>> Okay. Good afternoon to the January. 20th 2026 meeting of the Fairfax County School Board Governance Committee will now come to order at 04:00:05PM. We may have
someone join virtually so clerks should be go ahead and vote that person in or we're not sure. I have to say I am a little uncomfortable with possibly people joining or not. I think it would be
helpful in the future to know if expect the person we're not okay. Missing John C****** has submitted a written request to attend this afternoon's meeting virtually due to a personal conflict. She has a
family commitment and is attending tonight's meeting from Great Falls, Virginia. All those in favor of approving the Saint. John Cummings request myself, Mr.
Fresh this lady. A post Dr Anderson. So request passes winds in this age are coming arrives. We will check her
audio and video. Okay. We will move to the approval of minutes item one point '02, we will vote on the minutes of the January 6th meeting of the Governance committee. Is they
remove or for that? Dr? Anderson moves and Mr. Fish seconds. All those in favor. And that passes unanimously
>> a little >> Okay. So on our agenda today, we're going to go maybe 10 minutes or less about formatting of the policies.
We've worked hard to try get things in order and then we're going to turn to some H r related policies and just a few more facilities related policies, including one that we had that as a
superintendent to come back to in the last meeting and then with at least 30 minutes left in the meeting, we will turn to a discussion about the new frontier of AI policy
development. OK? So we're going to look at agenda item. One point '03, the formatting of policies. So Madam Deputy
Clerk, Brown, do you want to speak to this? It's pretty self-explanatory get ourselves
in order. So what I have here is kind of I've been listening to all of kind of ideas that people have had about the formatting and come up with and take
>> The previous regulation on formatting and made a 10 foot. There are people can use this to make sure that not only do they have the correct from adding that they have the
correct. Components infections above and beyond this, I had added regulation 11, 0, 4, which is the formatting of directives. I did have one flight recommendation on that
for consideration and that would be separating the 2 so that we would have regulation for policies and notices and then we would have a regulation on regulations.
Reagan, they should regulate Jen as a lot of tough games and that the way that the current regulation, Reed is a little confusing and some
things change regulations which are Dr Reid's preview and some things can you know, our that policies and some notices that are the school board's purview. And so I get a lot of questions on it. I just thought it'd be worth
saying that it is. My recommendation is someone who's been on the back end of these 2 separate out that regulation for the regulation regulation and the policy regulation. On the Really good
name like are squared, Mr. Fresh. pretty sure I'm not sure I follow. >> For example, the philosophy
section right is the board, wants a philosophy section in the policy part Dre doesn't always have a philosophy section and nor do we
necessarily need a philosophy section and regulations. So there's things like that when this bomb was suggesting that we have.
>> The >> 10.4 regulations and attempt but for policies so that things are even in the same right now. We just have one 10 put that used for everything notices are also actually a little bit
different. And most notices don't include any of this. So you could actually have a 3rd temp live for notices. So they
are. So there's different ways that things could go that's why we were suggesting that if Dr Reid has a template she
wants to use for regulations. That may be a little bit different than what the board wants for policies that we
would separate them out. >> Anything further, Mr. did you get any of this before the meeting by Chance? I don't know if you thoughts on
>> I didn't. But I >> I think, you know, as we draft regulation, clearly there are parts that we do not need in regulation that you want and policy. I think I would want to go back to our
continuing goal to fill them in ourselves, right? at the end of the day, the philosophy drives the policy, but the regulations, really how we're going engage in the management to get it done. So I don't
think it necessarily appropriate rate for regulation. I would like to back to our team, though, to look at what our template for regulations because we've just gone through 60 or 70 this
year. And I don't know that I want to go back rewrite all of those again. so I think I don't want to be clear to that would be a moving forward thing. But I do think separating them from the board's temple. It makes a
whole lot of sense for sure. Yikes. That's really about. >> And I think that it would be a separation of this regulation 11. 0, 4, 2, so that your regulation for
regulations would be more aligned with your 10 point because right now everything kind of mashed into one and a little bit difficult, Anderson, understand which aligns with which sometimes.
>> On the actual. All Temple, it. I think it's great to have a template can use go back to the temple really quickly, thank you. Attempt on temples.
There we go. Is there anything else underneath?
I think it might benefit us too. >> I don't think definitions are something that are required in every single policy and the and I worry that we might end up with
competing definitions between policies. So maybe in red next to the word definitions you could put as needed or as warranted so that we know
that. Nobody has to come up with things just to fulfill that employed. I think that's bad policy making I'm comfortable with the idea of having philosophy and
everything. But I don't want to be overly prescriptive on. Having to have different sections. I do think that the order matters and so having
having them in there, even when there potentially not used makes sense I think what's missing after
responsibilities is the body section. I don't know what that would be called necessarily, but the meat and potatoes of the policy. What
is the actual policy? I think it's worth having something there that shows the format for it. I think response
abilities also would be as warranted. >> And I share. >> That I I think this is a
good start, but I envision something more detailed and I happen to have pages of notes about sort of glossary type decisions. We agreed at the last session, you know, to say
that the school board chair for school or believes that. So I think there could be more guidance like put in here like Mr. Fishes saying even verb tense, you know, and philosophy and
responsibilities. I think it in or changed a lot. And I have commented on one of the policies about that. So I think we can do more to clarify. I agree about like, what's the meat of the policy? And I actually went through
last meetings, policies and color coded them into lake, which one has the section that section. So there's some more to do. But at least we've got
they start. So Dr. Anderson. Thank you. And thank you for getting this started Mr. Brown, I do agree that it will
be great if there was a very quick, an easy way to separate regulations from the policies, at least. >> At least visually so that it's easy just to notice. And
I do agree that I don't think the regulations require a purpose. And I don't think you do a summary. It's just a change. So we know those 2
will be gone. I do agree that this should be what both the policy and whatever changes to regulation should be moving forward. It's tomorrow's work
and there's no retroactive work to this. We will never get that done. And I don't even think we should try. I do agree with some of the comments that were just made
regarding components. There are some that are evergreen and we'll show up everywhere. And that's essentially summary and purpose and philosophy. I think those are the mainstays.
All of the rest is kind of interchangeable because as needed, we had definitions. We've had responsibilities. We've had procedures because I've also been doing a little charting of of my own
regarding some of the headings that, you know, we've used even going through today's. They're all over the place authority rationale. I think we need to give ourselves a
bank. Headings to be used as needed so that we do stray away from the language because I could see it where I'm just
pulling something instead of ration. Now somebody can just write explanation moving forward. So having that has kind of some sort of would be very helpful. So we know we're
gonna draw away from these topics in order to fill out the body so that we don't end up with. Way too many words that are inconsistent and
misaligned but other than that, I think this is really a good start. And so what I can do is you only had 2 weeks since our previous governance
committee meeting, but I >> try is I'll try old school think about right, which LGBT and see what comes up with. But to create some glossary type things and yeah, I think that will be Happy to keep
working with deputy clerk on that. So that sends okay. >> One thing I did have it. This is a public-facing document. I just sorry I had I did have comment and they're
of when to use think the wind and not. But I didn't want to add it in for the public facing. >> My only last comment will be once we do fill in the things that we've all kind of
talked about here, it probably would be good to have a sample model policy. Just something that we it doesn't have to be a real policy, right. Just 8 example could be something completely. Yeah. Policy and
pizza at lunch or whatever. ID like something, you could be silly, but it should show exactly what the policy format would look like in practice.
Yeah, I think we need that right to let people know. And then I think once the committee adopts that. Probably something the board
should look at least for consensus it may be the chair and vice chair can circulated in the. Chairs, notes, but the
poll and then we can just kind of March forward with that. I think it's very close to being done. >> Great come a long way. Okay.
>> All right. So let's go ahead and tackle some of the policies. We're going to start with the human resources related policies as agenda
item. 1.0 4. so we have 7. I wonder if there's any We could just go through from 4.40,
onward. So when we start with performances, assessments and evaluations, Dr Anderson. Yes, thank minimal. 2 things. One
is more substantive. >> And the other just a semantics 4 section 4, I think somewhere and I'm really
comparing this with the sample from the SBA. missing. I think some language that speaks to that this is applicable to all employees misses Smith.
>> Do we have any employees that are not evaluated? >> Hart, our hourly employees are not evaluate it.
>> Hourly part-time, hourly full-time. >> Our hourly or part-time hourly employees. >> that's a small group or large group. It. >> It's a large group, but
there again, their hourly employees. So they're not a full fte there they do not receive benefits. They're not part of the bargaining unit. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. I think somewhere here we need to talk about all
employees. And also what I see that is missing on the second part. >> Is speaking. >> Or providing some guidelines for uniform performance standards we
haven't here for teachers and principals and it makes me wonder about the superintendent and Central Office staff which document that they're using. And again, if you look at the the SBA
document, it highlights teacher principal and superintendent evaluations. And thirdly. And a philosophy. I think last time we were
leaning into some other language that Fairfax County shall. And my proposal here, Fairfax County School board, shall we choir? That written evaluations, written
evaluations of the effectiveness of all There's all never mind that. I think I was looking at that for number 4. I'm so sorry. I want Iran
to this really quickly philosophy. My recommendation for philosophy, such a star language to the Fairfax County School board shall require with evaluation of the
effectiveness of all employees just kind of. Wordsmith thing that a little bit. Because I think we started with adding Fairfax County school board
with a lot of the language that we use last time. >> And then in the back, I just also I'm thinking we need to refer to the other guidelines that are utilized.
