All right. Good afternoon everyone. Um, I'd like to call this April 2nd, 2025, curriculum and instruction committee meeting to order. My name is Lauren s Shernoff. I'm the chair of this committee, and I'm joined by my colleagues, Dr. Samara Rasheed and Dr. Linda Deans. Uh, we do not have any public comment tonight, so we will jump right into our agenda. Item 3.01, the approval of the draft minutes for March 12th, 2025 meeting. Are there any changes at this time that need to be made to the minutes? Seeing none, I'll entertain a motion. Motion to approve the minutes. Is there a second? Second.
It's been properly moved and seconded. All those in favor to approve the minutes? Say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passes unanimously. We will now move on to our information items. 4.01 is our first information item of the evening. It is policy 54 30 use of generative artificial intelligence, and I believe I will be passing this over to Mr. Slevin. Before we do that, I just wanted to clarify. Um, this was an information item last meeting. We are keeping it as an information item due to the public feedback window still being open. So we will talk and discuss through some of that tonight,
um, in hopes that we can possibly move it to action in our to move to the full board next meeting. Um, so with that, Mr. Slevin, the floor is yours. Thank you, Ms. Shernoff. We appreciate the opportunity to have a bit more of a time to work on this policy as it's an important one and one that is of interest to our community. Uh, I'd like to thank, uh, Mr. Hendrickson and Mr. Smith for being here tonight. They've been, um, partners throughout this work, um, and so they'll offer perspective as we go. But what I thought we could do is first, um, start with a little bit of a overview of the, of the work to date.
Uh, we did have an update earlier this fall on, um, what we've been up to and the work has continued. And then we did bring tonight two draft regulations, um, one that were of interest to the committee that we'll we'll walk through in terms of what we put into the regulations. Taking an initial look at the feedback that came in, um, late last week, um, many of the concerns are addressed in, um, the regulations that we've developed, and there are some things that we should think about going forward. Um, and I would note we're also still waiting
on feedback from cac. I believe they're voting on that this evening. Um, so staff will have access to CACs feedback when we, um, come back in May with the final policy. And then we'll just have a general discussion on any kind of feedback that you see that perhaps we missed. Does that, does that work Committee, is that fine with you? Yeah. Yeah. Okay. Me as well. Okay. So in in board docs, um, we had linked a number of things, um, in terms of where we're at with our work. Um, Ms. Tson, did you want to talk a little bit about a few of the items on here that were updated?
Yes. Thank you. We've updated the graphic to reflect some of the, uh, uh, work that we have been continuing and, and as it's moving from one column to the next. Um, so, uh, some items of note on here are, uh, some of the professional learning resources we've developed over the course of the school year. Uh, we have offered, uh, professional learning on artificial intelligence in a variety of formats, uh, through our professional learning days. We've offered some virtual, uh, sessions for teachers.
We've offered materials to schools that, uh, that the instructional technology facilitators can take and turn around to staff. And we've had some schools make use of those resources. So I feel like we have a good, uh, foundation in professional learning. It doesn't mean there's not more to do, uh, but I I think we have some good resources that have been out there and, uh, have been utilized by our, our teachers and staff. Um, another thing of, of, of another item of note is, uh, some of the work we've been doing around, um, collaborating with Mr. Smith's team and DDI on, uh, evaluating, uh, tools
that include generative ai. So, uh, inside of our onboard software review process, we have updated all of our checklists, uh, and documents, uh, that, that are, are guiding those reviews to incorporate, um, look fors for around generative artificial intelligence. Uh, we've updated, um, RFP technical technical review processes for things like, uh, new textbook adoptions, uh, when we're looking at technical, uh, requirements or technical, um, configuration for some of those tools that come along with, with, with r fps, we've got a set of,
um, questions and, and, uh, items we're looking for and evaluating for around generative artificial intelligence. And I think we're, uh, in, in, in a pretty good place there in, in leading amongst other school divisions as far as how we're in thinking about artificial intelligence and adopting new, new tools. Um, uh, couple of, uh, things that are still in progress. We have, uh, some, some pilots of generative AI tools that we have in, in certain places. Uh, we have a few schools piloting a teacher facing tool
called Brisk, uh, which is a Chrome extension that allows teachers to use generative artificial intelligence on top of, uh, tools. They're already using, like, uh, Google Docs and um, YouTube videos and things like that. Uh, we have another, uh, small group of teachers in an innovators cohort. Uh, and that group of teachers is piloting a tool called School ai, which, uh, offers some student facing tools. So we are about ready to start dipping our toe into, uh, offering some, some generative AI experiences
for our students in a, in a supported way. Um, and some things that we're looking forward to, uh, working on are, uh, developing, um, some skill progressions for students. What are things, what are things that we want students to specifically learn about generative artificial intelligence? How, uh, do we want to cluster and sequence that learning what makes sense as far as when those topics should be introduced, as in, in different grade levels and, uh, things like that. Um, we're beginning to think about how we can collect, uh,
either curate and or create, uh, uh, lessons around generative artificial intelligence that can support student learning, um, and figuring out how we align those lessons with that skill progression. Uh, and then beginning to think about, you know, at the earliest stages of thinking about how do we plan for broader student access and what might that look like and what are things that we have to have in place, uh, to help teachers feel comfortable to help the community feel comfortable and help students feel comfortable with, with using those tools to support their learning. Just to piggyback on that, uh, a little bit, I know that was a lot of instructional focus, but we'll also have some more operational focus
that we'll be working on, um, um, establishing a AI innovator cohort for more of like a central office facing one about how we can become operationally more efficient using these tools and, and really start leveraging those in our organizational processes. So we're gonna, uh, start standing that up. We have a lot of early adopters, um, but we kind of wanna make this more of like a ubiquitous approach across the organization. So that is another next step, not necessarily an instructional facing side, but as a district, how we kind of wanna start leaning into this work too. So we do want to take our time. Are there any questions for this portion of the, um,
information item before we move on to the regulations? Go ahead, Dr. Thank you chair. Um, I'm really excited for this. Uh, I know it, it is a boatload of information. I'm sure it will evolve, you know, uh, later on. Um, I guess trial and error type of thing. I don't like saying that, but I, I know it's, it's, it's just been birthed, but I really, I can see a lot of, um, help for the students, uh, also with the educators with bringing this coming forward. So I'm excited to see where this goes. Dr. Deans, Do we have a, um, uh, a way to cite having used
generative AI in your work? That'll be in the regulation we're About to cover. Okay. Okay. I know that is important. You know, we wanted to kill Kate when she left us all the requirements surrounding bibliographer and stuff, so we know that that's important. I just had a question. I had an educator reach out, and this might be more policy related, but I'm gonna ask it in terms of professional development. Um, an educator is, I, I guess creating sort of a what if situation of, um, will there be guidance around how
to deal with, if you suspect AI has been used, but it wasn't cited, will we be providing guidelines and background for teachers and support for educators to be able to approach those situations? 'cause I could imagine that that could be contentious, right? You have a kid who you think has used AI instead of it's their authentic work, but you have to approach that student and how they may or may not respond. Um, I thought that that was an interesting point. So I don't know how you put that into something in policy. So I thought maybe on the professional learning side, that might be something that would be addressed.
