Mr. Harris present. Mr. Hollis. Miss Holland is not present. Miss Holloway >> here. Miss Holloway is present. Miss Melerine. >> Miss Meerine is present. Miss Morris >> here. >> Morris present. Miss Lopez Morgan >> is present. I just like to say you have a porum.
>> Thank you. Okay. First item. >> Your consent agenda is ready for approval. Pulling item 3.2 two and adding items 5.1 and 6.1 through 6.5. >> Okay, we have a motion by Mr. Harris and second by Mr. Burkin. >> We have any you want to
>> any objection? You >> want to go ahead? >> Yes, sir. Uh Mr. Chair, uh if you don't mind, I'd like to motion to move item 7.4 to after item 10.1 on our agenda. >> We already >> Yeah, we need to clear the >> We need to clear the consent agenda.
Wait, what? We've already got a motion on the floor, so take that spin finish. >> You I'm rushing. I'm sorry. You're rushing. >> Thank you. >> Do we have any objection to the motion on the consent agenda? No objection, no comment. The consent agenda stands adopted. Now you can make your motion.
>> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> Um proceeding in an orderly manner. Uh I'd like to offer a motion uh to move item 7 forward to after item 2.1. >> Okay. Uh we have >> Okay. We'd have a motion and a second. Do we have any objection? Do we need a roll call for that?
>> Okay. Uh, no objection to that. That motion stands adopted. Next item. >> Okay. Your next item is 2.1, consideration of a presentation from the Louisiana Center for Safe Schools regarding the Louisiana Statewide Threatad Assessment Outreach Initiative. The recommendation is to receive.
>> Okay. Um, Miss Holloway moves. Miss Champine seconds. Do you want to come on up? Yep. >> Come on down. Good morning. Just hold the microphone as close as you can to your mouth because it >> Okay. >> doesn't work very well. Yeah.
>> Test. All right. Uh first off, I'm uh Jackie Manton. I'm the director for the Louisiana Center for Safe Schools. And good morning everyone. >> I want to say thank you for allowing us to uh present on our uh status of our behavioral threat assessment program. And uh what we're going to do is just
provide you an overview of where we were, where we are, and then where we're going. And at this moment, I would like to go ahead and uh start the presentation with Miss Janice Ehaza. >> Good morning. Good morning, everyone. Uh again, my name is Janice Ehaza.
I am the Center for Safe Schools Statewide. I got you. Okay, great. Use both. I need to use both. I am the Center for Safe Schools Statewide. uh ski safety behavior health program manager. Again, I'd like to thank each
board member for giving us the opportunity to present to you today uh Dr. Broomley. It's been years working with you on school safety. Miss Rosson and her team and especially Miss Holloway. Miss Holloway has been a huge
uh support of school safety throughout the years and personally she have been our mentor. She's watched over us for six years and I just like to take this opportunity and tell you thank you. I don't know what I would have done without you. Thank you very much. The
purpose of our visit here today is uh um is one we'd like to give you a closeout report on the ESSA grant that was awarded last year to provide statewide behavioral threat assessment and management uh um and we call it BTAM
training. And secondly, we want to build on the success and the outcome of the BTAM training and implement the Louisiana statewide threat assessment outreach initi initiative. We already have the funding, but we need you. We
are here seeking your support and your endorsement. Uh what you have in front of you, you have a copy of the BTAM training as a grant closeout report. You have information on our outreach initiative and our focus group outcomes.
You have copies of the BTAM uh facilitator manual and the practitioner guide which can be located on the department of education website. So before I go into my presentation, I just want to provide some clarification. I know what you're looking at. You see
state police all over it, all over it, all over your documents. For almost six years, I've worked with the state police as the school safety policy planner and the grant was awarded to them last year. Effective March of this year, my
position was transition under the center for safe schools where my responsibilities have remained the same and that's to implement the statewide threat assessment in all schools. So, my work followed me. However, we do want to acknowledge the state police for their
years of support with this body of work. So, what is behavior threat assessment? BTM. The primary goal of a behavior threat assessment is to evaluate the difference between making a threat and posing a
threat and developing a management plan. The secret sauce to the threat assessment is the management plan. The threat assessment allows you to identify, evaluate, provide intervention with resources and followup. An assessment without followup and
resources is just that, an assessment. This work is about prevention. If a threat assessment is done correctly, we can help redirect that pathway to violence. We can catch it early in the grieving stages and the
ideation stages and provide resources to the students and their families who so desperately deserved. Next slide. There we go. Okay. So, just to give you an overview of where we've been as uh my director stated where we are and where
we going. This body of work really falls under the 2018 school safety commission. However, moving fast forward, we actually started working working on behavior threat assessment in 2002. So, I just want to give you a little
overview. In 2022 2023, we conducted a nationwide Btown research to identify best practices and evidence-based BAM methodologies and tools. This is what we knew. We did not need to reinvent this tool. or reinvent the wheel. This work
was already being done across the nation and we wanted to find out best practices. We developed nationwide uh partners with BTAM subject matter experts and ongoing collaboration. We conducted a statewide audit on the schools uh of their tools. We wanted to
know what behavior threat assessment tools they were using, whether or not they really knew what a tool was. We developed a statewide mental health resource pool. Uh we also conducted a statewide school safety uh presentations to schools associations, conferences,
training stakeholders. We needed feedback and we also wanted to introduce BAM across the state letting everyone know this is what we're about to enter in. We developed a prevention advisory group with the which is the department of education and of course Miss Holloway
was part of our team. Uh we also uh um conducted the Louisiana school safety initiative behavior threat assessment mental health and grant survey. The purpose of the survey was to identify parishes that were using a BAM
tool and those that were not to help uh determine training needs for BAM to collect mental health resources across the state and to help identify other states available other available grants.
We also developed in 2023 the Louisiana statewide K through2 BAM prevention plan. I want to point out our goals at this time. The goals were to create a statewide BTAM prevention tool to
establish BTAM procedures and guidelines to establish a BTAM statewide training program and also to establish a central reporting BTAM software to collect analytics. In 2023 also Senate Bill 207
was to created the the the the center for safe schools under go which also required that district threat assessment teams be created and provide input to school crisis management and response plans. It also stated in uh Senate Bill
207 is to develop in consultation with the state board of education and secretary education a statewide comprehensive school safety framework that includes a statewide behavior threat assessment model and traumainformed support to students. Next
slide. In 2024, the state police received over $200,000 from you all. Thank you very much. to provide district region uh statewide BTAM training to school administrators, personnel, mental health
professionals, school resource officers, law enforcement, and other stakeholders and partners that may support district BAM 2 in partnership with the principal association. We'd like to thank them. uh from May 2024 to September 2024 using
the best map your map we conducted 11 two-day two-day BTAM training seven of which were foundational training and four were trainer trainer next slide and as you can see from the slides uh as you can
see 415 attendees uh receive Btown foundational training the demographic chart also shows who were in attendance. We were very pleased with the diverse group of attendees. Right? For trainer trainer, these groups were small groups
and we had 107 were trained across the state and again the chart shows the demographic of attendees. Next slide. We're also extremely uh we also receive extremely positive feedback from the attendees regarding the training.