Mr. Fresh thoughts. >> Yeah, a couple things. One I'm hesitant to say all employees because just because they're part time and not receiving benefits does not
mean they're not technically employees. So what modifying language can be used to indicate that we're being very specific about which employees were talking about. Secondarily, I don't want to
include the superintendent this. If there is a need for a policy or on the superintendent's evaluation should be separate because we do it separately and it's hard. It's identified in our
governance manual. Just my 2 thoughts. I think there's a very specific classification of employees. And I don't
think that. Including the one employee, well, not the one, but the the preeminent employee that we have direct purview over. In the same policy as everybody else makes
sense. >> And just check, is this ancient counting on? Is that MCS that her okay. Okay. So yeah. I don't think putting
the superintendent here something I'm interested in. This is one where the philosophy and the responsibilities are kind of mixed like our philosophy is that we want to make sure that
our staff. Are doing the job signed up to do. And if they need support within reason we're giving them support Dre. Do want to check them. I just
think that Mr. Smith and I were side barring for a minute. I think we if we're going to go with the suggested amended language we would want to say evaluated in compliance
with statutory expectations because not everybody's on the same cycle. And so I think it's a nuance, but we would want to reflect that. I think in the policy. I think we'd be
amenable to that. I mean. This is yours bring to us. So if you think that's what's best, you know, please put that in there from the start. You know, we're looking for advice of counsel to be sure that we're not. Stepping over the
line with our collective bargaining agreements. And we're not over committing to
anything. So. It doesn't say anything about code. Is it a
suggesting we have something in there about code Dre?
Do evaluate all employees. We
don't evaluate hourly employees.
>> No, that's correct. And we have anywhere between 11,012 1000 hourly employees at any given time. These are people who are in the hourly ban position that you may have seen or may be familiar with
performing a variety of functions and we have substitutes who are in that category. All of those things. So those 11 to 12,000 employees at generally not
generally, I'm sorry, those 11 to 12,000 employees do not receive an annual evaluation. Thank you. So this language is
not say annual and the frequency actually was something that I would want to see put in here that, you know, says something about frequency. The frequency, at
least for instructional employees is defined in Virginia code. So generally people who employees who are in licensed instructional positions need to be evaluated during their first 3 years
because they're in a probationary term. after that, they reach continuing contract status where and they're evaluated once every 3 years versus our operational
employees who are evaluated on a different cycle. So there is a little bit of nuance difference there. Yeah, so I mean, I just don't think this is accurate or I'm not sure how useful it is. The
philosophy is saying that we think that every that all employees shall be evaluated in somerton way. But we're hearing that that's not actually what happens in
practice. So that doesn't seem right to include here and if there's other language, whether it's policy or code or the collective bargaining agreement. This is one of those policies. Where does it
make sense to stand alone? >> Should it be part of something? But that's a recommendation that we seek staff to give and put on. So I'm not sure what we're doing
with this policy right here. So outside counsel who worked with us to believe Mr. Patel worked on reviewed all of the HR policies. >> I think that the statutes
included on Page 2 under the sections and those have been updated to reflect 2020 2021. and the code of Virginia below responsibility. So the
language is there and it would be fleshed out more in the regulation, those different cycles for different groups so if that's helpful, Mr.
>> So I want to make a distinction between what we include under philosophy and what we included her general policy language so what I
recognized? At least of late is that when we have philosophies, speaks to like some kind of a value of some kind rate. So if this was in line with that, this would be
something about why it's important to have valuations of employees generally speaking. I think that this could go through. I was
looking at responsibilities and I'm like we would get into a mess if we tried to identify every single person who has a responsibility in the evaluation process, especially when you consider that there
are different jobs that have different people who are doing the evaluating so having the evaluator and the employee listed as the responsibilities
make s to me. And then that is kind of described in our regulations state code which are listed as for the language under Section 4. I'm
fine with that language for philosophy. It could be something like. Whatever we
decide. The Fairfax County school board the Fairfax
County school board or firms that. Employees benefit from.
Regular. Constructive, you know something, something along those lines, right? Because that speaks to a philosophy and not just a
regurgitation of what the policy lays out. >> I agree with you and kind of thinking. I wonder if we should just put a pin in this one for a moment and because I
think we'll have other questions on philosophy, responsibilities, procedures, right? keep having to go back and check our format and check our understanding of the
sections right? I'm to start into you're you're good place. Frisch's Point regarding value. I think the value of performance evaluations is a belief in a strong teaching
force. Right? So we value strength in our teachers. I think also if you're going to try to you're kind of wordsmith thing. What I wrote down was timely and appropriate feedback, right?
Like there's a because everything spot regulation, right? So what we're trying to convey as we value strong teachers and we value ongoing work, blooper educators, we believe in the ongoing
improvement, right? So if we don't have it again, according to state code, you know, if you but if this is a value statement, I think you can make it a value statement. And
I think is Dre Point out. All the codes are there and the regulation, which is which I this is like see, I mean, the regulations, 9 pages long that accompanies this, that breaks
it down into who when, where and why so. You know, I think the way the flush he's written right now, it's kind of. Purpose E but anyways, I do
agree with wordsmith thing that if you want to be. I don't know we need to. But if you want to talk about contract employees, you could say boys with a stick with the
CBA because that's everyone on I think. And I think is anyone who gets evaluated on the cycles. That's not in CBA.
What if we to protect yours? And so what if we inserted the language in lady just said that the school board believes that highly inappropriate feedback.
>> It is essential to Graham, strong workforce, teaching weren't whatever, whatever linkage and Im trying think. I don't know what language HR uses in its reports. You know, things that. Yeah, I wanted to be too long, but it is today.
The reason we value performance evaluations is because day. >> Generate dialogue. They generate timely, appropriate feedback. They generate coaching or they generate mentorship of someone else.
Right? You're you're an exemplary teacher. And so now we're going to have you mentor somebody who is, you know, maybe a needs improvement
category. Dr. Anderson. Yes, the other thing that came to mind is the procedures section. I'm wondering, do we need a procedures section if
we have a robust? >> Regulation that lays out the procedures. Is this named or should that be part of the
overall philosophy? Because this is speaking to, you know, the basis wise is an important thing. So that would be my wondering there because
procedures set of steps that are laid out for you to complete a particular task. And that sentence is not it. Or those sentences is not
procedural. It's. More part of belief philosophy. And so I I would advocate too, perhaps, Mary that or rename it because
those procedural. >> I think it should be objectives. I agree. This
lady. >> No, just gonna say back to the earlier forming conversation. I think that that we example policy. It's like may include these categories like we don't
always have definitions. We don't always have objection objectives. We don't always have procedures. I think that we box staff in because I think they've been feeling like we want each of these
categories and I think they're struggling to win. They produce some of these red line policies. I don't want to speak for staff. And my sense is if if they're trying to fit into the box, think we've created. It's easier to have a
tool kit of here. Some of the category headings as this picker policy, which ones do we need to utilize articulate this particular policy? So I agree I thought there was
going to be a little bit more discernment in in this work and it continues to be a bit more regimented than I thought we were communicating again. I have all these pages that I
will go through and >> pull out exactly the stuff that we've been talking about. You know, as I look at the other HR policies to review in this meeting and think about
the ones we did a few meetings back about contractual poison hourly employees. I would love if the superintendent and her staff could look at the whole bunch and say does this all makes sense or are we talking
about objectives for each of these policies. Are we talking about requirements are talking about procedures like? You are the experts. Tell us what
makes sense. And I think our philosophy part immune this policy particular H R I think a lot of it comes in the philosophy, the how probably won't be as much of the
board's input. So what I would suggest for this policy is we update the policy this lady's suggestion about timely and
appropriate feedback. Change procedures to objectives. And remove responsibility is. And that could probably get as close enough for now. Mr.
Fish. >> I don't want leave the assumption out there. That staff is not taking that kind of thoughtfulness to the policy. Dr Reid, when you're
looking at policies and you've got a group of policies that might feed off of each other. Are you looking at ways to when I the collective you write, are you looking for ways to collapse things as as
possible or to refine things. Generally speaking. >> Yes, sir, we generally are. I think. As a practical matter.