And I, yes. And, um, I think that may not be, um, unique to AI use, you know, when a, when a teacher suspects that it may not be a student's work, what is our current approach and can we bring some of that language into our supports to teachers? I think that's great feedback. And I just wanna say thank you for your work on this. I do think we are light years ahead of the, our surrounding districts. I think that we're doing really innovative work. I can see that it's already evolving and changing even since we've talked, um, the last time. So I'm, I'm very excited as well as Dr. Rashid. I echo those comments. I, I think we have to embrace this.
I wasn't in that camp when we first started a year ago, but I'm fully in that camp now. And a lot of that is because of the work that you've done and because people are responding to that and it's here. And so us being proactive is, I think, really key. So I thank you for your work. You may proceed. Thanks. And I'm really thankful for my Mr. Hendrickson's leadership and the AI Innovators cohort. We do plan on spotlighting a couple members of the cohort at a future board meeting. I believe it's in the May, um, spotlight when maybe this policy may be in front of the board. But either way, um, we'll have a positive example of the use
of AI as the board is taking on this topic. Okay. So we have two regulations we want to talk about. Um, much of the feedback was about whether or not even we're allowed to use Gen ai. When is it appropriate? Um, there were some questions about citing, um, gen AI like, um, Dr. Dean had asked. And so the first regulation, we, we we're at the gate with two regulations, and these are draft obviously 'cause we don't have a policy. Um, and so the first regulation is pathways inciting of artificial intelligence. And so we ha we imagine,
and we have been talking about four different ways that we see our teachers or students using gen AI in the classroom. First. There are many situations where we don't want students to use gen ai and that's perfectly acceptable for a teacher to say, this is the time when we're not using, using this technology. Um, we see situations where gen AI is used as a coach. We see situations where there are collaborating on the work, and then they are an essential part of their essential tool in the task that we're putting in front of our, in front of our students.
Section B references, citing gen ai, as well as, um, what would happen if you failed to cite, um, AI in its relation to the active as an academic integrity violation. And so your feedback Ms. Shernoff is good about, you know, what are some, what is our guidance that exists and make sure we're linking gen AI used to that, that, um, communication. And so we have information in there around using MLA or a PA styles online and where we could find those resources. And then we also have sections on how to use, how
to disclose use of gen ai. And also in, um, information about sharing your chat in gen AI responses with your teacher. Um, would you add anything to this regulation? Uh, the only thing I would add is, is a lot of the, the content that, that are, is making up these regulations is, uh, inspired by the, uh, some of the resources we built for teachers inside of the generative AI guide. So if, if, if some of this is looking familiar to you, it's, it's because it's, it's kind of pulled out of, out of those resources and we're highlighting the ones that we feel are kind of the most supportive and,
and the most relevant to some of the, the major questions we're getting for, from teachers and community around this work and, and kind of codifying it or, or formalizing it inside of the regulation. Um, Mr. Smith, do you wanna talk about the second regulation? So the second regulation we have is privacy and data protection when using artificial intelligence. Uh, so really this policy, um, just highlights for generative AI specifically. We already have student data privacy, PII direct information type policies. This just kind of highlights, um, when we do have authorized gen AI tools.
Um, the differences between using authorized tools and unapproved tools and kind of the dangers of using consumer versions of tools, uh, we just wanna make sure, um, how we compare them is like putting data in a system that we own and that we control, um, is a lot different than putting data in a system that's just out for everyone in the world to use. So we kind of wanted to highlight the differences there. Um, we made some, uh, just when students use the tools and how we're gonna protect their data and really just don't put PII or personally identifiable information into these tools. Um, we do not want the models for these AI tools being trained on our student data.
We wanna make sure that they're protected. And the best way to do that is to use the tools that we are gonna provide as a district that are gonna be enterprise licensed, um, contractually obligated data protections in place. So that's really what this, um, regulation is to highlight. Is there a way to, you know, they're gonna use that when they're home at home. They're gonna use, they may use a device other than what is issued. Is there a way to indicate to them that they've used outside resources versus the ones that are allowed? So when the regulation and the policy are passed,
we'll probably have some conversations about what exact tools we're going to allow as a district. And then those will be rule sets that we apply based off of an account and a device. But if they choose to do something on a personal device, this is be where we would be recommending to them that this is not a best practice and that if there is, you know, this could potentially be a disclosure of data where they have to do a FERPA notice or something like that. So we've already, um, included this as part of our FERPA training, um, about why we don't wanna disclose student data. Uh, and so we've been doing that since last summer as like these tools still are out there
and people are using them about how to use them carefully. Um, so it's still gonna be up to them to kind of make that decision if they're using a personal device that we have no con, no connection or control over. Um, but if they're using an LCPS device or an LPS account, we'll probably have some permissioning and restrictions there once the policies are in place. And once we make some of these decisions about what our enterprise tools are gonna be. I had a question about, um, it actually came from the SAC feedback and I thought it might fit better in the regulation is about opt-out options. So I know we do a lot of permission click for certain digital platforms.
Would that be something that you envision would be part of this process if parents, I mean some of the feedback was pretty heavy handed in terms of fear and parents feeling like that that's just something we shouldn't even allow at all. So would that be an area that we would cross over to, to give parents that choice to opt their kids out? So before students will be granted access and, uh, uh, Mr. Anderson and I got, uh, the pleasure of being at in SAC and having this conversation. It was very robust. It was, it was awesome. Um, but I think part of this is really go slow to go fast and being safe. 'cause we don't want, we wanna make sure
that we have a system in place where that we have transparency into what students are doing. You know, right now the environment is evolving so quickly that a feature set that doesn't exist today exists tomorrow. And so we're trying to keep up with that rate of change. Uh, but we do have some requirements that, um, it's gonna be data protections. We're gonna have, um, some transparency into what students are doing. Similar to, like, our goal would be something like a gaggle of how we do that when they do a Google creative content. Um, and then the potential for an opt-out, it really depends on how the technologies are onboarded and what we're able to do there.