Next slide. So, uh, we provided a little pictures. I wanted to show off my professional photography skills here. So, just give you a little pictures across the state training. Next slide. And here are your trainer trainers
across the state. I'm extremely proud of these folks because they're in their schools right now doing a BAMP training. Uh, they took the extra mile. The prerequisite is that they had to take the foundational classes. Then they came back for two more days to do the train the trainer. So again, thank you to all
these trainer trainers. Next slide. Moving forward, 2025 2026 is the implementation of the Louisiana statewide threat assessment outreach initiative. and support of the BTAM
prevention plan. Outreach will build on the BTAM training to provide to provide uh communication and incorporating traumainformed protocols for threat assessment. Our goals now, I'm proud to
say we are ready to deploy a statewide integrate threat assessment tool and a central reporting mechanism. That's our software. We still need to establish threat assessment procedures and guidelines, but we're also about to implement statewide training programs.
Uh we've completed the training last year. Now we're ready to implement the tools. Outreach is a standardized integrated threat assessment tool and a central reporting mechanism. The software platform is a furba and hippo compliant.
Violence threat risk assessment. Vitra is the violence prevention model that address all forms of violence. That's threats to self and threats to others which also include trauma-informed framework that identifies the pathway to
violence. Outreach also meets the mandates of the safe school safety act 334. Outreach implementation will be rolled out in phases. We have completed of course our initial planning our regional focus groups. We are now initiating the
implementation has been launched which will be rolled out in three parishes. That's Kushu, DInnesota Parish, Tangible Hope which all will be completed by October the 1st. All school districts across the state will be trained and connected to
outreach by May 31st, 2026 next school year with ongoing training for the next three years. Next slide. Uh our focus group review. We are pleased to announce that we announced
that we completed seven focus groups across the state in April May of this year. The purpose was to learn each parish threat assessment processes and gain their input and feedback to incorporate outreach roll out. We had
151 attendees from across the state which included administrators, superintendent, principles, teachers, mental health professionals, nurses, law enforcement resource officers, governmental agencies, community to resource agencies, and that were also
included Catholic, private, charter, and of course public schools. 7 uh7% of all school parish districts across the state provided input and feedback. To gain 100%, we are planning two additional virtual trainings in September and
concentrating on the parish districts that were not in attendance. We'd like to also add that the recent Senate resolution 119 requiring the center for safe schools to implement a system to collect data on suicide risk assessment in all public school. This resolution
has been included in our outreach platform. Uh that concludes my presentation. I know a lot of information has been provided to you in a small period of time, but I just want to point out again that this work is about prevention and
addressing the mental health needs of our students which was support uh with the support we can continue with your support we can continue to build on the success and the foundation that the grant provided us last year. Thank you very much. Any questions?
>> Thank you. Do we have any questions? I I have a question. Um, are there any specific action items uh for Bessie LDOE or the legislature that have been identified in the course of all this work? >> Well, >> for us
>> for us, well, we've worked very closely with the Department of Education on implementing this program and with uh with with the grant last year. There's no specific action item, but our we're here today seeking your support. We found when we're doing these uh uh
implementation that your support you you makes a a world of difference even though we have the funds to do it but we need your support. We need you to tell the uh uh uh the education world that it's okay.
>> Okay. Thank you. Anybody else? Miss Holloway, do you have any comments? >> I just apprec uh appreciate Oh, I'm sorry. >> Thank you, Janice, for your hard work. It's been an amazing journey. Are you asking for an endorsement?
>> Well, what we're asking for your support. >> Support. >> Support. Yes, >> I think. Yeah. Hello. >> Sounds like an endorsement to me. >> I agree. I think I should endorse >> this program. >> Okay. Yes, ma'am. >> Either way, we just need your support.
>> Okay. >> This endeavor and we're hoping by providing you with with the work that we've done over the past year, we're not going anywhere. We put a lot of work into this. We want to see we want to see this program implemented. So, thank you.
>> Hi. Well, I'm Beja Lips Morgan and uh Jackie, I know we sat in a lot of meetings together and so I just wanted to sit here and say thank you as a student. School safety is really important to me and um I'm proud to be on the Louisiana Legislative Youth Advisory Council. So, uh, we helped establish the Center for Safe Schools,
Senator Milligan, and I'm really happy, um, our resolution STR40 was just passed to establish the K through2 school safety task force. >> So, I'm really excited to see our initiatives and I just want to thank you both for your continuing dedication to student safety. >> Thank you. Thank you very much.
>> Okay, any other questions? Miss Holl, >> do we need a motion in regards to support? >> You can make one. We don't need. We don't need one. Are we Let's make one. >> I move that um Bessie
>> endorses, right? Endorses. Oh, I like that word, Janice. >> We have We already got a motion on the floor to receive the report. So, we got to clear that. Any objection to the motion to receive the report? No objection. So, now you can do it. >> Oh, thank you. Um
I'd like to make a motion for um Bessie to support endorse the program. Let me get it right. Behavioral threat assessment and management. >> Um, >> yeah. So, yes, we like you. Yes.
>> Everybody seconded. >> Yeah, >> we definitely like you to endorse that. But our new initiative, we really would like for you to endorse the new initiative. >> In addition, the new initiative >> of batan, >> the Louisiana statewide threat
assessment outreach initiative. Got that? >> Next step. >> Yes. We have a motion and a second. Any objection to the motion? Mr. Burkin, >> how does this brought to the schools each of the schools this this what what you're doing?
>> Yes. Well, we be we will be going to each parish and also providing statewide training just like we've done in uh uh in the past, but right now we're working with three parishes as I said earlier. Moving forward, we will be working all parishes individually because what we
found out each parish work differently. They also have different uh threat assessments and where we're going to start we're going to start where they are. We're going to implement whatever threat assessment they have because the platform is a standard platform. So we will be going to each parish working
with them individually because they're all different. It's like a different world to to to ensure that all parish number one will be connected and provided the training that's needed for outreach. >> Sir, it's going to start with the districts within that parish school
district starting public first and by uh we were mandated by law to provide this opportunity. But understand that I want to make it clear superintendent if they choose not to have this platform they can so choose it. by law. All they have to do is have at a district level a
threat assessment team and they all have them. >> So, yes, sir. >> Thank you. >> I hope that answers. >> Yeah. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Hey, so this is just for clarification. Um, are you guys working with the fusion center? I know Jackie and I, we've been a lot of meetings with GOEP. Is this related to that a lot
>> or No, >> not not not this this wouldn't wouldn't tie into the fusion center. This is strictly for the districts and their their tools here. They don't this doesn't need to. >> Okay. So, thank you. Yeah. So I I work with the Fijian with the state police so I know exactly what you're saying. >> Yeah. Thank you, >> Mr. Gret.