>> He's trying to match. >> Our work with your needs or desires as a board at this point, the regulations. Right now we're in a situation where
some regulations don't have a policy, some policies on of regulation and that's been the historical long-term issues site. I think one of the things we thought, but this year, one of the I think
really good ideas. It we're working on is trying to clean up everything. So we're current and then I think we could go back and look at if we're going to consolidate,
what would that be right now? I think the press is to really get current honestly. And if we see, I think we sit sunset a couple policies and we've recommended. I think there's
been one or 2 along the line, but when there's a regulation attach, we'd have to combine all of that. And right now, I think just getting things current and accurate probably
isn't. Number one priority for triage thing. Mr. anything else. This lady? OK? So my
recommendation was that to adjust the philosophy to say the Fairfax County school firms. >> Employees benefit from timely and appropriate
feedback. We could just leave it at that. For now. And then. Make the second bode well for
objective is. And then get rid of responsibilities. And that would get us further along for
now. What 2 others think. >> All of that. I did think that the responsibility section made sense. speaks to
the collaboration is necessary in the process without getting too in the weeds about different classifications of jobs and how they're evaluated, which is spelled out in regulations. >> OK, I feel we're passionate
about philosophy. So I'm cool with that. Dr, Anderson and lady to have any thoughts on And I agree, because is responsibility of the person being evaluated and evaluate or mean there? There's steps
that both have to do. So they both have responsibilities in. Abide by the code. Okay. So keeping responsibilities and
doctors >> I agree with what this lady just said. But parts of me is feeling as if all of this is part of the objective. I it's
not really identifying that. You know what? My part is as the evaluate Hora, what your party is as the employee per se. So it looks like he could
all kind of be under the objective. Just to talk about that. This is a 2 step process. >> That it involves both individuals. But we all know we've been in schools lot well, not all of us, but some
of us have been in schools long enough to know that if the evaluated does not initiate. Nothing happens. And I don't think we're necessarily needing to spell
this out here because that is spelled out in the regulation, correct? Dre. Yes, M'am. That's true. >> But again, it's not a hill for me to die on, but I just
it just seems like let me say this. I do believe it is still my turn. Let me just finish out my time. I just wonder because if we look at the language that is right above
it, that speaks to, you know, performance assessments in the base is what they are. We could also just pulled out to identify that evaluations are a collaborative process
because typically when we have responsibilities, we identify who's doing what and that shows up elsewhere here when. We have and, you know, with other policies that will see
this does not identify who's doing what it is saying. It is a shared task. I think we could accomplish that under the umbrella of the objectives. Okay, Miss lady. And then with draft this up
Gogo once a and Mr. Salmond can correct me. But I do believe that, yes, the evaluator, I mean, if undervaluation I know in my in
my PD I'm getting emails. I'm getting reminders. They're not directly coming from the evaluator. >> Yeah. So that's where bin clarification Dr Anderson, is
that in our system? It's not just evaluate or initiate everything. The system itself initiate. And I just want to put that clarification out there.
>> So can we then a little bit of compromise, so remove the responsibility section, but keep that sentence. Under objective so that it still includes annihilated I a
collaborative endeavor that will suffice. All right. So again, we're going to update the philosophy change the procedures to objectives.
We're going to have all those things at their list of somebody of change and include that evaluations are collaborative. Without objection. Is this policy ready to be sent to the board?
I mean, look at the governance Committee Sen Policy. 44, 40 performance and assessment evaluation as discussing revise the full board for adoption, Mr. Official Movin,
Dr Israel. Second, any comments. Comments? No comments. All those in favor going without objection. But we are in favor. All right.
For 40. 44 40 goes to the board. Excellent. Okay. Alright, next, let's look at grievance procedure. 44 60.
Dr, Anderson. A regulation that goes with this. Because I could not find one. When was
16. There are 2 regulations to go with 44 64 44 65. >> That's what it was. looking 4. The exact number. that's why couldn't find any. I'm
sorry. Can you repeat that again? 44 60, yes, ma'am. 44 64 44 65. Not to ask you, but
I wonder why differently numbered. The you have that answer, Janet, Mr. Brown. The
answer to that for can. >> The 44 61 in 44 62, where the old ones that are related to the CBA until the CBA was
ratified. 44 64 in 65 point. People to take over as those. So those are the policies that are current. 44 64 in pretty 65. This was just me. Nothing
that I didn't put the right one. regulation regulation 44 64 to for 65 are current. Once it was just this is the old one before the CBA, the new
one of 44 64 40, that we can cleanup. I can clean it up right now. >> Okay. Yeah. Perfect for 64 or 65 will. Then become so the
one. Typically when we have because the way things work great if we re number them, it's basically lake same. The old ones never existed. We generally keep those numbers
and we retire them. >> So that if something were to happen, we would still have them if legal needed them. At some point they would still have that it existed. So
that's open this can remember them. So therefore, we have to give them different numbers because we can't replace the ones that currently or that formalized van to. I know my
statement. I thought this was a little bit. More simple than what it's turning out to be. I just couldn't locate them. So I couldn't figure that out.
>> Just a couple of under purpose like to strike the word that there are just so we end up with to establish grievance procedures for employees.
>> Of the school division. So that's one under philosophy. Again, being consistent with we've been saying the Fairfax County school board. That
would be what I offer there. And also >> responsibilities. I also thought that that could be included as part of the philosophy because, again, we're not.
>> Necessarily identifying what each of the individuals are doing. >> Because we have procedure. I'm sorry, a regulation that is very clear. You will do is. You will do that. So
that would be the 3rd thing that I would like for consideration. Is that all doctors. so just a time check, we have 45 minutes to get
through the remainder of the HR and the facilities policies. So I will say the philosophy is it should remove
the word Shao and the second time the school board and I think the philosophy and the read the responsibilities
could be flipped. I just I don't know. Is are we okay with the philosophy statement and or the responsibilities
moving that together. I feel like the responsibility statement is more of a philosophy that we support employees right to discuss a complaint with the school System administration or to file a grievance Mr. Fresh is
framing here. Not Can you share that again? What you just articulated the responsibilities that seems to be more of a philosophy that we support an employee's right
to dismiss the complaint. The philosophy is a clunky sentence and we can edit that. But I don't know that it adds value. I'd be fine with making
the responsibilities. The philosophy. But can we also take action on my what was your who have meant the 3 words and a purpose that there
are. Sure I agree with that. Objection to establish grievance procedures.
>> I we just did that without objection, right? We did a purpose. That objection and the responsibilities one still. Yeah. I think that the sentence under
responsibilities. Could be changed to the Fairfax County School Board affirms an employee's right, blah, blah, blah, blah, blah, make that
the philosophy. There's The number 5, 2, objectives. And make number 5, the objectives. But we're getting rid of
philosophy. So we get rid of a section. I mean, at of responsibility I don't. So >> Okay. So the changes from the top be under purpose to
establish grievance procedures. Can't wait for if you want to score the top with
me. Okay. And then the next one would be to remove yet removed the philosophy statement yet that reverses court affirms an employee's rights. Yep. And then objectives. And I think that
would be it. Does that look good to everyone? >> That's one point of classification. Last time we met, we had the sentence. We use 3 different sentence
starters. It was Fairfax County Board believes and there were 2 others that are escaping me Allegheny or Shell recognize recognizes that we
like confirm that because I think supports is fine. I'm not a big fan of the captured So have I heard We know word.
So it I know that's what was supposed do next. But got to you know, I guess without objection, we'll have the clerk's make it. >> We said the Fairness Commission was challenged here. The shares his school
board shell and finishes school board recognizes those are the 3 things that this committee agreed on 2 weeks ago. That was the understanding that that's what
would be put in here as the philosophy. The Fairfax County
School Board recognizes an employee's right. Okay. Is
okay to go then? I think it's OK to go if we do without objection. That the committee
sent policy. 44, 60 grievance procedure has discussed and revised to the full board for adoption there. Any objections? no objections of 44, 60 will go to the board. Nice. Okay. The
next one is employees certification procedure. 45
20? 45? 20? I did not have anything substantive on this Dr. Anderson. Thank you. And
or purpose to establish the requirements for being a certified employee or >> I think it should be to establish requirements for. Designation as a certified
employee organization. So that's one. Same comment about philosophy and responsibilities. Well, let me
pause here and ask, is there a >> regulation that goes along with this policy. Yes. Listed
in the yeah. That's I have that. again, I think I'm
raising the same question about responsibility. But if we have a regulation that's going to outline, you know, who's supposed to be doing why? I wonder if we can. Bring this all in under philosophy.
sounding like responsibilities isn't the best fit for the HR policies, right? Because it varies with different groups of employees. ones that we've done so far, though, that's one thing I'm hearing. The
other thing is. >> You know, why did not have any change is when I reviewed it earlier, you know, this is about collective bargaining and this was a really big deal that we brought this forward. And so I'm wondering if we
want to again put more in the philosophy about that. And maybe come back to it, Mr. Fresh. >> Can you repeat the 3 phrases that we've used for
last face? >> Yeah. So that each start with this Fairfax County school board shallot here. Shough. And recognizes. And
actually not the school board affirms its belief. I haven't read. So shall adhere Shell and recognizes.
>> I would like to suggest that the philosophy. Read that the Fairfax County School board recognizes the importance of an orderly
process for the certification of. Employee organizations. The Fairfax County School Board recognizes the importance of an orderly
process for the certification of employee organizations. >> Mr. Fischer join sat in there, but the board's role to do the certification for.