So I think there's more to come. Those are things we would like to have in place. And we actually are working through a process now where we're gonna share some more information about getting, um, parent consent for some of these things to make sure that they understand like what their students are using and where that data is going. So I think that'll all be wrapped together, but we don't want to put a tool in students' hands before we are a hundred percent sure that it's safe for them to use. And at that point, um, I think that's some internal conversation about what an opt-out could look like. Is that part of our online registration process or whatever that kind of needs to look like. So a great point.
Something that we really haven't finalized yet, but I think could make sense depending on the tool selection and how it's implemented. It's wonderful that that's top of mind for you all and that you engage them in that conversation. 'cause I thought that was a really, you know, good, good, good thought. So anything else? So in terms of the, a quick walkthrough, the feedback, um, yeah, and then we'd, we'd love to hear the committee's feedback on what we should be thinking about from what you see in the feedback. Um, as I mentioned, there are a number of things regarding, um, the feedback that we did include in the regulation.
Um, comments about insufficient guidance as to what would be dishonest use of gen AI or when could it be used. Um, there were, while I agree there were some, um, comments with concern, there was also very positive, um, affirmative statements about us being forward thinking and thinking how this gonna impact our schools and appreciation for the policy. Um, a lot of it is gonna be driven by professional learning. Like how are people gonna be using this in terms of the concerns that are being, um, given such as around our English teachers.
Um, what are different approaches we could use? So AI users as a tool and not a crutch for writing essays, for example. Um, one comment about the erosion of critical thinking and intellectual growth. Um, there are steps we could take in our classrooms to make sure we're focusing on the process and not just the end result of a, of a writing process that would help teachers navigate that. But these are all, um, Perspectives I think we need to be mindful of as we're supporting our teachers in implementing, um, and encapsulate why we have a policy
and regulation and training to begin with around this particular topic. Um, There was a suggestion about getting student voice. Um, the student advisory committee is kind of wrapping up for the year, but I think that this is a policy that's gonna be of high interest to our students. Um, and so trying to find some ways to get some student perspectives on how we're rolling out ai. Um, we, we've had some level of conversations, but increasing student engagement is a, is a big takeaway from the, from the feedback. Um, and then moving on to the, um, m SAC feedback, one of the things that stand out is a question they had about a section on general prohibited use of generative ai.
We did, um, use pretty positive language in our policy about what we expect people to be doing, but there are probably very specific behaviors that we do not want people to use. Mr. Smith mentioned not using personally identifiable information as a tool to kind of feed the, the tool. So should we add a section for prohibited um, behaviors for JNAI, that that's something that we'll be working with the team as we come back in, uh, may. And then, um, Some questions about inaccurate information and that may be more regulation, but that, that, that's the feedback
that stood out from me from sac. Do you all have any thoughts on the feedback at this point? Part of the conversation we had at SAC was the ethical use of AI and not just from a student perspective, from a staff perspective. So, um, we're actually updating Policy 75 66, which is the employee technology responsible use policy regulation to support that. And so we're gonna embed some of these ethical practices into that regulation to ensure that it's not just a student ethical use. There have been, you know, DeepFakes
or other things that have happened that we wanna make sure that staff are aware as well as along with students. So it's kind of that holistic across all facets of that, that we're looking at. So we threw a lot at you and happy to get your, the committee's thoughts and, um, on what we should be thinking back when we bring back, uh, policy for action in May. Yeah. Thank you so much. Um, I'll pass it to committee members for questions and comments. Go ahead, Dr. Deans kick us off. Is it true that, um, she would get a different AI from an Apple product versus an HP product?
So starting to see it be embedded into almost everything, but there are some core tools like the chat GPT, which is is a tool. Um, there will be Windows as releasing AI embedded into laptops. So it would be right there, um, as an assistant on the device. And yeah, so they are, they would be different, but our goal would be if we're gonna have a technology, it would be to students, for example. It would be on their Chromebook managed by LCBS and that type. And it would be consistent for all students to have access to that unless there was some sort of opt out process. So there are variances,
but our goal would be to have to try to be as consistent as possible across the organization. With that. Thank you. I, I was asking it for a personal reason because my granddaughter keeps saying, mom, I want to use your, your laptop rather than daddy's. Hers is Apple and his is not. There might be some personal preference in that, uh, but, but uh, it is, they could have different, but you're gonna start to see that just as an evolution of the market. Um, yeah, Dr. Rasheed. Okay. Um, I had, we did a pretty deep dive on this at Leaf as well, um, which was really interesting. And I, I think today brought a lot of clarity and,
and hopefully I can point them in this direction because I think people see the policy and they think that's all we're doing. And I was trying to explain to them, we're kind of almost working backwards with the policy 'cause we've already like forged a path with AI in a lot of different ways. Um, so more, um, thinking about this being just sort of the, the foundational philosophy behind generative ai. I am, I'm very happy with the regulations. I think they're really responsive and I think they're in a good direction. I don't have a lot of notes there. Um, but I did, the one conversation that did come up that I think is stressing people out a little bit
is this idea of continuous improvement. Like we always want to be doing that. We wanna monitor what we have in place. And then there's an annual review, and I saw that a little bit in the m sac feedback also, but in Leaf, that's really where the conversation was coming alive is maybe we need a little bit more clarity on what those processes are. Specifically. Someone said, um, I, you know, I understand that there'll be an annual review of the actual program, but if features and things need to be turned on and off in different ways that we find within those programs before that review would come up, how do we define that?
So specifically limitations, um, how will features of programs, how are, how will those things be evaluated? And do we need to have a section that more clearly identifies the difference between monitoring a program we already have and reviewing something that we're gonna keep or not keep? So I think the way that we do this now, the model that we use, for example, like our Google environment, they're always releasing new features, functionality. Uh, and so we have an off until on and then every twice a year that environment is, is audited and, and by a a K 12 focus provider who tells us what's kind
of best practices for those based off of age levels, restrictions, what other districts are doing. So, um, in this area, we haven't found a partner yet who could do, who could sit with us and help us do that. So, um, part of that would be what, how much do we have to build ourselves as part of that process versus how can we lean on a vendor partner who's gonna be looking at this more than just loud like entire K 12 spectrum across the United States. So those are one of the reasons, those are like all the questions we have before we can select a tool that we really wanna make sure that it's not gonna be this ever changing environment. And today a teacher thinks this and tomorrow it's like this.
Like it really needs, we need to be able to provide some consistency there. And then that also helps us with our review process. 'cause if we think only this feature is enabled, that should be the only feature that's enabled, not this kind of like ever evolving thing. So, um, I think that's heard and I think that's one of the challenges we have now. There was a feature in chat GPT that was released, uh, that was just auto on for every single person. And that would not, that's would not be okay and like a K 12, we would want that off until we made the decision to turn it on and we would want to review that. So those would be the type of processes that we'd want to build out.