>> Miss Holloway, >> one more um comment. Jackie, thank you from the state trooper division and also a national guardsman. Thank you for your service for what how many years? 30
30 years serving our state. Thank you. >> Yeah, I uh I met Mr. Morris here. I was the uh director for uh youth challenge for years. So they asked me to call. >> Are you saying he was a youth when you knew him? >> Just check it.
>> So I mean thank you for bringing that to the board's attention. Thank you. >> Superintendent. I just want to thank uh Jackie and Janice for their work and also further acknowledge that I just think it's smart that the Louisiana Center for Safe Schools was created. Uh
so that that knowledge and expertise is housed in one location with the ability to coordinate across multiple state agencies. Uh that didn't exist five plus years ago whenever I first came into the role. Um and there was uh it required um
pretty intense uh collaboration to make things happen that are now going to be simplified uh as a result of the Louisiana Center for Safe Schools. Want to also just as I've as I've shared with you uh Jackie uh Steve Guchiani and and Trey Fos they do a lot of the
collaboration representing our agency and so if they can ever help in any way I know they stand ready. Um and then the last comment Mr. Propel is just that I know that the school systems take this very seriously. They've worked very hard and diligently over the last few years to to harden perimeters, move to single
points of entry um and and various u security issues such as that. So, we have some of them in the audience today. And so, I just want to thank them for their work and then also use this as a plug as I always do to uh talk about the need for schools to be safe and orderly
uh both the campus um and the classrooms. Uh provide an environments where teachers can teach and kids can learn and uh encourage system leaders to use the flexibilities of the of of their uh role. and then the statutes, particularly the new statutes that have
been created to promote a further safe and orderly school environment. >> I think you hear from the board since that uh we're supportive of your activities and want you to keep going and let us know if uh there's something that we can do to help. Uh certainly we
want to do that. We have a motion to um from Miss Holloway. Is there any objection to the motion? There's none. Thank you all for coming. We sure appreciate it. >> Yes, sir. Thank you everyone. Thank you. >> Okay, next item. >> Your next item is on page 16, item 3.2,
consideration of requests from local education agencies for waiverss of policy contained in bulletins submitted by the state superintendent of education. The recommendation is to approve as outlined. >> Okay. U Mr. Harris move Mr. Burton seconds. Do we Who's going to present
this? >> Do we have any present? >> There was >> Okay. Yeah. just um wanted to make a comment. These are waiverss that we've received from local school systems. The over the overwhelming majority of these are relative, Mr. Fel, as as I know you
and both Miss Meerine have been involved before are on this waiver of the foreign land requirement. Um and then you have one that's from East Baton Rouge, which is a a longstanding um enrichment experience for kids. And then you have a situation in point cap with a very small
school uh that needs um special education to have an expanded grade band. So uh those are those are two isolated issues uh that we recommend approving and then the the majority of
of the packet are the 43 waivers u from eleas. Now there a legitimate question could be why this year are there more waivers? Um, and I I'll tell you, I I don't think it was because previous to this year, there were many more schools last year teaching elementary foreign
language than this year. I think it's because we did outreach to make sure that systems were aware of this particular requirement that if they weren't um offering the foreign language, they needed to submit the waiver. And so I think that that's what prompted uh more of the waiverss just to make sure everyone was if they weren't
offering we wanted them to be in compliance with policy by making sure they had a waiver in place. >> Well, I think Miss Melan and I both have expressed our interest our belief that um foreign language is significantly important to to education of children.
But that being said, I think uh the state whether it be through the legislature or through Bessie or through the department needs to have a more concise policy on foreign language. So it needs to be looked at in whole and
then we got to come to some conclusion because just giving waiverss all the time and we're just putting band-aids on an issue. uh we really need to resolve whether we want foreign language, whether it's significant um and how we fund it, all the different
details going forward. So there's nothing to do right now other than approve this, but I think we need to to to look at that from that holistic perspective. Mr. Morris. >> Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to just get some clarification on, you know, what is the policy? Um that's
first of all, what is the Bessie policy on this topic? And then secondly, how does statute speak to it? So, could we get some clarification on what the expectations are um at this point? >> Yeah. Uh Tony Liji um and Ashley Townson
can come to the table and provide some information on that. So, some of this goes back, you know, 40 50 years, I believe, in in statute. Um and then some so some of this is statute related and some of this is policy related. And I I agree with you, Mr. Appel. there needs
to be some um streamlining um of what's important and making sure the policy and the law align to what's happening or what we would desire to happen. >> Okay, who wants to go first? >> Good morning. I'm Ashley Townson with the department. So, there are a couple
different requirements. One in revived statute 17272 there's a requirement for eleas to offer five years of French instruction beginning with oral French in the first grade. And then separate from that in Bessie policy in bulletin 741 there's a
requirement that schools offer students in grades four through eight 30 minutes daily of articulated foreign language instruction. So in the statute there's was a provision or it currently exists but it was limited. Um school districts had to apply for an exception to this
statute by 1971. There are seven school districts that had that exception on file. In the Bessie policy, there's a provision that allows for waiverss of policy in bulletin 741. Those are good for one year and can be approved by the board annually. So, while there's no
more exception available for the statutory requirement for offering that French um foreign language instruction beginning in first grade, there is a provision for an annual requirement of the Bessie or an annual waiver of the Bessie policy requirement. >> Couldn't you have said it any better?