>> I don't know that we have a role. Well, we certify the I don't think these are 2 different things. This speaks to the non. So we have a group
of employee organizations that still exist that are recognized. They are. Folks that folks that don't have their units, cetera. So we
have specific things that speak to collective bargaining and then we have This was something that talked about a
little bit when we talked disbanding 45 tense right? Because for some people they still existed a framework for
them to continue meeting with staff while others did not because they were now covered
by collective bargaining. So. Not a few. >> Okay. So this is still necessary to have something
like this. Okay. It would be good if it said, you know, this does not include the collective bargaining units. I don't know. Again, these are if it's fine, it's fine. I just. >> Well, it's the board's
policy. I think that might be helpful to communicate because they'll be future boards that don't have the opportunity to have a little background. It's already in here. So I think that makes sense, too, at that
kind of background. And I have a question. I 45 10's, what entirely disbanded. So these groups that are seeking. >> Certification, what is
their platform? 4 solution for solution. ING. >> So this is a unique situation. The group's 2 of the groups in question here.
>> Comprise Fpu. So Fpu is a separate union. >> But fcf tea and FDA are certified organizations. And so that's an example of 2 certified organizations that have come together to create a
union. And in the absence of the ability to have the certified organizations. That we would run afoul of the
board's resolution, identify nephew as exclusive representative. >> Right. So I think my question is still. Has not yet been answered. What's the platform for communication? Because I believe we sunset
for the 5 tense. Like those monthly meetings are not happening. >> We did send the so those are separate. The 45, 10 meeting. Those were disbanded.
This is a separate group for those certified organizations so that they can exist. FDA and FCF T be able to exist to create few.
>> So it's only for those organizations not like the Hispanic associations or it was like 17 so that those are separate. Those are not all
>> Board certified employee organizations. We have associations organization that this is only applicable to Fcf Tnf e U. >> I'm sorry. Fcf TN FEA.
>> Those are 2 examples. I don't have the exhausted, but those are at least 2 examples. >> Okay. I think I'm more confused. Mr. First, as you have a comment. It seems like
we could use some more information about this one. I'd like to set it aside because should be distinct that it should be meaningful. And if we're even clear on who this is covering and how they
even get certified. I don't think we're ready to move this forward. So released. Well, could put it aside for now. And don't forget to in 35
minutes, but Mr. Freshness do agree putting it aside for a moment and it's fun. Yeah, lady. I don't have a problem with it as is. But I'm OK,
setting aside. So let's to set that aside, OK, 46, 30 payment of personnel supporting
community use of facilities. I was OK with this one. So doctors coming up. >> It is about finish an. With
definition. >> I don't know what we're defining there. Because typically when we have
definitions, we have a term and we have language. What is the term that is being defined
here? Well says it defines personnel. Then I would just say, let's write the words
personnel and then identify that its persons who are working in support of community use. >> Why are we defining personnel? I guess that's what that leads me to. And I wonder if this would be better to be
brought into the communities policy. Itself. There was also that because does like not much here, but this speaks to payment. And making.
>> I'm not against that. I just want this to make sense. If it's >> better rolled up into another policy that's going to be more robust. Let's do that. And sunset this. But I would
actually lobby to just cancel the whole definition section because personnel is not a term that we would define. We define things that are a little bit more explicit. And I just don't well, not even
explicit that a little bit more challenging to understand the context. And I don't think. That meets that threshold here. But with this
make sense, rolled up a larger policy. Mister Solomon, do you have thoughts? don't know that this makes sense to roll up
into another policy only because when we're talking about community use and the costs associated with it. >> One of those costs is the payment of personnel. One of those procedures that we have to follow is the payment of
personnel who are working be it over time for staff members who are working above and beyond 40 hours and flexing their time hourly staff members who need to be available to support that
community, use all of those things. >> Doctors, India, further
comments just. >> Located this regulation regulation, the crosscut, this policy is likely the same regulations to talk about payment of staff essentially
salary guidelines and things of that nature this lady. Yeah, I just agree with Mr. Salmond, I would not roll the I think this is distinct and I
actually had to read it twice to. Grass communities, communities, communities because this is the differentiator, then all the hours we need to be there for
school activities, which is the majority of our time. But then there are community use and you have to have the proper custodians, other supervision, cetera. So I think it should be a stand-alone policy. Okay. So
>> how are we feeling about what's there now? We have a there was a suggestion about. >> The definition. Is there
proposed change? Exactly. Then? Other thoughts about that. To remove the definition
of personnel. Okay. It seems like we're okay to do that. >> to have the philosophy be consistent with the language
that we recognizes. Recognizes. So. So without
objection, the government's key committee shall send policy. 46, 30 payment of personnel, supporting communities of facilities as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption.
>> Any objections? None noted. 46, 40 payment of salaries.
Here, Dr Anderson. >> Just a couple of questions. I know this is speaking to just pay. >> Is there an assumption here regarding stipends and after
school work? Because I know very an example that I could think of is math and science Olympiad which some of the schools are provided with funds to pay teachers to do
that. Where would that fall? That kind of payment while that kind of compensation. We have regulations that specify salary supplements and stipends. So that would be
separate and distinct. >> So there's a separate policy that speaks to that as well. I will therefore that. But there are definitely separate regulations that speak to it. I wonder if there's no separate policy and
I don't know if one does not exist would make sense to have it be here. >> As well, if one does not exist or that if it does exist, I love to. Kind of evaluate to see doesn't make
sense to separate. So that's one and then, you know, just kind of some language with Hans abilities. Clearly there's some things there for
financial services and office of payroll management to be responsible. >> It's just responsible >> Pay of personnel. Is it? Is
that the word that we're looking for it because they're not, you know, necessarily paying them. They're doing the logistics. The administration. Make like checks are cut. So I
wanted to share that. And then. Kind of going back to what I said earlier. If there's regulation with this, that is super clear terms of
who's doing what should this response Ability B, as we've talked about before, which is the superintendent will ensure that this is happening. It doesn't necessary have to be
these offices. So wondering this man. >> And
>> and then I guess the last question philosophy. We will okay. >> I don't know if my philosophy is that everybody be paid on a bike weekly or
monthly basis is just so that they are paid. >> How does this fall into with what was started a couple of years ago. Doctor Reed, which is >> the or maybe it doesn't.
And tell me I meet mixing apples and oranges where we had, we were not able to give more frequent paychecks to certain groups of employees. Part of was connected to the I
don't want to call it the ancient, but I think I can HCM system right. So as we're updating our htm system in HR and business, we're going to have more flexibility to look
at more flexible pay schedules. But it my understanding is that it was very directly related to the software system and Mr.
Solomon maybe could comment further, but I suspect, but was really one of the big drivers we weren't able to do that manually. That is exactly
correct. are older systems that in the current state are not industry standard that we've had as a school division for about 30 years that make it difficult to achieve that. >> Just add to that, it will say as we were planning and
preparing to implement the HCM staff were surveyed and overwhelmingly shared that they want to keep the pay structure monthly pay for contracted staff such as teachers and others. And then
by weekly paper or biweekly staff such as hourly employees the same so staff were surveyed in given the option to provide input, ultimately opted to keep it the same. >> So it's not a matter of
individual choice. It's whatever the collective it's supporting. That's what we're doing. Is that accurate? >> We're going to keep it the
same when you when you say individual choice. >> I could. I decide as an employee that I want to be paid monthly. Somebody else says I want to be paid biweekly. >> The reason I'm going to say
no is because introducing that level of variation and not having a set structured for employees exponentially increases risk and opportunity for air.
>> Thank you. And I think I'm waiting for your answer regulation that goes with this. Thank you. Mr. Fresh. >> So I similarly striking the
responsibilities. I think there's an assumption that the superintendent's responsible for effectuate ing the work of our policies. I don't think it needs to be spelled out here
specifically, especially when a department could be re titled at some point for the philosophy I had written the Fairfax County School Board shall pay Fcps employees on a biweekly or monthly basis.
According to the established schedule. Delete up to the
word pay. Dr, Anderson, that removes employees at the beginning. That euro. And the
regulations. 56, 10. Yes, that's the one that has a
policy. 46, 40. >> But we still think it's a good idea to put in biweekly or monthly. >> And here in the reason not to.
>> We're just leave it out altogether yeah, Dre, thank you, And I wonder if it's just
on a regular basis. How about this? Because he served end of a seasons of the Fairfax County School board shall appropriately compensate Fcps
employees. >> is objective. And a regular
schedule. I that we need identify schedule. >> But I do agree that it doesn't have to be very specific for the reasons that was just stated. Some people just once at the end of the
season. imagine that. Meets coaches and I don't know how the stipends and of those other things that I've raised of working. So I think putting in a regular schedule will give you a place to go to to
identify what that schedule is. You know, we have a policy
on benefits. Similar one. Likely because benefits falls under right now. finance,
lines trees. Yes, ma'am, kind. Okay. So I would say to remove appropriately. UK them are
fresh. Yeah. Okay. Any other comments on these changes? You know, so. Who are so the philosophy has been updated to be the Fairfax County School
Board's the shell compensate. Its really its employees. According to the establish schedules. We've heard of that
responsibilities. We do cite the office, although. We we're going to get rid of that keep it to the superintendents jurisdiction. Okay. And then
are we OK to leave the payment structure that explains monthly biweekly optional deductions. We also had
seasonal. Procedures. But it doesn't mention the seasonal folks after Eid. So should we
add something in the air? Is this accurate still? guess.