But um, there, like I said, we're just looking for like who in that space can be our thought partner to kind of help us through those processes. And that would be part of the before, before a tool got to students. Like that would be part of the things we would want to consider before we reach that tool. I guess I'm, and I appreciate that context. I'm just thinking about in terms of policy language, like how do we clarify those multi-layered steps in a more concise and clear way with definitions or, I think this, as much as you are saying, we are catching up to the work we've done, I think we're at that point now with actually making decisions about usage
of tools that we don't quite know yet. Okay. So like we are engaged in pilots where we're trying specific tools and that's gonna inform how we're managing and reviewing decision making. I would offer a suggestion. We recently, um, shared back in the fall when we were talking through the instructional technology guidance, we developed a regulation for selecting online instructional resources tied to our, um, supplemental resource policy. Um, I can envision adding a section to that regulation specific to ai if that's something that, um,
would be warranted once we go through this process of kind of making some decisions about tools we're putting in place specifically for, for students. Yeah, I like that idea. Is that what you're Yeah, that, I mean that sounds good. I think again, it is evolving, which is kind of the issue. Um, also, is there a place where we can link the guidelines? Like I would that be in the regulation to have a cross reference to the guidelines? Is that already in guidelines For ongoing? Just we've developed in general or for the AI use. Okay. Principles, the guiding principles, sorry. Well, the guiding principles are in the policy.
Are you talking about for when we're selecting a tool? Yeah. But didn't you guys present like a big document that kind of had all of that in there? Is that just all transferred into here now? But you're asking is there a place where we put the guiding principles? I mean, I see them in the policy. I'm guessing that first part. I think Mike, Mr. Hendrickson knows what I'm talking about. Sorry. Sorry. I think, uh, we, we do have the generative AI guide, which which we developed this year. Yes. Which is, you know, this year, which is, you know, 10 pages full of content and, and um, guidance and um, a lot of what is in these regulations and policies is pulled, pulled from
There, from from there. That's the document I'm thinking. Yeah. So so your suggestion is to find a way to link that, that guide or reference that guide in in some of these regulations? Yeah, because it's a much broader approach and I think that that would help people feel like, wow, they really have done a lot more work around this. Whereas this feels, I think to parents, this might feel a little bit like thread bear. It's just the basics, right? But we have a lot going on, so I would love to see that work like linked into here. Even though some of it's pulled from it. We could do that. Um, we do pub we do have
that published on the instructional technology website in case you wanted to share it. Yeah, we did share it at Leaf, but Okay. I think people wanna see it in combination. Okay. We Could think about How that fits in. Just note. Great. I do not have anything else. Um, I'm looking forward to hearing from CAC as well as, um, other feedback comments. Can you remind me of the date that this is open till for feedback? So feed the feedback process has closed it closed on the 28th. Okay. Above course they can send in a Let's talk. Okay. Or an email. And we're happy to receive additional feedback.
Um, and we are anticipating the feedback from CAC and then staff will get to work so that we're ready to present a final recommendation at the May CNI meeting. Sounds great. Alright. I so appreciate it. Thank you guys so much for your work. We will move on to item 4.02, Virginia assessment language and literacy screening SY system vows for grades four through eight. Uh, we have Mr. Jeff Rounds, the director of teaching and Learning presenting. Joining him is Dr. Michelle Picard, supervisor of Secondary English Reading and Writing. And I think standing in for Ms. Catherine.
Neil is who is the supervisor of early literacy. Elementary reading is Mr. West Strayer and West. You'll have to remind me of your title. It's not in board Docs. I am the Early literacy specialist. The early literacy specialist floor is yours. We are here this afternoon to talk about, um, the current state of vows and the Virginia Literacy Act and LCPS and the extension that is coming next year, uh, to grades four through eight. Currently, this is K through three. Next year we'll expand into the upper elementary grades and also middle school as well. Before we get started, I want to thank Dr. Picard and Mr.
Strayer and the rest of their teams. Ms. McQuillan, who's back here for the really proactive work they've done in helping our schools, um, get ready for this change that's coming next year to communicate early with principals and reading specialists and our teachers. And there's a lot we don't know. So there's part of this presentation tonight you're gonna to hear is, is information we don't know yet, but, um, they've been really, really proactive in thinking through how we might approach it and how we might best support schools. So I'm gonna turn it over to Dr. Picard and Mr. Strayer to walk us through, uh, the changes for vows for next year. Fantastic. So, um,
Our goal really is to inform the subcommittee of what's gone on, um, in the past year with the K three and looking forward. As he said, we've been really proactive with how the VS assessment is going to be implemented in grades four to eight because it will not look the same as it does in the K to three. We also wanna provide in complete transparency what is known and what is not known. And you will see that there are a great many things that are not known, but we're a very proactive organization. And so we're thinking about those implications and we wanna share them with you tonight. So just as a reminder, here are four different components
for the Virginia Literacy Act. The first one was the K eight teachers as well as high school reading specialists. Were are currently participating in an online course called The Science of Reading. That actually happened last year at the elementary level and then it was opened up, um, this year. So that is, that is going on and will come to a completion at the end of this year. And then they'll probably, most likely, we've been told, be a cycle for new hires. The second piece is the one we really wanna talk to you about tonight, which is the implementation of vows. As a reminder, that's the Virginia Assessment of Language
and Literacy screening system, and that is in legislation as a K eight initiative. The third, and I know you're familiar with this again, but I think it's helpful to bundle these ideas, is that we should all in the state of Virginia be using research-based interventions that is connected to the vows as students that are identified as high risk. So until this point, it was very much the school system's purview who received intervention based on multiple data points. We'll talk a lot about that. Now. We have a very clear red line.
If you are indicated as high risk, then of course you're going to be afforded the opportunity to be in a research based intervention. And then lastly, the law does require the documentation of student reading plans or interventions and that progress monitoring be part of that. So all of these ideas, especially the bottom three, are interwoven into this evening. We wanted to start off with what we do know about the VOWS assessment for the, um, grades four through eight. So we do know that vows for four through eight will be administered in the fall. We know that it will not be a universal screener.