>> Like a lawyer shorts. Let let me see if I understand it now that you've laid it out there for us. There's a state requirement and there's a Bessie policy requirement. The state requirement um is a five-year requirement starting in grade one. So
that would be for grades one through five. And then there's a Bessie policy requirement for grades four through eight. Get that right? Okay, great. Okay. So, for the the state requirement for grades one through five, what is the specific
requirement? >> So, it's the way it says it is five years of French language instruction beginning with oral French in the first grade. >> Okay. So, every every every school in the state that has a grade one through
five should be teaching French. Is that right? breathe in in that the LEA offers it. Not necessarily that every school teaches it or that every student receives it, but that LEA is off. >> Okay. Okay. So, if they're just offering it, then you don't need a waiver. You should just be in a position to offer
it. Okay. Got it. All right. And then grades four through eight, that's the Bessie policy. So, can you help us understand again what the expectations are for grades four through eight with regard to Bessie policy? >> Right. So that one in Bessie policy is elementary schools shall offer an articulated foreign language program for
30 minutes daily in grades four through six and then 150 minutes per week in grades seven and eight. >> So so um that is a specific daily requirement that's not all for the class right >> and it's it's schools shall offer a
daily instructions. >> Okay. So there's an expectation in grades four through eight that schools are offering not offering students are receiving 30 minutes of daily instruction to French. Is that right? >> So the fourth through 8th grade it's
that schools offer to students. >> Oh they offer. Okay. That's an offer as well. Okay. >> Right. Just French. It's just world language. >> Okay. And then there was something about seventh and eighth grade. >> Right. It's it's taking it's the same number of minutes. So 30 minutes a day, five days a week in grades four through six. seventh grade, it puts it at 150
minutes per week, which is the same as I think that's because um ele schools may be more likely to do some different things with scheduling. >> Okay. Okay. But again, both the statute and the policy, the requirement is that they offer it. Okay. Not that students actually receive the instruction.
>> Yes, sir. And there there used to be some language years ago, and there's still a piece of it left in there about schools being able to determine whether um foreign language instruction is appropriate, for example, for students with special needs. So there's that provision in there as well, but the requirement is that the schools offer it.
>> Okay. And so uh but only the Bessie policy is subject to waiver. >> Okay. >> Right. The the statutory requirement um there was an exclusion that school systems could um apply for, but they had to do that by the beginning of the 1972
1973 school year. And I have seven districts who requested that exclusion um and were approved by Bessie at that time. >> Okay. And and then uh with regard to why we're receiving these waiverss, um I'm just assuming it's because we we don't
have uh enough French language instructors or is it something else or that and something else or do we know? >> School districts mention several different things whenever they're requesting the waivers. Sometimes the request is um due to a lack of foreign language teachers. Um and so our team
reaches out to them. they offer to connect them with an international associate teacher and they'll talk with them about some of some of the logistics of that program. Um there's there's money that's offered from the state to help fund those teachers, but there's a local um side of that too that isn't always feasible for school districts. So
sometimes a lack of a teacher. Sometimes the school districts mention that they need more time for core subject instruction. they may site test scores or student performance in different subjects and they say that they would prefer to use that time for intervention blocking high dosage tutoring provision
um or additional um time for for four subjects. So those are just a couple of the main reasons I >> So it's basically priorities based on need in that particular school system. >> Yes, that's what we >> got it. Okay, thank you. And my my point is I think this this all misses the boat
that is crafted together over the many decades and it uh what we need to be doing is studying the issue in holistic way. Do we do we believe that foreign language education is significant in the
education of children? If we do, how do we fund it? How do we fund teachers? all these different elements and then go back and recraft legislation that fits the 21st century, not unfortunately the 20th century. Um, so like I say, there's
nothing to be done today, but uh I my suggestion is it's something as we go forward we need to think about, engage the superintendent, gauge the teachers, and figure out what's best for kids going forward and maybe see what best
practices are in other states and other other countries even. Um, so that's all that that was my comments. >> Would this be something potentially Mr. Harris could put on his backlog uh for our legislative committee to consider down the road. >> Well, I think we that might be a step
too far too early. I think we need to we our department needs to decide uh what's the best practices for Louisiana first >> and then we'll get into the legislature. >> My thought was just if it's on his agenda then that's going to prompt uh somebody. It would but but you got to
decide what the big picture is first then then you can design. >> I just want to make sure we have something to ensure we are actually taking action. That's my point. >> Yeah. >> Well, you the president of this board might want to look into it. >> Anyway, thank you all. We have a motion to uh receive the is it to receive these
reports to approve these uh waiverss. Um is there any objection to the motion hearing? No objection. They stand approved. Just wanted to thank Tony for all of his work at the fable. >> Did the heavy lifting. >> Next item.
>> Your next item is on page 67, item 4.1, consideration of update report regarding literacy and key performance indicators. The recommendation is to receive. >> We have a uh do we have a motion to receive? Miss Champan moves. Mr. Harris
seconds. Uh who's going to go first? Mr. Appel uh Dr. Shassan will make the report. Okay, >> please. >> Good morning everyone. Today um I will bring you all updates on our ongoing work around literacy.
So we'll start with um an old slide I'll call it. Our Louisiana literacy pillars since 2021 continue to be the cornerstone of our literacy improvement work and were founded as results of our ongoing action research as well as evidence-based best
practices. They still really revolve around these key core principles around setting and monitoring literacy goals, providing explicit literacy intervention and extensions, developing professional growth and educators, and recognizing
the essential role that families play in each child's literacy journey. Louisiana's comprehensive literacy strategy is working. It's not about one initiative, as you'll see in our presentation today, but it's about how all of our efforts come together to
support students from every angle. We've seen the results in the national data. Louisiana is now the most rapidly improving state in the nation for education. On the nation's report card that was released a few months ago, Louisiana students achieved their
highest overall ranking ever, moving from 49th in 2019 to 32nd today. Louisiana did not just grow in ranking because other states declined. Our increase in ranking is actually due
to an increase in scale score. The most significant of which was the increase in fourth grade reading which grew four points from the 2022 to the 2024 NAPE administration. For more national context on our
literacy progress, I want to highlight a few findings from the education recovery scorecard, a collaboration between Harvard and Stanford. This annual report measures how quickly students across the country are recovering from pandemic related learning loss.
Louisiana ranked first in the nation for reading recovery and second in math when tracking progress since 2019. At a time when many states continue to lose ground, Louisiana students made measurable gains. We're also the only state where the average student has
fully recovered academically. We'll take a moment next to look at the literacy instruction key performance indicators. These indicators include growth on LEAP for third and eighth grade and increase of scale score for fourth grade NATE and
growing the percentage of students reading at grade level as me measured by our statewide literacy screener. I wanted to provide a little bit of context about these KPIs and the difference in the data sets because it's really dependent on what is being measured in the actual indicator.