The goal defer to Mister Solomon in part because those are categorized as our Leigh Ann not. You know, I think there may be a distinction here, but I'll ask Mr. Solomon to respond, correct. And in
looking there are policies and regulations that speak specifically to salaries to supplements. >> Completely separate from this, which is salary compensation for employees who are regular receive a regular
salary. >> do you suggest? We leave it in there as is. >> To answer your earlier question, I'm suggesting that salary supplements and stipends for coaches that
doesn't need to be included in this policy. Where is that included in here? The reason you don't see here is because they're a separate is and
regulations that govern supplements. So, yeah, so are you confirming that leaving what's in here? Underpayment of employees is accurate and
appropriate OK? So we've updated the philosophy show. We go ahead and pull that up.
So the without objection. The governance committee Sen Policy. 46, 40 payment of salaries as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption. Any objections? No.
Okay. So 46 40 goes to to the board. Okay. We've got 2 more HR and then 3 facilities. 49,
20 workplace diversity. And And if you're placards are up, then Mayor, okay, Dr Anderson. And a lot of questions on this. I feel like this should
be related to a lot of other policies. And I also would like to understand how does this dovetail with a
non-discrimination policy? So this policy is specifically talking about an affirming the board's commitment to workforce. Diversity writ
large. >> Right. So those other policies related to making sure that employees are in an environment free from discrimination, harassment, bullying as an example have completely different policies
and regulations that govern it to this policy. As I'm reading it, essentially saying the school board values a diverse, adaptive and supported Workforce. >> Okay. Thank you for that.
So given that under philosophy, we could just change to the stock language that will be helpful. And I also feel like the rationale. Is part of the philosophy. If
not, should be the philosophy. So bringing that up, I think would be important. And responsibilities. Again, I'm t
the ring here. I would be fine with it, but I'd be fine if it was not there. But the rationale I think needs to come up to philosophy. I agree
it. seems like there's a lot of sections that are trying to say the same thing. Anyone else with comments on this. Are you okay with combining
some of these things? Mr.
Fresh.
Though, to confirm the philosophy sentence would be stricken. And then the rationale section will be stricken.
>> And a lot of that language will come up. And that language, though, is the Fairfax County School board recognizes this is under philosophy, recognizes that diversity not only promotes equal opportunity employment,
but also result in the highest quality of education for students. >> It easier for you can just
copy the. >> Okay. So. And then are we striking responsibilities as well?
>> I feel like with most of it is is not just responsibly. The program managers. >> We'll put on the philosophy is is not quite there. Sure.
So it's these Fairfax County School board recognizes. That diversity not only promotes equal opportunity, employment, but also results in the
highest quality of education for students. Okay. And then. Responsibilities. We've talked
about that about being I don't know makes a nice. We have a robust regulation on this, correct. Does their regulation
on this missus? Solomon? I'm looking for now. OK? Because if there's a regulation on this that I don't think we need to have their responsibilities and I would
also say goal of the workforce, diversity, commitment. We could just change that 2 objectives because that's been the language reviews thus far. I think that's a good suggestion to change goal of the
workforce. Diversity commitment to objectives. OK? So we have the change in philosophy. We are going to
remove responsibilities. We'll change the last section. 2 objectives and remove Russia. Now. Dr Anderson. Yes, the
regulation is 49. 20. Can you give us a quick like does it say who's doing what does it identify? Program managers or anybody else in terms of
bringing this to life? Yes, it outlines the responsibilities of the Division Superintendent, Human Resources program managers, etc. >> And we certainly don't need it here. Thank you.
>> Okay. So without objection, the governance committee will send policy. 49 20 workplace diversity as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption for adoption. I see
no objection. Okay. Final HR policy. 49. 50 sexual harassment. And Mr for should
you? 49, 50 Dr, Anderson. The purpose of the study. We organize to state the policy again, I think we
>> have been a little bit better about that on this. I have been quoted elsewhere. The fee I think is fine here.
The responsibility. I had a question and this is how I'm reading it. The title 9 office in conjunction with the Office of Employee Relations is responsible for implementation. And monitoring
of sexual harassment complaint. What are they implementing the not implementing sexual harassment complaints? Is it implementation of
>> training? What are they implementing? >> I believe its
implementation of the policy and then monitoring of sexual harassment complaint. We need to at that because it looks like they're implementing sexual harassment complaints.
And just I'm wondering about Section 5. >> Should we re title that to be more? And alignment and
alignment with what we've done so far. Which section doctors 5 prohibition of sexual harassment. And I don't have a
good working title because objectives doesn't really sit here. Well. >> Yeah, the title of this policy is just unclear. It's a
tell about sexual harassment. Is preventing it? Is it having the procedure for when it happens? Is it? The prohibition? The says, you
know, we want avoid it. But then it also the last sentence as that we will take appropriate action when complaints are received. So maybe the purpose itself needs to be outlined. First is the purpose is to establish a procedure.
>> Or it's to denounce. Sexual harassment or is it both? Because the statement doesn't lead us anywhere. The purpose doesn't lead us anywhere.
>> I would recommend that. >> So it sounds like this is going to a little more work. >> Not a more. And do want to train. We have those 3
facilities policies left so on. >> Yeah, I I'd like to say
let's come back to this one. Please. Just given the time, see if we can get through our facilities ones and then. It's unclear if this policy is
about a statement saying we do not tolerate sexual harassment and or is it a policy saying that we're gonna have a process for if it occurs? It will be addressed, right? Those are really the 2
distinct things. Return with clarification of weather. It's about preventing it. All
right. So 49 50 is going to remain for review. Facilities, policies. We've got 3.
Maintenance, a physical facilities. 85 60. We have asked that that go back to make it more encompassing using that phrase public school facility, assets. We
had value engineering and then we had wireless telecommunications facilities. So what we go to maintenance of physical facilities as we've already had a bite at
apple. So 85 60 5.60. Any comments to kick us off. 60.
Mr. Fresh. Or the philosophy. >> The Fairfax County School board recognizes that school buildings grounds and implant a quip Mont should be preserved in an optimum
condition by planned an orderly methods. For the revisions elsewhere I'm
inclined. >> To not need a. Responsibility section because it is driven by the superintendent and regulations and it does depend on what it
is that's being done right? There are things that are the responsibility of the school to request. There are things that are done from central
office. So there's that it could be expectations.
>> Okay. So be clear. What needs to be? Recognizes. Is
there anything else to be captured, Mr. Bush. >> I think this covers everything that we talked about. Okay. Any other
comments. >> very quickly. I agree loss of the comments. Is expectations going to be a
new? A new term that we're introducing to the bank or is there any space with this? Could work under either
procedures? Our objectives? >> Which actually looking to replace this philosophy is a possibility for maintenance. Probably just responsibilities
would be more in line. Making it responsibilities. That's
the standard one. Yeah. OK, so we're good with these changes and we reviewed it quite a bit last time. So without
objection. the government's committee send policy ad. >> I-68 85. 68 maintenance of facility, physical facilities as discuss and revise the full
board for adoption. don't see any objections. So 85 60.
Goes. Value. Engineering. 82. 75. So that one. 82 75. Okay.
Question. I do have a question about that. And the heat is kicking back in again. So okay. Now we're determined to be warm up to frozen. Oh, boy.
OK, I can't find my into ring page. One of my wondering here for guarding value engineering and again, not knowing what the regulation is that goes with this.
>> Because I'm just looking back on the debacle that was value engineering application at >> Falls Church High School where this project was
presented. And then went back in value engineered and pieces were taken out and the presented project was are ready. It resonated and people
were married to it. They went at it and it became an issue. >> Should we be speaking as to this state like I again, I don't know if this lives here because I have no idea with regulation. Looks like. But
I'd like to. Asked the question in terms of when his value engineering going to enter. The the process, is it going to be done before?
>> For anything is introduced to the community because after his disastrous. >> Yes, ma'am. I understand and agree, Mr. Gordon, and you
have a sense and that the value engineering. there's could be, I think, a best case scenario. If you know that you have a big bus or a project that doesn't come within.
Expect 8 expectations costing. >> And yes, you do it prior, but you're going through a design process. Typically valley engineer encourage you go through design process the bid, the project out on on of the old procurement method
right? Design bid build. You didn't build the project and you have a big bust and you have to go back to value and you're something out to make the project a word of a project. >> So say could happen before
and after? >> Yes, depending on what you know about the project. time now we're using now that we're going towards a CNA at risk where you bring in. And owners
age rep in the helps you with. The development of a construction documents in the project. >> You eliminate >> you know, some risk of having a cost overrun. And so
you would know more on a on the front end before you're fully present. So I think now that we're heading down to 40 with parka method see him at risk. I think we'll know more on the front end.