Um, there will be a subset of students that will be assessed according to the criteria. Um, but that has not yet been established by the VLP or the the VDE. Um, and so what are the implications of just that piece? Schools will need a new plan for the administration of vs. Um, specifically the one-on-one assessments. Um, that is something that, as Dr. Bacard and I were talking is a little bit newer to middle school level. We have those structures at elementary, but not so much at the middle school level. Um, staff and grades four to eight will need to also be trained in how to give the assessment. Additionally, we know the VLA requires the implementation
of the research based intervention and a student reading plan for all those that are identified as high risk, um, on vows. And we're already using those interventions, those programs, and there's been ongoing professional learning and support for the implementation of these approaches. So we feel really confident in that. What else we know is that LCPS will be required to develop and progress monitor those student reading plans for identified students. Um, we have an electronic monitoring system already in place with the MTSS module and the student reading plans. Um, and we know that there's additional work that will include the professional learning on plans
for grades four to eight and just how that data is all gonna be synchronized. There are, however, a great many things that we do not know if we can go to the next slide. So the first is we do not have the criteria. The VLP is currently engaged in a pilot with grades four to eight. And that pilot will not end until quote the end of the school year, which for some systems is May and for some systems is June. So we are not really anticipating a full download of information until the summer months. So if you don't know the criteria for how many students are gonna participate in an assessment,
it's challenging to plan what that assessment, um, model will look like. Um, we're gonna talk to you about things we've done to prepare and to be proactive. You're gonna leave feeling really great, but we do not know this at this time. Um, the window for assessment, we assume, we hope that it will be similar to the one at the elementary level, but that is, that is still information we're waiting on how long the administration of the vows will take per student. Um, at the middle school level specifically, it's usually like a soccer game. You start and you end and it's an hour and it's done.
But this is probably more like baseball. You play nine innings, it may take a short amount of time, it may take a long amount of time. So that's a really important piece of information that we are waiting with. Now, the implications are to develop testing teams and you'll hear more that we are starting to do that at the middle school. Elementary is, um, definitely more flexible with that and has had that experience pre previously, where also an implication is that middle schools should and are being as proactive as possible as our grades four to eight into scheduling kids
that we already know from multiple sources of data require an intervention. So that's, that's part of our jobs that that's been going on for decades and decades and decades. So we're talking about being very proactive with spring data so that, um, we will not have to make, um, a myriad of rescheduling decisions. We'll, we'll talk a little more about that. And then the last two, and I don't mean to gloss over them, but we don't know the accommodations for students with learning disabilities or for English language learners. Now we do have all the K three guidance and we can make some assumptions about that
and you'll hear later in the presentation we have, um, given space and time for that. But we really need that guidance because it will look different. For as a quick example, uh, a read aloud accommodation is a common accommodation for testing, but it wouldn't make any sense to give a reading accommodation if you're testing a student's ability to read at the middle school level or higher. So, and then lastly, we're not sure how the staff will be trained. It has been implied and we are preparing that it will be an online module,
in other other words, downloadable, something that you could go through at a self pace. We are already making plans to use some of our August countywide professional learning days to provide that training. And so that is, um, under consideration. So those are the things we don't know. Now I'm gonna turn it back to Wes and he's gonna talk about how proactive they've been at the elementary level, and then I'm gonna talk about how proactive we've been at the secondary level and we'll all feel okay. Um, so, um, at the elementary level, um, we do feel very well, uh, prepared to roll out vows
for grades four to five. Um, all of our elementary schools are proficient with using the universal screening data that's, um, provided from the VOWS assessment. Um, while adding the vows assessment to the upper grades will be a little bit of a new process in terms of how do we use this data and how does it interact with the other data sources we already have, such as map, for example. Um, that process will be new, but teachers feel really fluent with administering the assessment or administering assessments, I should say, um, in this way to their students. Um, we have testing teams that are in place to support students and teachers as needed.
Schools feel really good about how they might use their EL teachers to support their special education teachers to support, um, whatever that might look like. In terms of organizing the testing itself, um, we are very fortunate at the elementary level, we have daily intervention time built into our master schedule. So in addition to their ELA minutes that they get, um, or that they're allotted, they also have an additional 30 minutes that is dedicated to intervention. So when we are starting those interventions with our fourth and fifth grade students, um, we are already rolling that out. It'll just look a little bit different because vows is gonna give us some of that new information,
um, and we feel well versed in data collection and progress monitoring for students. Uh, next slide please. Um, and so as we get closer to the implementation of vows for the fourth and fifth grade, um, we just kind of wanted to share a little bit about what we're doing to kind of get as much information as we can as quickly as we can because we, we recognize that a lot of this can be really time sensitive and, and teachers want to know, um, kind of what to anticipate. So, uh, we do attend biweekly office hours. Those are hosted by the VOE, um, and the VLP offices.
Um, and we listen to see what can we pull from that to be able to share with principals and reading specialists in a really timely manner. Um, we're considering the implementation impli implication, excuse me, um, of vows on the decision trees for grades four and five. So having that additional data source is definitely gonna have a little bit of an impact on those decision trees. Um, and so we're working with the MTSS office and those and, and, um, those teams to kind of see what that might look like. Uh, we monitor the updates from the VLP office regarding the availability of the training. That is something that we've been asking about.
We've asked frequently about just when will we know what this is gonna look like and when we can anticipate this. Um, and then finally, we're just considering the additional materials that will be included in cycle four. Um, so cycle four is, um, they're gonna do another list of the recommended supplemental and intervention programs. Um, and we, it has been shared that we can anticipate that sometime in October of this year. So now we're gonna transition to middle school, which is definitely, um, a different ballpark. Um, it, it genuinely is. So we wanted to be as proactive as possible,
but we've had so little data. We also participate in, um, some of the meetings that Wes was talking about, but it's all been K three, K three, K three K three. So we have very little information. I mean, we've shared what we know and what we don't know, but what we did do is, um, I met with a subgroup of principals and talked about this really important aspect of the VLA, specifically, the implementation of VS. And intervention is coming. And then that group helped us to form us being my office as well as MTSS as well as special education EL.
It was a very broad based, um, committee that put it together. And then I facilitated over 60 minutes. Um, with, with principals it was very productive because we broke it into three different components. So we would say, this is what we know about administration and then we let them work with their peers. What could that look like at your school? This is what we know about intervention, what could that look like? And then lastly, the documentation. So that was, um, we got a lot of really positive feedback. Um, Mr. Slevin was there, um, Mr. Rounds was there. We had Dr. Tyler there. It was very broad based,
and so people left feeling not overwhelmed, but okay, we've got some challenges coming up. And so we did that. One of the things that came out of that is they asked, um, the office to turn that information around as awareness for the middle school teachers. So we made a, um, a narrated PowerPoint, uh, I'm sorry, yeah, narrated PowerPoint. So it's 15 minutes of me talking over slides, explaining to them very much like I just did with you, what we know and what we do not know. And then giving them, um, some next steps.