There's a reason why we have multiple indicators for literacy on each of these. The LEAP assessment is a comprehensive English language arts assessment that tests a student's ability to read, comprehend, analyze,
synthesize, and write about text at grade level during one period of time near the end of the school year. The NAPE, the National Assessment, is a reading assessment. It measures reading comprehension by asking students to read
grade appropriate texts and answers about what they have read. Dibbles is our Louisiana statewide literacy screener. It is a set of short one minute assessments used to monitor early literacy development in students from
kindergarten through third grade. This assessment includes multiple subtests that assess various foundational reading skills such as phmic awareness, alphabetic principle, and reading fluency. And so although we have KPI set on each, you see there's
there's quite a difference from one assessment to the next, which is why we set KPIs for all three of these. Our first KPI is set around the LEAP assessment for third and eighth grade, both of which saw a slight decline this
past year. So, I did think it was important to show all grade levels from third through 8th grade. This slide shows the year-over-year Mastery Plus rate for third through 8th grade. Although some slight decreases are noted for third, fifth, seventh, and eighth,
we did see mastery plus increases for fourth and sixth grade. Overall leap for ELA held steady, indicating that we should look at our overall strategy, including bright spots in the data and how we can better support schools and school systems, which I'll go further
into during the key endeavors. The next few slides will show the graphic representation of our literacy KPIs against the key endeavors. The line graph portion represents the actuals in LEAP from 2023 to 2025
with the dotted line projecting us toward our goal of 50% proficiency in 2028. The bar graph maps the metrics of several key endeavors that we'll dive more into in later slides. The dark orange shows the percent of
students that met the attendance requirement for high dosage tutoring. The teal bar shows the completion rate of the required science of reading trainings for kindergarten through third grade teachers and leaders. And the gray bar represents a future KPI beginning this year for literacy support that we
will be provided to systems throughout the school year. This next slide, this next slide shows our eighth grade KPI. Similarly to the last slide, we have mapped our eighth grade LEAP proficiency actuals and projection toward the goal
on the line graph. The bar graph showed the movement toward our goals and our key endeavors. I will note here on this eighth grade slide that we've seen some decline in eighth grade. However, when we think about the implementation of this
literacy improvement work really beginning in 2021 when we saw the first wave of policy, the first implementation support, our shift to the science of reading, if we think about where this past year, the eighth grade cohort was, they were in the fifth grade. And so
when we think about that, we see that although they have as eighth graders received some of the changes in instruction, in curriculum materials, um some of that science of reading, there were years before that that they weren't
perhaps learning around the science of reading. So I wanted to note that here with this eighth grade cohort. This next slide, um I added it. It's a bit of a throwback slide. Um, I added it in because it's our original goal slide
for literacy. So, before we had KPIs, um, we created this slide back in 2021 and it was based on our 2019 NAPE results and we set what we felt back then and what we still feel today is a
pretty bold goal. And this was in my first ever literacy update presentation back in 2021. and we said that we wanted to look toward a strong national indicator for reading ability. So we looked at the 2019 fourth grade NAPE results and we
said we wanted to grow 10 scale score points and if we grew 10 scale score points that that would lead to a Louisiana ranking in the 20s if other states stayed the same. Now we know at this point other states have not stayed
the same. rankings have, you know, fluctuated due to COVID. Um, but we knew that that 10 points was an ambitious goal, but we really felt like it was achievable based on the policies and the implementation that we knew we could
move in this state. We also knew we were able to look at Mississippi's growth in NAPE and we knew that how they grew over seven years. And this is actually a more ambitious goal than what was seen over that same period
of time in Mississippi. Um especially in light of COVID being in the middle of this goal. So this slide is a new slide showing the same goal we set back in 2021 that's still there, but now we call it a KPI.
You can see back when we set this goal in 2021, we used the latest NAPE data available from 2019 and the scale score then was a 210. It demonstrates the NAPE KPI increase for fourth grade reading.
We saw the first increase in those 2022 results and then we saw another increase in the 2024 result. And you can see by the dotted line that we're actually ahead of pacing towards our 10-point
goal at this point in time. So our goal is by 2028 to increase fourth grade NATE scale score to a 220. This is another new KPI and the reason for this being a new one is you all know
we we worked for quite a few years to implement a statewide literacy screener. Um we knew it would take a long time to go through that RFP process. I know you heard Thomas talk a little bit about that yesterday as we now begin the work
on the the LEAP RFP. We knew that it would take um a significant amount of time, but we also knew that it was absolutely worth it to have a statewide literacy screener in place, not only to give us great data at the state level, but most importantly to give teachers in
classrooms data about the instruction that they were providing to students. And so this KPI is the percentage of students reading on grade level and above by the endofear administration of our statewide literacy screener.
When the baseline was set in 2023 2024, we set a goal to raise the screener endofear proficiency to 70%. That's a 15% growth. Again, we are superseding our goal for this year. We began at 54%
and are already at 64% reading on grade level and above. The next three are just a table showing what I just went over. So the next few slides show some additional data on our statewide literacy screener.
This chart represents the growth from the beginning of the year screener implementation to the end of year during this past school year. Kindergarten through third grade proficiency rates increased 17%. If we think about actual student
numbers, that means that over 17,000 more students exited the school year on grade level and above than when they entered last school year. This is significant, especially considering that the complexity of the screener increases
as the school year progresses. Even students who came in proficient at the beginning of the school year have to show adequate growth in order to remain at proficient. We've also seen significant growth within the past year from end of year to end ofear administration across
kindergarten through third grade. The most significant increase you see here was in second grade which saw a 15% increase. This chart is a good look at our cohorts. growth within each rising grade level not only demonstrates the continued
growth within the past year, but it also shows how each grade level will be starting next year at a higher proficiency level than the previous cohort, leading to a higher standard across the state from one year to the next. All of this growth and all of this work
could not have been possible without our educators in schools and school systems. And so I felt it was appropriate at this time to recognize our top performing and our top improving school systems across the state on our new statewide literacy
screener. We ask them to join us here today if possible. I'll ask them to stay in their row. They've received a banner indicating them as top performing or top growing. We do have some who are being recognized for both today, meaning they are top
performing and they also had the most growth this past school year. So, when called, I ask for you to please stand, be recognized, um, and then you can be seated afterwards. And following this presentation, we'll take photos outside.
We'll start with West Feliciana. St. Charles is being recognized today as both top performing and top improving. Ascension Iberville Blackman's is being recognized today as top performing and top improving.
Vermilion Lasal Vernon is being recognized today as top performing and top improving. Allan is being recognized today as top performing and top improving. and St. Tam.
We also have our top improving districts in the state. Evangeline Madison Grant assumption boer. and Acadia. Thank you all for being here with us today. I have to say my team and I have
been so impressed and inspired by these school systems. Um, in most all cases when we saw the results and we we pulled up these top 10 performing, top 10 improving, we were not surprised because we know the work uh that these
individuals in these school systems and how much they have really embraced change um and really embraced the science of reading practices in their schools and in their classrooms. So um we couldn't be more proud and more inspired by the work that they're doing every day. So I know some of them at the
end of the presentation uh will choose to come up and give some public comment about their um about the work in their systems. >> Thank you. It's really wonderful news and I can't wait to see the same kind of report on numerousy and math. >> I'm not done. >> You're not done.
>> I do have a few more slides if you don't mind. >> Okay. Um do we have any questions from the >> Oh, you're not done. Literally. No, I'm really not done. >> I thought you meant figuratively. >> No, I didn't even I didn't even get to all the good stuff yet.