>> And we have in the past, but it doesn't remove the risk entirely or not the risk. The potential, the potential to have to require value
engineering after that's that's correct. Okay. So given that I'd like to make sure that we are super clear here because out our policies, it's a communication to the public
as well as directives to the superintendent. What happened is Paul Church is nobody know that this would happen after the fact. So we have to find some way to articulate the language here that this is.
And various stages of the process. Where could that live? Because our public is
not going to look up the regulations, but they're going to look up the policies. I
think implementation. And I don't know if it's highlighted because we're changing the title term or not. indicates that will really every single construction project needs to
be value in near. It is a standard practice. And my understanding is that's been their period. I think the question you're proposing is
what is the timing of that? I think when that be part of the bid process to Eric. >> But maybe. >> Some clarity around. Once
projects have been provided the community unless there's some huge. Compelling reason we would want you know, keep our commitment. So I'm just curious what your thoughts on
that. It it for sure, man, so that yeah, 2 parts of your, you know, seeing rest were coming up to with the new procurement method. I think we'll know earlier on if there's a call to see what the
cost that take something out. >> We also have a component work through our cip process where we were last year. So 2 years we're actually going out to the community and giving updates. The other project on the front end. That's
something that's I think we've gotten better out over the last year and a half 2 years. communicating with the community on the front end during throughout the construction process.
>> I'm sorry. I just want to be a look clear because we saw the disaster. That was when the project was presented to the fosters community. >> And then they went back and value engineered and
components were taken out. People were very upset to say the least >> if this is going to be something that is likely to happen, even if the likelihood of that is very low. We need
to communicate that here. Clearly. Because I think what your particular leading is not quite matching what Mr. Gordon, a saying, which is. The risk is going to be lowered, but it could still
happen. We just need to say this to individuals because it came across as a very as a big surprise and purple felt. Some kind of way about it. So where in here can we say that value
engineering could be occurring any state? It looks like Cole drafting something because he's never heard of value engineering either. Well, and I think you're both correct. We had COVID. We had cost
escalation then, but I love the So but I'm sure Mr. Fresh. I can feel it has the answer. Well, he races Hansel. That was the Mr. Fresh.
>> Under implementation, I would suggest that it read the Division Superintendent shall establish regulations and procedures requiring that all school construction projects. The value engineered a
standard practice. And that value engineered outcomes remain aligned with community expectations wherever possible with the community engaged and informed throughout the
process. Let me read a faster. That's exactly what I was just looking My reference point.
Also reread it just people have it. >> The only fair thing that's missing is. They'll be informed about the process which is good, but they have to be forewarned that it could
happen at any point in the process. Can we add some? I
would just a little bit more
explicit there.
Despite the valiant efforts Mr. Fresh you add it on the fly. >> Do we want to come back to this one? Because we're also wondering if there they're changes that could be put into
whatever policy talks about the engagement process around renovations because we do. Talk about that. But also it's 5.30, and I want leave time
for the AI conversation. So would we be okay with? Capturing Mr. Fishes recommendation which happened and Mr. Fish. >> Not yet because Dr.
Anderson's comment. >> well, at least that part of it. But then there's a second part to so on. So let's pause
on the H one. H 2.75. Value engineering. And let's also come back to 83. 35 wireless telecommunication facilities. If anyone did have comments about 83. 35, if you could,
you want to send them to me all shepherd them so that we can get that policy closer to where it needs to be. Next time. Okay. So we want take break. Stand up. quick.
Stretch. Okay. Are you ready to innovate? All right. So we are going to something that we've never done before, which
is create a policy for which there is no template. So many draft at all. We're going to start with the discussion today in talking about You
know, first of all, we have some lessons that we can we can look to. We've done the comprehensive boundary policy change the grading policy. So we know about, you know, how
we want to engage in the kinds of things that we want to be, you know, doing we might have thoughts about the engagement process, how we want to engage the board. The public. But
also a lot of us are coming to AI with different experiences. And so thinking about what information that we want to know more about as a board as individuals. You know, we have
our meetings planned from now through May 19th. And so if we want to get something to the board to approve, you know, May 19th is that last scheduled committee date. We
could certainly add meetings. That's so here is meant to be thinking about how we've approached large policies before and how we want to do it as a committee. Engaging
the board, engaging the public. Providing in this conversation, some direction to the superintendent to say we need more information about, you know, X, Y, Z.
Again, this could be reflective of past policy creation work or knowing that this is a new area that we're still learning about. We can talk amongst ourselves around the categories. We've heard
lots of different things. You Workforce development, data, security. Lots of, you know, we get throughout those buckets and start to talk about what would be want to see a policy include. What
does the board need to understand? To develop a strong policy? So again, our superintendent has put some work out there. But now this is the time to really say, you know, in order to do this
policy, we really need to know, you know this or that hear from an expert. What should we even be doing for the next month as we prepare for February 17th meeting? And then again, what is it that
we're even looking to implement in the new school year? What about this policy is going to come through in students and staff experience
in time for the school year. Yeah, doctor for Mr. Fisher's you have your pocket. Yeah.
>> I appreciate the want to be Folsom in our considerations here. All of the mentioned previous efforts, though, started with the draft. Do we have draft policy of any kind
4? >> We are going to start with a conversation rather than start with. Something. We want to start with something of our own creation. That's fine from
the ground up in the royal we for all of us are. Well, I want to start with the conversation, but are you sure the draft from somebody I was given a draft that I didn't realize I even had. I don't
know how even came to have it. And I haven't looked at it because I think it's important for us to come with this with a fresh mindset because it's the board's policy and we only get to do this one With all
due respect, we can't say this is the board's policy and then put high expectations of what the superintendent is supposed to think about and bringing it to us at every single one of these meetings. It's the
board's policy. It's always the board's policy and we shouldn't be asking the superintendent to go out and do work for us. I don't think that's where we want to end up as a board because we get tremendous value out of the superintendents, worked to
help develop suggestions that we then mall and kick the tires on I would appreciate it. If we were at least forward what were shared with
you. I honestly do not know how I I was looking at my Google Drive and it came there. So I really don't know. And I said to the superintendent, the governance committee needs to consider a
lot of different perspectives and I think we deserve the opportunity. Just talk a little bit before going right to the superintendent's recommendations. So I'm happy
to send it to you. I wanted to give us the chance that we can't do this. Fresh after tonight. So yet isn't.
>> I know when we had the grading policy, we kind of went around and around and around with the draft that was in front of us. And at some point we kind of pause, like, what is it that you're looking
for this to have? And that was a very helpful exercise for particularly same thing with the boundary policy. There were there not. And I wasn't even on governance, but that was how I would call the first
meeting going, which is what are the big buckets that we want to have included in here? And those big buckets were shared and it went on to just inform the policy. So I think there's some value just kind
of thinking out loud a little bit because what I think it avoided is missing the mark entirely because when we're writing about and this is brand new. So we don't have
you know, anything per se to kind of a ready talk to think about, but sending the superintendent on a wild goose chase. Is never a good use of
time. So even of very preliminary conversation in terms of these are the things that we're thinking about. These other things that thinking about. I think it
will be very helpful to kind of at least have that that data dump, lack of better words, just to help. With a draft that we could look at our next meeting. So I
appreciate the opportunity. Yeah, I too, because I've asked before. Gotta do we have a? Draft? And I was told we
were surprised not to have as part of this to discussions. So. I don't not sure. I understand. I mean, here's the
thing like we have that night. He department. Who has specific expertise just like we have. And I asked department construction service and has expertise. So
I guess I'm not sure why we wouldn't let them help guide the work. I'm interested in the conversation. You know, I think we can do that, but I but I guess want to reiterate my colleague shared, which is that yet?
>> I would like to take a look at whatever's been drafted because I'm sure that even though maybe the show it's being drafted by someone whose
immersed in this. Every day all day. And I'm not. You know, welcome the conversation to build like to see the draft. So. It is a bit
disappointing that my attempt to be innovative has been grounded. I think we all come to I work with biases. We all
have it and what I've while the our tech staff may have expertise. Our families also have roots lived, experiences that they've been sharing. And so I thought it would be
valuable to come with more of a of not having expectations for what should be in the policy and reflect on what we've been hearing, which I don't even want to, you know,
color the conversation. But there are different opinions. The superintendent has one opinion and backed by a lot of expertise. But our community also has opinions and
feelings. And so I thought it would be a good idea to approach it in a more. Pure
way. Dr. Anderson, I'd like to play because I'd like to just jump in because we can talk about the talk in all. We could just start to talk
because it is 6.40, I'm sorry, 5.40, I know one of the things that has come up quite a bit that I was speaking about as we were listening to parents,
that seems to be a huge piece. I'm hoping that the policy can be reflective of. >> Privacy issues, safeguarding information. And I don't know who's taking notes for us on this jetted.