What we anticipate doing from here. Obviously we want your feedback and we want, um, to inform you, but we will also have spring, they're called lead meetings. So EL meets with leads, students with disabilities meet English and reading salts, which is a subject area lead teacher. Um, we have access to them. So as we get information, we will be fielding questions and preparing them just as we did with the principals. We also already made the commitment to the, the middle school principals and many assistant principals
that we will use the August County wide day. And when I say we, in this case, I mean the English, um, office, the secondary English office, we will, um, provide time and we'll provide support so that whoever needs to be trained, whoever it's decided is on this testing committee. And that might be more than English. That might be a social studies teacher, it might be an EL teacher. It might be a, a, a special education teacher that we will provide some support around the professional learning. And then on the last slide for this section, um,
we have also, as you heard Wes talk about, we've, we've put out draft MTSS decision trees. How does this data help us make decisions? And, um, we will have ongoing, we'll have an ongoing professional learning plan across the year about the use of the data. So that is, um, where we are, the takeaways we want you to take away here are the takeaways I shared with the principals and, and all of the land is that this is, we are well positioned to handle the administration of the new assessment
and to handle research based intervention and student monitoring. We have, um, and, and Wes alluded to many of these things, I've alluded to many of these things, but we have strong CLT structures, we have strong assessment protocols for multiple sources of data we're already using. And you'll see the last few slides have just been added for your own, um, a access. But the state has put out the recommended, um, research based interventions. I don't believe they've been voted on yet, but the, all of the ones that we're using are up for approval.
So for example, re 180, Lexia Core Power Op Core, um, and other language live. So we're already using those research-based, um, intervention programs. And equally importantly, teachers already know how to use them. I feel very, I feel great sadness for a district that is gonna be adopting an assessment, an intervention, and the professional learning all at once, that that's not the case for us. One of the hiccups is scheduling. And as you heard Wes talk about they have an intervention block. Of course it's shared with math.
It's not, it's not a perfect solution, but it's certainly something that we can lean into. We do have intervention courses in grade seven and eight, not six. Um, but we're leaning into that. And then of course, we have this robust MTSS, um, monitoring system where we can keep student reading plans that's being streamlined. And we've been working, um, not only to streamline it, but to make a lot of progress monitoring data asynchronous. So it just gets, it gets uploaded to lift the load from teachers. So with that, um, we'll open it for questions.
You'll see the last three slides are simply what the VDOE has recommended recently in terms of intervention for the middle grades and, um, resource link at the bottom. Thank you so much. Uh, colleagues, questions or comments? Sure. I think this group of middle schoolers are the first group after Covid in terms of reading. Um, so even some of the students who are maybe advanced in other areas may need help here. Um, parents are pushing more
and more for their students to start those high school credit courses, especially in math, in middle school. Will there be any time taken away from those high school credit courses for these assessments and interventions and No, we would not anticipate that. Um, when you think about the assessment, it will most likely be a day, and again, this is speculative, but given, well, given a great many years of experience with assessments at the middle school and the elementary school, it will likely be a group administered assessment. So, for example, you read something
and you answer questions, and then that will, um, that will trigger, oh, Michelle needs a sub assessment on something. Right? So, so there will be some individualized testing. That testing most likely, I mean, schools will have a lot of latitude, but for example, a testing team could decide to pull students from a study hall and do those individual assessments. They could decide to have a day where that is happening. And there's, um, enrichment going on for the day.
So there are many ways that we can handle it, but it will not affect your participation in advanced classes. Okay. Or, or other classes. Right. Okay. It's a great question. Dr. Rashid, Thank you Chair. I just wanted to see if you anticipate any challenges with the educators in terms of, I don't wanna say training, but in for their support for this, if you anticipate, um, any cutout time for them to kind of like to, to, to get comfortable with it, if I may. So when I said that it's a different, um, ballpark for middle school, it just, it's a,
it's a different experience. I will tell you that our English educators are amazing and our reading specialists are amazing and we're incredibly proactive. So I anticipate that there'll be a small learning curve. And I also anticipate that this will be an opportunity for EL teachers and students with disability teachers and classroom teachers to come together deep in their understanding of what these assessments mean for kids in their classrooms. So is there a learning curve? Absolutely, a hundred percent. Um, our job in central office, in my view, is
to make life easier for teachers. And one of the ways that we're doing that is by providing time that we, you know, we talked about the August, we will provide the time and the support and the structure so that they are completely comfortable. Does that address your question? Yes, it does. Thank you. Thank you, uh, so much. I, I'm gonna start with the positive. Um, one thing that I know LCPS is well equipped and ready to do is take on data, analyze it, and use it to drive instruction. We are blazing the trail there.
I feel very confident about that. And um, Mr. Strayer, I really have very few worries about elementary. I think we're built for this. The structures are there, the teachers know, and I actually think this adding this component into the data set is gonna be really beneficial to identifying kids that are continuing to have foundational gaps. And so I see this as a real plus for grades four and five. I think that it will be well received. We've done the legwork on MTSS and I really have very, very little fears.
So, yay you, um, onto middle. I, um, I feel like we've had some very timely conversations recently that kind of all lead into this. One is master schedule and different kinds of piloting schedules. And I think, you know, having that conversation now as we prepare to take on a new literacy curriculum and new assessments and more intervention, um, I think we're queued up for having those conversations here, um, to allow for more flexibility and scheduling so that flex time and MTSS and resource are used to their maximum capacity to meet student need.