>> That too. Please continue. >> Thank you, Mr. Pel. Thank you. So, I do have a few more slides addressing some of the the work that we've been doing and breaking down some of the the key metrics on the um the initiatives that we've done in this
improvement work. So, first just wanted to address that, you know, over the past two years, we've been able to administer the statewide literacy screener. Um, and we have seen beginning of the year results for kindergarten, as I'm sure some of you noted, that are quite low.
It shows that many students are entering kindergarten not on level, meaning that they're not um ready to access literacy skills at the beginning of that K year. Um because of this, I wanted to just briefly share the development of a strategic plan for kindergarten
readiness focused on strengthening preK4 instruction in particular. Um and we plan to do this by targeting professional learning. Um really recognizing those bright spots and also taking a good look at policy um and
aligning policy support for that prek4 year. So, wanted to address that about that kindergarten data and let you all know that is something that we're really being very intentional about moving forward. The next few slides highlight some of the >> I want to interrupt just for a moment
just to uh recognize that point. I think that's a very important uh point. Um and I know that our team both the teaching learning team and the early childhood team are um engaged in a number of conversations around this because it's it it truly is concerning. I think our
kindergarten readiness um as indicated on the beginning of the year screener um so the first screener developmentally appropriate of kindergarten students coming in I think it's roughly 28% are K ready you know so these numbers
that you see of of growth um are very positive because the work that the systems are doing under the strategy um that we've all employed is working. But when 28% um is your kindergarten readiness number
on BOI, um that's that's a lot of ground to make up. Um and and and Mr. Appel, I me I interrupt the presentation because I know you've spoken a lot about this particular issue and I just wanted to
call it out um that it's something that has to be overcome. >> Thank you, Dr. Brumley. The next few slides highlight some of the key work that we're measuring against the KPIs. So, these are the bars that are going across the bottom of the KPI slides up
above. Act 108 um from 2021 mandates that all kindergarten through third grade teachers and leaders in public schools complete professional development grounded in the science of reading. Um I still believe this is one of the most impactful pieces of policy to pass in the last several years. We
now offer this course free of charge for all Louisiana educators. We've created our own course called the art and science of teaching greeting. Um and it is asynchronous through our Louisiana professional learning platform. As new teachers enter our K3 classrooms,
they're gaining a stronger foundation in how reading develops. Um, one of the shifts that we were able to make in the last few years was to ensure that our teacher preparation providers really came along this journey with us, which they have in updating their coursework. We've also been able
to update um the practice exam all to align to the science of reading. And so beginning this January 2026, we will have new teachers entering schools across the state, exiting from teacher preparation programs who have
gone through the coursework in the science of reading and taken the updated practice, meaning that they no longer need a separate course after they exit their program. We also have the free program available in perpetuity for those who need it.
However, you see that our goal here is 90%. I just wanted to mention that, you know, this is a bit of a moving target when you think about uh teacher retention rate across the state. When you think about new teachers, we do know that we have places with uncertified
teachers who are simultaneously pursuing a certification. Um those teachers wouldn't be shown as completers yet if they're enrolled in the training while they're teaching. Um, and so we we did feel that 90% was an appropriate goal knowing that that 100% would be a bit
unattainable because we'll always have some teachers enrolled in the training as they're pursuing their certification. The next key endeavor is around high dosage tutoring. We currently support um two main tutoring initiatives. One that occurs within the school day, one
outside of the school day. And we know that research has found that when tutoring is provided at a high dosage and with certain key features in place, it leads to increased learning outcomes for students. So our Steve Carter tutoring program is the outside of the school day tutoring
program. Last year we had nearly 5,000 students receive tutoring in ELA or math kindergarten through 12th grade through this program. And we ended the school year with an additional 8,000 students on the wait list. We did receive $5
million for this program um from the state legislature for this upcoming school year. Um that will be able to continue this program. We're also pursuing some shifts in federal funding so that we can increase the size of the Steve Carter tutoring program for this
year knowing that there is such a high demand with that weight list number. Act 771 of the last legislative session in 2024 put in place a requirement for school day embedded highdosese tutoring. Um it requires all students in grades
kindergarten through five who failed to achieve mastery on a statewide assessment to be eligible for expanded academic support which can be met in two ways. One, these students can be given priority placement in a class taught by a teacher who is highly effective or
they can receive high dosage tutoring from a qualified tutor and that can be LEA staff full or part-time or it could be from an external tutoring vendor should the school system choose to partner with a vendor. Um each year
school systems submit plans by September 15th to the department for approval and then they also complete quarterly reporting. Today um an administration and finance committee will be asking you all to approve allocations for this program for this upcoming year um from
the $30 million state appropriation. These are the metrics on high dosage tutoring. The metric is based on the percentage of students who were identified as needing tutoring and those students who met the attendance requirement for this past school year.
We do have a goal of 100% here. Um, but you can note that 92% of students met the required attendance. Um, it's important to understand that there's a there's a lot of variables that could play into attendance, but also recognizing that this past year was the first year of tutoring
implementation. And so our team here at the department really has a wide range of supports that we offer for tutoring. Um, and we plan to continue offering those uh at an increased rate this upcoming year to ensure not only that attendance that students are attending
tutoring, but also that the programming they're attending is high quality and has an impact on student learning. And finally, this is a new key endeavor um that I'm really excited to talk about today. This is our menu of services. So, as we
look at across at all of our data, um we know that we have policy in place. We have very strong literacy policy in the state of Louisiana. We know now that the quality of implementation is key and we also know that our schools and school
systems need support in order to really make that quality happen in schools. So this year we we will be providing differentiated support knowing that some of our school systems are growing in their literacy outcomes at a faster rate than others.
And so we will offer this menu of services that I believe is now being passed out. And this is a comprehensive catalog of support services that's available to school systems um by the department.
So literacy support can be requested at any times by a school system directly to our team where we can arrange in-person visits to go out at the school system level and at the school system um to help them with their planning and with
their implementation support around any of our key initiative. We did set a goal. Last year, our literacy team was made up of seven members and we were able to conduct 230 support visits.
Through reorganizing our office, we were able to add additional personnel to our division of literacy and we were able to add seven literacy coaching specialists whose primary role will be to work in schools on a daily basis. this year they'll be
able to partner with school system and school leaders around evidence-based literacy practices that are grounded in the science of reading. So knowing that with that much smaller team last year we were able to conduct 230 support sessions, our goal for this year with the expanded team is that we will
conduct 800 support sessions with victims across the state. And our team, I'm happy to report I have a few team members here um led by Shana Bieber, our executive director of literacy. Our team is off the ground and running this school year and already out across the
state supporting system. And that does conclude my presentation. >> Are you sure? >> I'm positive. Thanks, Mr. Pal. I'm happy to answer any questions. And I know we also have some some individuals from the school systems who would like to say a few words through public comment. >> Okay. Any questions from the board? Mr.