Are you taking those for the superintendent? And Getting into AI optional for students
like can I as a parent opt out of that? So I think those would be important things to articulate as well as again. This is not my space, but I'm
learning a lot and I have read a lot and I need to know more. We need very robust definition segment. I think you've instead it yourself Dre that
when people say AI, we may not be working with the same definitions and what does it mean to be concerned by large language models? What does it mean like what? How his jet
the chat gpt that we have different from the public chatgpt. So I would love for the definition section to really highlight. What is it
that we're looking for here? And of responsibility section. This is a space where there's a lot of different parts. Some of it is Bottoms Department
West, just the logistics and much. I think much of it is going to be with the instructional department like how is this going to kept get the kids? I would love for us
to be really explicit about our instructional plan. How are we going to boost opt-out digital literacy? Because what we've had so far, you it has
served a purpose of physical tools, but I don't know if it is as clear as it needs to be for the tools that will be
available with AI yeah. And also what kinds we're going to be using? What kinds we not going to be using? What is the expectation of teachers?
Because right now we're in the space and Dre, correct me if I'm wrong. Where teachers opting into the pilot.
>> So their their number of different activities currently occurring. It's a shared with Ms Merrin earlier today are like how schools project was one of our it's now I believe
for 3 years into that and that's our partnership with. >> His tee and AC a C D. >> one of the obviously it's
to be a front facing innovation lab, right? Incubating new ideas. So to the lighthouse, schools were
opt in for those schools and staff within those schools there also, if you're referring to the current OpenAI chatgpt for educators,
that's also up to him. And we did meet with all of our 2 suspects and Spitzer, school-based technology, instructional and technical staff. So they can also be
resources and will be meeting with principals as well on that topic. But it's currently opt in because it's in the adult learning space
exclusively. The open AI chat Gpt pilot. The Lighthouse schools work is something you know, like I said, that's been going on now for 3 years. Sure. So that's another piece that I think we could have
some robust language around where we are currently is not necessarily what will be in the future. So has to be a policy that speaks to. >> Kind of that timeline.
>> Where do we want to be in how we get there, whether it's opt in this year, mandatory next year. That's the regulation work. But I think those of the piece is that I'd
like to see and also communication and community engagement component, I think would be important. What can the community expect from this? How are we going to
bring them along as well? Kuz is a is an education that I think is important. There. And clearly when we had the December meeting where person after person who can to speak
to us, spoke with a I spoke about AI. How do we ensure that those kinds of concerns are and that it in here and in addressed. So pause here and
hear from others, especially since my time is Thank you, Mr. Bush. Excuse me, a couple things I think about.
>> On the data security front, it'll be good to know how our current data policies trust policies which are trust policy, rather, which are. Agnostic to the technology.
It's specific to the data security wood play here I also think that. Something, you know, looking at how our
professional development policies might come into play here. I think the resulting policy should be platform agnostic and not linked to specifically into the
technology. Aside from definitions. Otherwise we're going to be constantly redoing this policy to keep up with the technology, which is something that Congress has
dropped grappled with in terms of it's tech policy. I think there are things that naturally become thoughts about our work here that don't necessarily belong in policy
but do belong. Maybe in a follow on that is proposed along with the policy. In other words, like a note on implementation, right? And that could include what kind of engagement were expecting
from the community you know how the community is informed of this rollout, cetera. So
that's my initial thinking. And I appreciate the the want
More creative fashion some of us just benefit from, you know, benefit from having something to spark are thinking and the royal me one
of us may have told community members that the typical process is that we get a draft of the policy. And so I'd be looking forward to And I don't have anything to share them
from this meeting, even though I told them that that's typically what happens. So that's my advocacy. There was that I was expecting to be able to provide something to members of the community have
shared an interest in. It also helps ground my thinking in the types of things that we should be thinking about. I think there's a lot to this conversation that does not belong in policy. you know, I
think it's essential that we have guardrails for students, guardrails staff how that impacts the SR in our and other aspects of the school
division, I think needs to be discussed as well. There's been a question about costs, you know, so making sure that
when we are communicating with people, they're aware that we have specific policies about the types of contracts that the board has to review and that there can't be some secret thing where it was
almost nothing at first, but because it had, you know, different provisions in the contract eventually win over the price that the board has to approve and the board didn't get notified. That's all covered. We already
thought about those types of things in the past. So this is some initial thinking there's a lot of policies I'd like to drag into this conversation
that are Trish yearly related. That's my initial thoughts. This lady. >> Yeah, thank So I guess I when you think about buckets,
obviously major bucket is teaching and learning I think Also to back up a second less is more person, right?
Because, you regulations detail things policy, sort of, you know. Creates guardrails
in the framework. So one. Particular back, it could be like data, privacy, security and ethics. >> and >> then this concept of like AI for all all, which would
mean like all students, all staff and families like a 3 tiered approach to understanding. Obviously I can integrity. And how we redefine
our work. >> Another area that I think about a lot is instructional differentiation. And personalization.
>> But I think that people need to understand that there the need for like. The human in the loop, for example, you know, this will never replace
teachers. You know, we were always have highly qualified. Teachers are going structure students. But these are people who are going to be trained to, you know, leverage technology work smarter, but
differentiated a bucket. I've talked about I think like high stakes decisions like obviously grading or the writing of IP goals, things like that, you know, you could use AI for data collection.
You could use AI to sort of augment help you. But ultimately those are human decisions, right? Like, you know, humans, right? It calls and adopt them. Humans are going you know, do degrading
and, you know, disciplinary recommendations, cetera, and then obviously this has been lot of articles. But, you know, the other human element of this that time it's safe.
Teachers. You know, a tremendous and our teachers are utilizing teachers pay teachers. And think that what
we're doing in Fairfax. It which is not, you know. They're they're finding that as a means of working smarter, not harder because there in essence, using their own
funding to purchase materials that are produced by other people. But that's not what should be taking place in our club are learning teams rate like. What we've the way I understand the work that we're
embarking on this county is that we're creating the framework of the guardrails that we're all gonna operate within that all teachers are going operate within and so as
to not have teachers doing those things on their own again, when it first came out, I certainly understood it because at the time it takes to. lesson plan and also it's
like. Run out of ways to innovate yourself. As a teacher says sometimes you're tapping into that because year you've got an idea. But you don't have fleshed out. You
know, I see a AI is helping support amount of time. So I have a few thoughts. just, you
know, from this lady, you know, hearing as usual year expertise on how teachers work and how learning happens. >> Yeah, that's something that I don't have is intimately. And so I just wonder is that something that, you know, we
also learn more about so we can really see like, what does it look like to transform a teacher's work and save their time? can envision what it looks like ipp, you know to do that. But not maybe the the
collaborative learning team. So I just wonder like how much do we need to know about what's happening now and where it could go so that we can see
that vision. Some of the thoughts actually is interesting. The comment about the money. So, you know, our board is has a policy that we review contracts of half a million dollars and more. But
we don't have any policy about reviewing partnerships with entities that are valued at that or billion or billions of dollars. And we currently do already have such partnerships
and the board didn't have a role in reviewing the agreements or even knowing it. And so I think the policy has to have something about, you know, recognizing that
business is business technology is business and you know, they have some great, great things. But our mission is to educate kids. And that's not the mission of business.
And so we can partner. But we have to, I think, and knowledge the risks. And I think the board does have a role in reviewing, you know something. So I'd like reviewing partnerships of a certain size and being briefed
on them. I just think about what does it mean to lead in this area and may be leading in this area isn't necessarily doing all the things first to make it happen in classrooms.