Because like Dr. Dean said, I do think that these kids are, we're seeing needs that we've never seen in years past. It is unprecedented and the gaps are real for a multitude of reasons. So I think that was a timely conversation. We've had staffing conversations. I will be a little, I'm a little worried if I'm being honest about reading specialists. You know, we have one in our middle school, like the ratio is high. And so this makes me a little uneasy in terms of staffing and, and I know you're saying testing teams, so I, I know it's not just gonna be them, but I'm imagining that teachers will have to step up
that have never previously given one-to-one assessments, might have to step into this in a way that they never have before. So I know you will support them. It's just, it's another lift and it's another shift. And so I think that that's, um, something to name for them as well as I, and I'm gonna say it, and you know, I'm gonna say it, I am so worried that this is gonna end up being everybody do one-on-one testing because we have Lexi and we can put kids on a program. I know that in elementary sometimes that's the only way
to get it done, you know, there aren't always extra people in the room co-teaching. And so sometimes kids end up on different programs to get, just to get it done because it is the nine assessment. It's a lot. So I, I'm glad we have those structures in place for teachers. I don't want that to become the default. And so I'm just putting that out there. Um, I know we've talked about it before and I think it, it also was a good conversation for us to have before this one. So I, I'm looking for some balance there. And, and you know, I don't, you, there's a lot you don't know with logistics, so we don't even know how many kids
and how much time, so I don't think that that's a fair thing to, you know, put on you yet. But I'm gonna let you speak to it, but I just, that's my biggest worry is because that is instructional time, lost reading, time lost, and I wanna make sure that we are doing what is best for students and still getting books in their hands. That's a lot. And I appreci and I appreciate it and I appreciate that this is a conversation. So, um, I am not worried about the time it's gonna take to administer the assessment. I will tell you, we will, I think about how the WIDA is administered. I don't know if you've ever had the privilege of, of administering a WIDA test,
but in my previous, my previous life they would train central office people and we would go and do the one-on-ones, the one-on-ones for kids. Um, at this level, uh, they're, they're gonna be quick and they're gonna be, well, teachers are gonna be well-trained. I'm not worried about the identification. Um, I am, and I'm just gonna underscore again, I'm very hopeful that this will strengthen teachers' understanding of what it means to be a proficient, critical thinker, reader, be in all areas. And then with regard to intervention,
we do have significant gaps. Um, and, and we're doing a lot of things as you know, we have a word study initiative. We've adopted, um, the use of Lexia power up. We have reading specialists. We have an increase in the number of reading specialists that are serving the secondary community. We are a very well resourced, um, division. I will say that, um, the beauty to getting Lexia in the last year and a half is that teachers at the middle school, remember that Lexia power up is both supplemental and intervention.
So in the intervention component, we really prioritize the in-person component, as you would expect. And the use of that platform has been very, very beneficial. And we will have more to share with you at the end of the year on that. But the other piece that's happening is that teachers are seeing it as a bolster to core as well. So if you need to teach a grammar lesson, they have like 32 different videos. So teachers, I feel very happy that teachers have had a year and a half to get very comfortable with what are the resources in Lexia power Up while taking a
course on the science of reading. Understanding explicit instruction matters, sequence matters, reading robustly and having opportunities for conversation matters. I feel like this is a really incredible opportunity for the middle school as a unit to understand more of that. Um, I am a little worried about numbers in the schools that are upside down triangles. You know, I think you've heard that expression before where there are more kids that are, have gaps than don't. And so one thing we are exploring is we could,
and this is just draft thinking, we have not made any steps toward it yet, but my team, um, my small team, and we could invite friends. Um, we could invite friends to go to a school like Sterling where we expect there's gonna be a lot of assessment and support the assessment. So it's not just the teachers. So those things are going to evolve as we get more information. We looked at, um, students that failed the standards of learning in sixth, seventh, and eighth grade, and we saw what I've just alluded to, which is, some schools it's not gonna be a heavy lift. And then other schools, it's a very heavy lift
to get that information. So I share some of your concerns, but I have nothing but optimism about the use of this data. I just wanted to, to add to that, the concern around staffing, which I think we share. There's not enough reading specialists for sure, but I know that, uh, Dr. Picard has been really strategic in how we place those reading specialists looking at multiple points of data. I think we have a good idea of where more support is needed. And I've been a part of some of these conversations with her, um, already of thinking about where we can place more staff. How can we be strategic in making sure we're fully allocating staff to schools where we know there's gonna be more support needed.
Because as Dr. Picard just mentioned, there are schools where we know that a singular reading specialist can probably handle. Um, we would love to have more, but we could probably handle the task in front of them. And places where, uh, Dr. Picard has been strategic in making sure there are some additional supports and reading specialists available to help those schools with some of the work that they're going to be asked to do through this. Well, I really appreciate all of that. And I actually really love seeing elementary, middle sitting together and tackling this problem together, or this challenge, I won't call it a problem, um, because I think that there's a lot to learn on both sides.
I, you know, I've always thought that as middle schools kind of carrying this load now, like elementary has a lot of good structures in place to handle intervention. And so some of that pressing in I think is really, you know, gonna be beneficial. And so it kind of just happened that way 'cause it's four to eight. But I'm happy to see that and look forward to the update and, and hope that VDOE actually gets us the information we need. That's my plug for the day. All righty. Anybody else? Okay, let's move on to thank you very much for coming. Thank you. Let's move on to item 4.03, policy 54 40,
the literacy plan. And our presenter is Mr. Rounds, uh, director of teaching and learning. Thank you. Alright, so, uh, we are here to talk about a new policy policy 54 40. Um, this is a policy that is a part of the legal requirement around the Virginia Literacy Act. And the policy that we have drafted here tonight is, uh, very closely drawn from the VSBA model policy. I'll just take a minute to walk through the, the parts of the policy and then happy to answer any questions, um, for this information item. So in section A, you'll see the vision for literacy. The vision for literacy is pulled directly from
our division literacy plan. Um, that was language that was developed collaboratively among many groups several years ago when we first submitted the plan. So that comes directly from the, the plan as it currently exists in section B, the required components of the division wide literacy plan. This also basically, um, is a word for word reading from the Virginia Literacy Act of the seven pieces that are part of the Virginia, sorry, of our Divisionwide literacy plan. Um, and finally in section C, these are also requirements from the Virginia Literacy Act of how we make the public, um, aware of our plans
and aware of the staff that are present in our school division to enable this. Uh, it also covers in the second section around how this is submitted, sorry, in part two of section C, around how the plan is submitted to, um, to the VDOE BI-annually for their approval and their feedback as well, which is a process we have engaged in previously. So really this puts in place a lot of things that are already present, um, and puts it into our, our policies and really, I hope affirms the importance of literacy as essential to, uh, the work that happens in teaching and learning at LCPS.
And we're happy to answer any questions that you might have or, or comments on the draft Colleagues. Go ahead. So when would you submit this and when will you know that it is approved? You don't know. So the plan is the plan has already been approved. Okay. Um, what this policy does is just capturing policy, what we, what our requirements are related to the Regina Literacy Act. Okay. Um, so we at this point we've actually submitted twice. Okay. Okay. I'm good. It's on our website. You didn't know about some other things. I didn't know if you didn't know about this too. Yeah.