Burkin >> on the high dosage $30 million. Um, was all of that money utilized? Were they asking for more than was there? >> It really depended on the system, Mr. Burken. That's a great question. Um, we
really want school systems to utilize that money and use it well, use it with intention. So, that's something our team is uh, you know, continually working with school systems to do. But we have some school systems um who already had really strong practices in place um and
already had some additional personnel to provide intervention and tutoring and they were doing some of that work. And then we had other school systems who um maybe didn't have that extra personnel. They were already pretty tight in their staffing and they absolutely needed an
external vendor or they needed to hire a few extra um individuals to come in and provide that tutoring. So, it really depended on the school system. Um, as a whole, we were able to allocate out the entire 30 million. We plan to do that again this year. Um, today we'll be
allocating uh I believe it's 22 million uh with the goal of releasing the rest of the funds through an October allocation. So the last time we had a school system here with um talking about the high
doses tutoring and they were doing well with it and they had indicated that um when a child gets into that HDT program that usually lasts about 10 weeks. Is that still the I see a lot of nods. Yes,
that's still the case. Um the law that's a common >> the law requires 10 weeks of Oh, it is a crutch. >> It requires the 10 weeks, which is why you hear 10 weeks. Okay. Um I will say many systems went well above and beyond the 10 weeks of programming, especially if they saw that the students still
needed. They maybe did 10 weeks in the fall and repeated another 10-week dosage in the spring. I think that's pretty common across systems is that they'll do more as students need it. Ju just a quick question. Um are we experiencing any problem the shortage of teachers or professionals to to do the
tutoring? >> I think it really depends on the location. >> Okay. >> It depends on the the region of the state. I know that school systems um have become really creative in how they arrange their schedules, how they arrange their staff for this. Um, we do
have over 100 approved providers at this point as external providers. Uh, some in person, some online, and I think we've seen school systems become um, very crafty in how they arrange so that they have the tutors that they need. Um, West
Louisiana is one that comes to mind who's recognized here today. They actually gave them a model of excellence last year for their tutoring program and they partnered with a provider for some of their higher grade levels to do online tutoring for students who they felt could handle uh virtual tutoring experience and then they use in-person
staff for the lower grade levels. And so we're we're seeing that from system to system. If they have a shortage then they lean on that external provider when they're not able to employ the >> and when they're doing the online type of stuff which I could see is very significant. Um, is that at home or is it a school setting?
>> Um, accelerate is completely embedded within the school day. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Okay. Anybody else? I mean, M President Morris. Yeah. >> Thank you. So, first of all, Dr. Jason, just want to applaud you guys uh for the aggressive goals that you set with this.
I recall the conversation we had back in 2021 and asked you guys, okay, well, what's your goal? And and you looked around nationally. He said, "Well, okay, what's the best in the country?" At that point in time, incredibly to all of us, Mississippi was the best in the country. And and we all agreed we could do better
than Mississippi, right? So, so you guys set an aggressive goal. You stuck with your goal. Uh so, I just want to applaud you for that. And then also, we can all appreciate, you know, the joy in the room, all the progress that we've made, the folks in the room have made. We realize some folks haven't got there
yet. Um, I did see we only have a 78% completion rate on science or reading. So, some folks still have a some work to do there, but again, you guys set a really aggressive goal going from 230 to 800 on your support sessions and you uh
developed a new uh key endeavor. So, you got focus there. I appreciate that. Hey, there's a little a different approach we can take to help support those folks that haven't quite got there yet. So, just want to applaud you guys for that and and thank you for your commitment to your goal.
Thank you, Dr. Clark. >> I'm going to continue to advocate for the high schools and the fact that we do not have the opportunity and I know that we have to continue to protect the $30 million in legislation, but I do think that we need to extend it to the high schools to fill in the academic gaps. I
know this year I did try to do my own little low high dosage tutoring on the high school level and I saw an 11% growth in mastery and just dealing with the middle level kids where there are tons of academic gaps because although we're we're taking care of the elementaryaries as they come up, we
still have high school students who cannot read on a first and second grade level. And I ended up paying $55 per four children to get the the tutoring to make sure that they received it. But I did see academic gains. And if it's really about children, we need to make
sure that we are giving it to all children on all levels throughout our schools because it's not happening on a high school level. Superintendent, >> I I just want to respond to Dr. Lart. I think she's um right and I think she's been a terrific advocate in this particular space. Um I do have a couple
thoughts there that I think are relevant. One is with the revised accountability model, with the the increase in the growth piece, I think that and I've heard this from some superintendents that in in those high school courses where they previously
haven't offered that level of tutoring, they're going to begin offering it. Um, which I think is just smart. Um, and then the other thing which you guys will hear about in a later agenda is our pilot uh that we have with I think a dozen systems last year for the spring
around the personalized tutor in those um in those six EOCC courses essentially or the the English and the math ones um with the AI um tutor. So, we're excited about that that pilot that we had too. So, I just want to mention those two things that um could be part of that
conversation as we move forward. But, um, I do think you're right to continue to advocate for that. Um, and I think probably more conversation around that with our team would be good. Um, but we're really excited about our literacy strategy overall.
Anyone else? Okay. Well, we have some folks that do want to speak. Um, Dr. C, let's see. Dr. Ken Erling from St. Charles Parish, Dr. Eron Stokes, and Anne Smith from Vernon Parish. And Dr. Stokes is from Grant
Parish. >> Good morning, uh, President Morris, Mr. Appel, and members of the board, as well as our state superintendent, uh, Kate Brumley. First of all, it's a privilege to sit before you this morning on behalf of St. Charles Parish public schools as superintendent.
