reviewed with with um BEu and with her her um leadership team and and for us it was a non-issue. Um, you know, I have some serious concern about folks
throwing around um establishment clause and days of low attendance. Yes, days of low attendance is a measure and um town council has said that that is a measure that we can use, but it's not the only measure that
we can use when looking at um calendar options. So, and and unless somebody got an email that I didn't get, and maybe you did, I have not gotten an email or heard a student speak at any of our meetings who
did not support the inclusion of the current um holidays that the calendar contemplates having off. Um, so you know, I I I hope that we get to a point where we aren't sending this to
our policy subcommittee, where we have a superintendent who we have faith in, who is going to hear what what we've said, what the community said, um, for a calendar for next year, for homework guidance and test taking
guidance around uh, when school is off, but that we put faith back in the superintendent and get in our governance lane and not in the operational lane. Uh so I'd like to make a motion to accept
option C, the superintendent's recommendation. And I'll take a second on that and then get further comment if there is a second on that. >> Sorry, Suzanne second it. Okay. Um Mariah and then Carolyn. >> Um I just want to say that while I don't
necessarily agree with your historical presentation, I think a couple of things have changed along the way. One is that um the addition of the Junth holiday has in a lot of ways changed the way the end of the year feels for people. It becomes somewhat of a of a moment in time where
we only have a day or two left. And so that has changed the end of the school year that was not that was previous to last year and it was something that we talked about over multiple years. And the other thing has just been the fact that we do have increasing and notable change in the temperatures at the end of the year. So I don't necessarily agree
that it was the last year was I think um the addition of the holiday was not necessarily a huge change. We have been talking about this over several years and I just want to have that like my interpretation of that also reflected because I don't think it's fair to entirely say well people weren't
thinking about this until last year. There's more to it than that. Caroline. >> Um, yeah, I'll start where Mariah just um finished off. I would agree with that. I think we've been sort of I can certainly say as as someone who's been
in the district as a parent for the past 15 years um my experience of the calendar has has been as we've heard from from many parents including the the CPAC um leaders one of sort of increasing
frustration um you know knowing that there are days that are kind of throwaway days um is frustrating and and so for me now as a school committee member, I've been clear about this last year and this year um I can't get behind
something that I know um has throwaway days and I'm not talking about just the early release days. Um the calendar C as Bob said is a noon release on the day before Thanksgiving and that's a nonday.
um and we've already been cited at the high school um for not meeting our instructional hours. So that's just the the job of setting this school calendar. It's actually not that complicated like we it's it's in the guidance um that
promulgates um statute that the this job of the school committee is to set a schedule. It's it's the instructional hours statute and guidance. Um and so Bob, we can't make the day before
Thanksgiving a real day because we don't have enough days. Um so that's why and the reason that this has become an increasing conversation is that we've been adding more and more
days of closure. And so we've been adding to the inconsistency and we've been, you know, getting further away from the focus on uh maximizing high quality teaching and learning,
which is the job of the calendar. Um, so I I agree with Mariah that it's it's it's an evolved conversation for those reasons. Um, and I would agree with the people,
sorry Val, um, who said this, like this is for the second year in a row. We've spent lots of minutes on it, but sort of going around the table one in a row is not like I've watched other school
committees taking this on in in a really um in a really uh deep way and a really professional way with as Bob said surveys and conversation. Um so kind of roundroin
is is not that satisfying and we find ourselves once again um without I believe a clear rationale and certainly um without
um criteria for future decisions. So if the rationale is inclusion um not religion even though this we're we're now closing for religious days.