It's thinking about kids, health and safety. Because what I hear a lot and when I looked at the Brookings Report that I shared with you all last week, it's a big warning
bell about the danger to children, especially with Jenner of AI. And I want to learn more about that and I haven't heard that talked about a lot so far in public meetings. It's been about,
yes, you want to be human-centered, I think it's important to perhaps put in the policy. This is a slide from our October 7th work session where there are 3
types of AI in conversations and at conversations, future readiness of students. So that students know how to and you know how to use this. The tools with AI in them that
maybe we don't even recognize that the eyes in there. And then there's the AI tools to support adults. And so I'm most comfortable talking about the AI tools to support adults because I think we can have
sort of the most they control influence. We can require certain professional development. We can check for quality control because I am concerned about if people are just developing their own
things will who is checking to make sure that it's equitable and, you know, anti-racist and, you know, norms with states standards, even. I'd
like to know more about the role of professionals like and do we have an advisory committee? Maybe the board needs to have, you know, people advising us not just
technology professionals, but other professionals in different areas. So I'll pause there let's keep the conversation Dr Anderson. Yes,
very quickly. Doctor, Reed or Mr. Smith, I wonder if this is one of these policies that the
regulation should be evolving along with because I remember when we still have our meetings back here, when I first got on the board. >> Policies and regulations that kind of work in tandem. It's wondering, you don't have
to expect, you know, answer right now. But I think it kind of makes sense for us to know if it's not here than in lives here because as I've asked Missus Solomon today, what do
we have in the regulations, then we don't need to reinvent the wheel and the policy that's been very helpful. This could be one of those spaces. If you had the bandwidth to
help develop the regulation as we go along, it's been informative when we've had that opportunity. Do I have some other thoughts? I think
we I gave the rest see. Kind of see what I think. I'll stop here. was looking for the
email, the dark to read Cent. I read the Brookings article that you sent to me and I didn't. I actually thought we were lined with it. So it's
interesting. We both read the same thing but come out with different impressions right? And I think the concerning thing is the safety. Given the percentage of our kids are currently using. AI is a
companion and their parents are not aware of it like I don't think our parents understand that's a part of the work we're doing. Will be to create. I think Dr read
some kind of parent. Repaired community a way to teach parents around AI safety because, you know, the second you hand a child, this which they all have done. Going
anywhere in the world without a parent supervision. If they don't have to put things on their phone. So the as a former school counselor and a counselor at heart, it's
essential that we teach about safety around and that piece of it. And that was noted in the article is the number of people. But Dre. I think it was Friday. The center says the study. That had some other
data in that I can't find that particular one and I I didn't get through. It's very median there's a lot of information in there. But I appreciate that. You did send that. So,
you know, again, I think. I think we all have the same concerns and I think that
education is. Essential. For every. Everyone parents. Our students, our support folks
are teachers but if we don't get moving. With every day, we don't have a policy with every day. We're not trying teach parents. We're putting more
kids in jeopardy because they're accessing this with no supervision, no guardrails. So we've got to get I believe we have an obligation. To do good by our students and teaching
responsibility. I think another benefit to the you know, us not having cell phones in schools is that our kids are actually learning to look at one another and have engaging conversations they're
they're learning to be social and in ways that went, you know, underground, if you will, as a result of being isolated during COVID and then coming out of COVID being masked and then being
comfortable being unmasked. We have lots of kids can do to wear a mask just because they were. They'd rather not show their face security. The amazing for for health risk. But we need our kids develop
self esteem strength of character. You know, all the things that make them strong humans emotionally, but we also need them learn how to gauge will another. And I I do
think we've turned the corner on that certainly with our cellphone policies this year. But, you know, we got work to do. So I you know, I appreciate the conversation. And there definitely are some buckets that we need to look
at. Thank you, Mr. Fresh. Mislaid his comment about families made me think of something that I share regularly in my newsletters. At least they did when they initially considering the
>> cell phone policy about steps parents can take immediately right to control their kids. Cell phones. You know, how do you disable all of the features of the phone
except for texting apparent. During school hours, right? Like. It's left on the school division to police that even though every parent who provide their kid with the
phone has the ability to rein it in themselves. And so I do wonder as part of this and it doesn't necessarily have to be in the policy. But one thing I'd like us to think about is
how do we? Fill the void of information about this, not just about what we're doing in Fcps, but you know what they need to know about their kids
use of AI kids are using it. We know that adults are using it to even, you know, long before we partnered with OpenAI students are using. I
faculty were using AI maybe not know structured or condone fashion, but it's happening. It's happening in every industry. So how do we demystify what's happening?
What the rules are in Fcps. Once we have a policy and whatnot and ensure that parents know that they have a role in this too. Because
there's, you know, there's only so much we can do, especially on the companion part. During school hours. That leaves a heck of a lot of time for talking to a
companion outside of school. When. Potentially less policing is happening with their devices. So noodle on
how we might be able to assist families with more information. >> Thanks. I. is at 6 o'clock.
Okay. I'll just finish up then. But the second last So as I thought about this, and I thought about cell phones and our approach to rein that in.
And I think about violence and bullying. It really all comes down to the same thing, which is the pedagogy that is used in schools. How do we teach
kids? How do we teach kids to think critically? How do we teach them to have social emotional resilience? I don't see this is any different. And so we need to talk about the
things that make kids strong enough and sharp enough. To make good decisions about AI in choosing it. But like cellphones, the technology is
designed to be. Enticing and to keep you coming back for more. And children also have. Their brains are developing differently. I'm actually
wondering what effect of AI isn't literacy us that with my son. It is 504, meeting and we're going over his accommodations for dyslexia and one of them is predictive text. Well, does that helps
them with dyslexia or not? Because we moved away from that style of reading of. You know, suggesting things. You know, that there's no research
yet and maybe he'll be okay because he's 12 and a half and he's overcome a lot of the dyslexic barriers. But would first grader who's just learning to read. So I would
rather see us talking about how how are we ensuring that the level of what our adults are using is consistent and of high quality and everything
that I have I've witnessed since August since I first read something in Info Grant, it has been very optional. And this is when Dr Reid says are we a system of schools or a school system? And when I
think again about literacy and how and pyramid, I had one school with 12 teachers trained Norton killing him and one school that had 0 trained teachers. How are we going
ensure that the quality of what is being used is high. And so I think, you know, also that professional element is optional. And it's also the
professional moment provided early January was by a company. It was by OpenAI. So what are we? What do we expect? Our school division? How do we marry the business
part of it with what we know is pedagogical E and developmentally appropriate for children and then add on trauma, English language, learner, disability, none of
that has. We don't know those answers yet. Summit saying sit and wait. But I think, you know, focusing on the adults is is really the way to and I
think it needs to be much clearer. It's just been too much information coming in. Spurts in fits and starts. And I'd really like to see the superintendent and board working on this together. So however, the policy can speak
to that work. And again, I think it comes to us approving things. That's the way we get things in front of us. So I will leave it at that misleads. You want another term? Well, I just want say that terms of, you know, we're
huge school system writes, I'm thinking back to, you know, when we were first getting a student from ation system that was electronic right? I forget maybe assists that Woodson was
one of the schools that pilot it right, because one of the reasons that you do this and you end up its choice to opt in because it's extra work is you're trying to determine.
It's sort of 2 steps forward. One step back right? If they rolled out sista the whole county the way that it was packaged, it would have been a colossal Trainwreck. And so I
am very supportive of the idea of piloting things because it's it's it's a learning by doing. But it's also protective because it's it's, you know, we we we want to
make sure we understand with fidelity, how this when implemented correctly. Alt all boats rise, right? Like all students are accessing learning in the in and all
those inter taking I think there's a time line every time we engage in these things just like piling, of course. I mean, McLean, High school pilot at a p pre calculus in a
vacuum and then had high scores in the in the country. And now we know every school has that. So I think that part of this will always be continued. Now, I don't ever want to see us rule something
out. 200 schools. Like this, such as my my hesitancy. I think that would be reckless of us. I think we have to dip our toe in things and let certain people who are early
adopters, perhaps work with it and provide feedback to it. Feedback to I asked feedback too big based interactions with families concerns. I think we grow from that. Mr.
Issuing rep overdone. Okay. So let's be clear on our next. Thanks for of sorry. Thanks for the few extra minutes so
for February half, every 17th is our next meeting. let me just look here. So we'll come back to the fore policies that we touched on today, but
didn't get through. We'll continue with the AI policy and, you know, we can obviously Dre, please send your draft out. But also we'll gather the note so that we
can. It can continue to inform a us in the draft on our if you want to reflect on it, given what we've just provided with the further, you know, thoughts and directions. If
that's all, you know, that is all captured in your policy. They can clear about that and what we want then I want to make sure that we're proceeding in a way that everybody wants to do so for
the air policy. Do we want to? Have a superintendent consider what we share today, revise her draft and send it to us. You know, as soon as possible, do you want to see it now?
What? What are your preferences as lady and Mr? Bush. Yes, and I think both are fine. Yeah, think that,
you know, again, I'm I appreciate the exercise today. And I think that whatever notes we have. If they're archived and shared with Dr
Reid and staff. Maybe they look at their draft and then maybe incorporate some of the dialogue. And then, you know, share draft on just a thought.
Okay. So we will very soon after today receive everyone will receive the draft. So Dre just added to the committee, please. All of us and we can get you the notes from today.
Then we also have a few other things. The policies that are due on some other items and back to the group's of. Policy is that we identify way back.
That could be tweaked in some Mecca via more. So there's really no shortage of looking at this. But the focus is the AI policy and that's what we'll start with the next
meeting to really start hammering it. But I hope that we can keep talking, you know, among board members to figure out, you know, more. But we even want that February 17
conversation to look like just, you know what kind of questions we might have. It is their information. We want to getting a look into more so I will work with the clerk team
too. Get all of our materials together. And I do have copies of a few of the Brookings pieces, including an 8 page panned out that they had as well. So yes, doctors, I'm
sorry if I missed but you may have covered it. But if not, here's my question. I remember when the boundary work just started. One of the things that the chair of the governance committee at the
time task, the group with is to go reach out to. >> Other board members, just 2 preliminary really get some feedback. Are you looking for us to engage in a similar
activity? sounds like a nice collaborative idea. I it's
always encouraged well, why don't we let it simmer a little bit? And Tuesday, a
look at the draft out. We can certainly opinion. think have another month before the next governance committee meeting.