And we will submit a new plan, um, in June, which will cover what we just talked about, the addition of grades four through eight. And then we will get feedback from the state, make any corrections that they, um, suggest. And then we will have our, our new plan. Okay. So a new plan will be coming later this year. Okay. I have no questions or comments. Mark it down. Looks good to you guys. So we Do, we do plan to send this out, the feedback. Okay. And when we, um, have the necessary feedback, we'll bring it back for action. Sounds great. Okay. Thank you all so much. Alright, we will move to item 4.04, review
of policy 50 70 field trips. Um, presenting Is Mr. Ferry Ms. Yes. Ms. Mitchell joining you or no, she's in the back. She's in the back. She's consulting. So policy 57 field trips is under its five year review. Um, one thing I do need to apologize for, the red line version actually did not, did not actually capture number under letter A five, six, and seven. Those should be in red. Um, they were not in the previous, um, policy, so
I'll make sure I correct that. But under this five year after the five year review, one of the things we did notice and identified is we added additional definitions. We never actually clearly defined what an international field trip was. The other definitions we added were aligned with how we, uh, the language that we, that staff members in transportation uses when we're entering uh, field trips. And uh, trip finder is the application in which we use. And the other um, red line item that was not captured is on page three under
letter C, which I, again, I apologize. I don't know why. Um, it used to read the Department of Instruction and now it is the department of school school leadership. There are no other changes than the ones I just, uh, identified and I'm available for any questions if you have them. Thank you. Um, colleagues, did you have any questions about this? You're good. You want me to kick it off with mine? Yeah, please. Okay. It's yours. Thank you. Oh, you're good. Um, I just wanted to, I, I think I need to spend a little bit more time looking at
the regulation too because some of these things may be in regulation, but I am having a hard time understanding the, the difference in the nuances of field trips that are in school during the school day, regular field trips and then the field trips that are endorsed by maybe boosters or where you're off at a competition and you're representing LCPS. And I know Riverside just went and marched in a parade in London and I see international is in here. Um, but I'm also wondering about weather because this winter
and last winter for certain field trips including all county chorus and then there was a theater competition, it seemed like there was some, there was a lack of clarity maybe around whether or not if you can physically get there, even though school is closed, can you go and can the teacher go and sponsor just a lot of questions swirling around whether and non official, I don't know, are those official? I guess my first question is, are those official LCPS field trips, if they are not within the school day,
are they still considered LCPS field trips? If they're, if they're competing and representing their school, they're considered LCPS field trips and we enter, we, we call 'em NTNs. Okay. Um, which means no transportation needed because it's parent driven, but we still enter those, there's, they're still representing our school division, um, in those contests, which also represents a staff member being present and being a either the sponsor or the coach of the event. And I think the events that you're referencing, Yeah, and I think it's, to me those would then adhere
to LCPS policy and weather procedures. Correct. So if there's a closure, they would then not go Correct. Um, there are circumstances where the superintendent or Mr. Lewis and them have allowed travel. Um, and we might, I, I can speak to, in previous years we've uh, sometimes we are not able to meet on school property just 'cause the lots are not clear. But we'll meet uh, at an off uh, site location to pick up students to be able to take them to, this is only for like state level competitions that aren't canceled.
But there have been some exceptions in the past that's not identified in policy. We don't typically in field trips, even in the regulation we don't reference weather, but we can, um, the regulation is actually under review as well. Yeah, I think weather is important to address. I mean especially given the size of LCPS, I think when we cancel school for maybe something, uh, you know, an ICE event that happens in the west, but you know, by 10:00 AM everybody's thought out and then those kids wanna go and compete. Say it's, I think it was on a Friday and I believe it was a theater
competition is what I'm referencing. And some schools decided they were gonna go and other schools there were sponsors that said weather school's closed, I'm out. So they didn't get to go. Um, so I think we do need to draw some lines there and have some information about how that's related to cancellations in different things when it's not based in Loudoun and they feel like they can safely get there and also help teachers and educators that are sponsoring those events to understand what their role is. Because I think there was some pressure maybe to feel like, oh I have to go and maybe put myself in a situation
where maybe I don't feel safe, you know, see where I'm going with this. So I think there's some gray area with this and I would love to see us kind of tighten up that language or create that language. Can I ask for clarity, would you want to see uh, a, I guess a LA language regarding weather and policy or in, in regulation? I think I'd be fine with it in regulation because then you can change it more frequently rather than go through the formal review process. And that's why I said I haven't really looked at the regulation in depth. But, And the other part is, uh, while some of these are transportation matters, you know,
we do have a number of, um, events on school sites that aren't related to transportation or requiring transportation. So that would need to fall under either a different policy or regulation if you understand. Um, yeah, like, like for example, um, blue Ridge is having their theater um, production this week and that is a situation where we wouldn't, typically, we don't provide any transportation. People show up, but we close our campuses, which means those events can occur. Um, would you, Yeah, I think we should flush some of
that out is what I'm suggesting. Okay. Or asking and I mean we can talk to the committee as well. I mean I'm kind of springing this on you guys, but um, I just, I think that there is a lack of understanding from the public what their role is when they can go and who is involved in, in those different circumstances. So if we could outline that. Well the reason I mention is we're also right now revising regulation 83 50, which is student activities. So it might be a chance to capture like what happens when school campuses are closed related to SS school sponsored events
or activities that are related to students. So we might be able to capture in both areas. Colleagues, did you have any questions or comments? Uh, Just, um, I guess a question maybe I couldn't find it. I see the section on safety, um, for section E and I just was looking more for, I guess tightening up the language, um, in regards to safe, uh, safety when they're traveling far. Especially in reference to, I guess, um, more of uh, chaperones or, or, or a liability. Something that kind of talks about um,
like if you have a parent and the liability when it comes to a parent, maybe it's somewhere else. Again, if we could just find like a place to make it more, It's in regulation but I could, I could see about moving it here, but it's currently in regulation. Okay. Okay. And still like, um, Ms. Shernoff, I'm still making friends with this policy, but I like that. Yeah. Making friends with it. I steal that. I, uh, tend to agree with Dr. Rashid. And I also am wondering students are expected to adhere to all discipline policies when they're on a field trip.
Correct. So is that cross-referenced or those cross-referenced? I know there's probably a lot, but I, I don't know if that would be appropriate to cross-reference some of the discipline policies just so that it's clear. Any other comments or questions at this time? No. Are we, go chair, are we going to um, review this again at another committee meeting or is this gonna go to the full board for Discussion? So it's information tonight, so it could either be, is this one time sensitive in terms of the end of the school year or anything? It's just on its five year review. Right. Okay. So would you like to recommend that we keep it
as an information item one more time? I think so. I think so too. Especially with, given that the regulation is being looked at and I can do a little bit more homework on that side. Um, we'll keep it as information and then we will, um, move it to action after that. Yeah. Sounds good. Does that sound good? Alright. Thank you guys so much. I appreciate you being here and answering our questions. Thank you. And um, with that we will move on to item number five. Is there any new business? Seeing none. Um, I will adjourn this April 2nd curriculum and instruction meeting. Thank you. Drive safe.