If the rationale is inclusion then where do you draw the line because anything outside of that rationale is exclusion. So it it feels political it feels haphazard. It feels really unsatisfactory and it feels again I'm
I'm never going to not [laughter] Dr. Gillery pulled our building leaders. We have that information. we know that they didn't want more days of closure added and um it's really
really disappointing to me that we can't uh start with a clean slate have a compact school year and sorry also Bob we're not closing earlier in June the calendar C closes
after Junth so again a known throwaway away day and I just can't get behind that. So, >> okay. >> Better in the future. >> Moving to a vote. Donna, how do you vote? >> Um,
can you remind me what the vote is or what the >> to adopt calendar C? >> Oh, um, uh, can can you call on me? Okay, I vote I'll vote yes because I'm deferring to Bella, but I have to say that I really
um I'm not I'm not a fan. She's not a fan. >> Suzanne, >> yes. >> Sarah, >> yes. >> Jesse, >> no. >> Bob, >> yes. >> Andy, [clears throat] >> yes. >> Mariah,
>> yes. >> Carolyn, >> no. >> I vote yes. Um, moving on to >> Oh, can I make a motion that we design a
a survey on the on the school calendar um and with the ultimate goal of administering it to the school to many folks in the school like I said to parents to teachers to maybe Brookline High School kids. Can I make a motion that
>> you can make a motion if there's a second, but I'd like to hear from Superintendent Wong because my understanding from her is that there are lots of blind spots on these, which is why there have been some conversation about a faculty survey, but that's that
caregiver surveys often miss lots of groups. But Superintendent Wong, >> I think that I want to give voice to a larger component of our community by doing that. So I I'm so I have heard I've listened
to all the comments today and I appreciate that in the end um there was there was difference to the recommendation that I made and and I think to to move forward so that we had
a calendar for next year. Um, if you would if you would allow me to consider everything that was said and maybe come up with a a plan to share about how to um
move forward and just anticipate where we might be next year. It might be with a survey or not. I I would probably want to talk to people at Lincoln Subbury and others like just um rather than to commit me to exactly a certain thing um
I'm not saying we wouldn't do it but could you just maybe um give me some time to think about but I definitely will um think of how we might want to process it. Okay. And I um I also appreciate
that. I heard Yeah, I listen. So, let's see what we can do. >> Appreciate that. Bob, is that satisfactory for your motion? No problem. >> Yes. >> Okay. Um so, next are leazison reports. Are there anybody who wants to give a
liazison report or has one an update? Andy, >> only a very brief one that uh regarding the Pierce project that um work across the street at Pierce Park on the geothermal wells begins on November 17th. Um the digging begins in December,
January and at least part of the park will be closed for a year. A year is the time limit under article 97. >> Okay. Any other leazison reports or updates? I'd just like to say about Suzanne that we're having a joint
curriculum and policy meeting on the 18th at 5 o' talking about talking about >> competency competency and termination. I know this [laughter] welcome
>> um Mariah or Jesse I believe full ERSC meets when >> we met today. Not today. Any update? >> No. >> No. It was more like a getting everyone all the groups have been operating in parallel. It was just sort of reminding
each other of what we have done in our different groups and talking about how it's all going to come together into one work product at the end. >> Okay. Um, any new business? Caroline,
>> thank you. I'm going to say this again. I think for the second year in a row, peripheral adjacent to the calendar, PSB has a homework policy. I think it's section I.
The information listed with our very complex calendar for each of the different categories is not aligned with our policy. And I would like us to do the work to at
least button that up in the interest of clarity for educators and students. So, is that something that >> I believe the superintendent is I believe the superintendent is working on
that. Is that correct? >> I actually thought it had um Yeah. Yeah. I thought it had gone out, but I guess we're still working >> working on school committee policy. >> No, I thought the homework policy the
homework letter went out. I thought So what I'm saying is that okay >> was there was there misalignment with the homework letter Caroline is that what you're saying >> correct >> the in the past I believe that the
homework letter has done two things one it's been passed on from superintendent to superintendent and maybe there's been some mission creep I don't know what happened to it but the homework policy PSB policy section I is not the same as
what's on that letter that is typically published. >> So, we have a policy meeting uh next week and the agenda for that hasn't been published yet. Um but this is one of the items that I don't think it's going to be a separately docketed item because we
only have 45 minutes. But um I I do plan to list under new business uh three policies that I reasonably anticipate will come up uh only for discussion basically about whether we want to discuss it further. Um and this is one of them because it's been raised by a member. >> I think it would be helpful to figure
out whether it's going to be a superintendent letter or a policy >> and but Caroline seems to be saying that there is a school committee policy that exists that is uh inconsistent with something else that also currently exists. So if so we should look into it, >> right? and get consistency one direction
or another or a third direction. >> Does the school committee have a copy of what this homework letter? I've never heard of it. >> So, typically it's on the district website. Although this
year's at least on what's what's published on the district website this year doesn't have the usually it says like category one what this means day of low attendance and then instructions and
it says like for two days after the holiday you can't do this and you can't do that for category 1 for category 2 for category 3 I I don't know if something went out to
families or not, but the letter that's on the website this year now all of that information is is gone. So again, I think we just need a little bit of fattening up. >> Is this related to the category
holidays? >> Yes. >> Or the days after. That's what you mean. >> Yes. >> Yes. So each category has instructions. >> I believe a letter went out. >> It did. It was a letter. >> Well, I know I know I was presented with it back [laughter]
>> and so I'm sorry. I'll have to ask Kathleen if it went out. >> Yeah, because I know I was asked by some parents. I went to the website like Carolyn was saying, I found that that information about how like assignments, >> reading things and homework and stuff
relate to those and I I copied it all out and sent it out to parents figuring that what was on the website was our current practice. But you're saying um Carolyn in addition it doesn't match what's in section I and that we need to >> she's not aware of the letter that went
out >> the other month. Yeah. >> Yeah. So we can look into we can look into that. >> I am saying that it doesn't align. That's exactly what I said last year and it's what I've said again this year. So So
I don't know who the letter goes out to. But so this is not sort of like directed at Superintendent Wong. it's directed at sort of our practice generally is should just be
>> it has to do with >> Mariah usually says this better than I do but just sort of the frustration of having days of school where instruction doesn't happen and I my under and the
the letter has in my years been more restrictive in terms terms terms of instruction, homework and testing than the policy. So, it's just sort of messy and I think it should be cleaned up. I
just sent the letter from 2018 to our list serve. I found it in my personal email from Andrew Bot in 2018 and the link was still live and so you all have that and you can see what it is historically included.
And for example, category 2 says, "No homework will be assigned in any class for all students on the last day of school before the category 2 holiday. Homework assignments, projects, presentations, or other assignments cannot be due until at least the second day after the holiday.
And the same policy applies for the administration of tests. So um it really puts quite a bubble around the days um which is as Caroline points out is very discrepant with the policy we have. So I think the I'm curious too. I don't know
what the practice is this year. >> Are we following that rule because it's not posted anywhere >> what >> I I so when when items are identified for new business I think they become future agenda items. So I'm not prepared
to discuss or respond. >> Yeah. So I I so I hear very clearly um that I need to look into the alignment of the homework letter to existing policy and also to address if um what's on the website is also not aligned
because that clearly would be confusing. So >> yeah, given that then I will not plan to um have it listed at all on the policy agenda for next week. Um since we anticipate that you'll be doing some work on it, >> right? And we'll get an update on a
superintendent's update in the coming meetings is my >> Yeah. Okay, >> I can do that. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Donna has her hand up. >> Oh, sorry, Donna. Go ahead. [laughter] >> Um back to new business. Yes. Um I
wanted to mention that Sarah and I had the privilege of joining the FRR families last Friday um for a PTO meeting. Um and there was a fantastic turnout. Um we had some good
conversation, but a majority of the conversation focused on um access to um after school extended day um extended day programming and I uh
at the request of the parents also requesting that at some point it be docketed for discussion in some form or another in some form or another. Um, maybe it's a discussion of what the challenges are at the moment to increasing extended
day. I'm not sure exactly what the conversation would be, but was definitely something that was that came up. Um, >> when you mean access, you mean like weight listing and you don't mean access to buildings? >> They weren't sure what the challenges are. I have no idea what the challenges are. or the parents where they say they
can't get into the buildings after hours or they want to have their kids >> their kids not enough extended day. >> Okay. Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Okay. Yeah. Yeah. That's >> Mariah has been the longtime leaison to the extended day program. Um so I think we can figure out a way to get this
topic discussed. >> Donna, I also wrote back to your email about this. >> Thank you. >> Earlier tonight. Yep. >> Oh, thank you. Sorry, Mariah. I didn't see that. >> Okay. So proposed executive session. I move to meet in executive session pursuant to mass general law chapter 30A
section 21A for the following purposes. Purpose three to discuss strategy with respect to collective bargaining with ask me school building employees, food service employees and Brookline Educational Secretaries Association employees if an open meeting may have detrimental effect on the bargaining position of the committee. And the chair
so declares purpose three to discuss strategy with with respect to collective bargaining with the Brooklyn Educators Unit Union unit A unit B and the par profofessional unit if an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining position of the committee and
the chair so declares and purpose 7 to review and approve minutes of the November 6th 2025 executive session meeting. Is there a second? >> I'll second. I think Donna second. Uh, Donna, how do you vote? >> Yes.
>> Suzanne, >> yes. >> Sarah, >> yes. >> Jesse, >> yes. >> Bob, >> yes. >> Andy, >> yes. >> Mariah, >> yes. >> Carolyn, >> yes. >> Uh, and I vote yes. And we will not be returning to open session. Have a good
night, everybody. And sorry for the technical challenges today. >> Members, you have a different link. >> Yes, we stay here. >> And we stay unear. Can we stay here? Yep.