um in part to recognize two consecutive years of significant literacy growth placing us alongside the tremendous school systems across our state, many of who represented here today uh that have really embraced these literacy initiatives. Uh this recognition
reflects a focused intentional effort on highquality core instruction and targeted intervention. an effort rooted in equity, excellence, and opportunity of every student or for every student that we serve. Seated behind me today,
uh I'm very proud of the principles of every one of our elementary schools and literacy leaders from across our district. Their presence represents the unwavering leadership and commitment they demonstrate daily that has helped guide this work. And while they are here with us, uh, this award truly honors the
hundreds of educators throughout our classrooms, the support leadership of our school board and the thousands of students across St. Charles Parish who've demonstrated what's possible through commitment, collaboration, and a belief in literacy as a foundation of future success. We're especially proud
to share that every one of our elementary schools showed significant growth with several achieving even more significant gains this past year. That's not coincidental. It's a result of focused literacy work, aligned practices, and shared belief that every student can learn to read at high
levels. Even more meaningful, and probably the most meaningful, as we close achievement gaps across every subgroup. That progress speaks volumes. It means students of every background are not only making gains, but gaining the tools they need to thrive, demonstrating their ability to read and
learn after leaving third grade. This sets each student up to take advantage of our high-quality educational opportunities that empower each to become enthusiastic lifelong learners. We are grateful for the collaboration that has helped make this possible. Thank you to Bessie and the Department
of Education for partnering with us in providing aligned evidence-based supports. We also recognize and appreciate the efforts of our state legislators whose leadership has helped ensure our systems, programs, and resources are working together in service of our students. This
recognition is a powerful milestone, but it's also a reminder what can be accomplished when educators are empowered, students are supported, and everyone is working towards the same goal. Thank you for this honor, and thank you for your continued commitment to achieving literacy and student
success across our great state. Thank you. [Music] >> Next. >> Good morning. My name is Aaron Stokes. I'm the superintendent of Grant Parish Public Schools. And um you might not hear a lot about Grant Parish. We're a
small parish, very rural. We are um the second poorest parish tax dollar-wise, but our teachers do some really great work and um we are just really thankful for the support and the resources that
we've received particularly from the department. Um and you know this honor really means a lot and we want to just recognize our teachers who have worked so hard every single day. our literacy coaches through the CLSD grant that we
received through the department. Um, of course, our district team who's here today. Um, but particularly I just want to again say thank you to the LDOE team. Um, particularly Shana Bieber, Natalie.
Um, when we got u stuck in our district leadership team meeting trying to figure out um what to do next, we would say let's call Natalie. Um, so thank you for that. Um, but really all of those things that Dr. Shasson mentioned, the high
dosage tutoring, the strong core instruction, the science of reading training for our teachers, all of those things made a huge difference and we are proud to stand with many districts in Louisiana who are doing the right thing for our students. Um, there's research
about how, you know, you can move quickly whenever a team has trust and transparency and I believe that we have that in Grant Parish, but we also have that with the department here. Um, we can be honest about our needs and uh, reach out to them and get the support that we need. So, thank you for that.
Thank you for the recognition today. >> Thank you, Superintendent. >> Yeah. I just want to acknowledge that later in your um agenda, you'll see a recommendation from me to you for u superintendent Stokes to be named to the accountability commission as the
superintendent's representative. So when you see her name, if you didn't aren't already familiar with her, that is superintendent Stokes. >> Now we know what you look like. >> Okay. Next. >> Good morning. I'm Ann Smith from Vernon Parish.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank you for this honor. But this honor really is, as the others have said, dependent on a team effort with every child every day. Whatever it takes.
It takes teachers with heart. It takes administration. It takes RTI teams, parents, stakeholders, everyone involved in education,
especially at our K3 levels. Our goal in Vernon Parish is for every student to be on grade level in reading by the time he or she exits third grade. We say every
student. We have a team, a literacy team that has vision, focus, and a goal. I heard the state with 73%
at at grade level in reading by the third grade. Our goal is 85 at this point. We really are pushing to a hundred with individualized reading goals for
every child so that no matter where you are, we identify weaknesses, we develop a plan, and we have a team to work toward meeting those individual reading
goals for those students. I could not do this without the superintendent and the assistant superintendent who's with us today giving us the autonomy to do what we know is best for lower elementary
students and also for the support that we've gotten from LDOE. I will tell you that I've been in this education business for 50 years. and
and the the Department of Education, their literacy team has given us honest feedback which sometimes is is um is helpful and sometimes you know you need to address these things. They have been in our
schools. They have helped us to gauge our progress and measure our progress as we work toward our goals. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay, we have three more speakers. Brad
Solio, I apologize if I slaughtered your name. And then Wayan Bates and Kimmy Smith from Boer Schools. And Brad's from Allen Parish. Go ahead and start up. >> So, first of all, Brad swallow.
>> Swallow. I killed it. >> First of all, it's an honor to be here. Thank you for support from from everyone. We we're excited in Parish. And I will say this, um to be recognized today is huge for us. And with that, I got to start off talking about our team.
Uh because as you know, we implement many things in education and they kind of fall away and this didn't happen out there. And so to talk about our principles, our interventions, our master teachers, uh you know, everyone administrators that played a part in this was huge. Uh they bought in. But
I'm going to tell you the team sit behind me here led by Miss Stacy Wel, no was not an answer. And that's just the God's honor truth even to me sometimes. And so, you know, they they pushed hard. They pushed very hard and and we we got
the result that we wanted. Now, I'm going to say this to you. This does not happen without the funding of and I heard you talk a lot about high dosage. This does not happen without the funding of the CLSC grant that we received and without high do, you know, it does not happen in Parish without those things.
So, I cannot stress the importance of that. Also, the fact that we owned our data. I mean, at the end of the day, you talk about the BOI and all things, you know, I I even go as far as to say, uh, when one of my assistant superintendent, Miss Steph, met with our principles, uh, and they're beginning to hear
conversations. They sat down and looked at data at schools and they had hard conversations and some of those conversations are not easy when you start talking about performance of teachers and we had those conversations. So, we owned our data even when it was hard, even when it was difficult and we
went with that. Uh ju just to close you know I heard a lot about high school and I do want to talk about that as I share your concern as a former high school principal but you know now the fact that we have students reading on grade level more out of parish this is lifech changing you know this is lifech
changing for students and when you think about the fact that you know we hope to see this result on state test and in classroom this is lifechanging this is what we're here to do is teach kids how to read first and foremost so the group behind me they love litery It's just
powerful to watch. They love it. They love the work that they do. Um, and without these things that you support us with, uh, it does not happen. So, I I'm hopeful with the work that we're doing that should be taking place in the classroom, we can focus more on core instruction now and not have to do as
much. And, you know, with the high school thing that you addressed a while ago, I was a former high school principal and I understand when you have those students not reading on grade level, what a challenge that is at high school. So, hopefully we will see this over the decade as we do this work. But what do we do right now for our high
school kids that struggle? I I couldn't agree with you more. Uh it is a very hard thing and I will say that our group back here has an initiative this year to push into our high schools and that is something they're going to be doing and that is hard to do because you get a lot of push back from high schools uh when
you start doing these things. So just want to say thank you u once again we can't do this without the funding without the things you provide to us uh and just grateful to be here. Good morning. My name is Whan Bates. I'm the assistant superintendent of curriculum. I'm here on behalf of Bojer
Parish. We're up in the northern part of the state. So, we don't come to Bessie meetings very often, but we're we're glad to be here. Uh, >> but I would say you have excellent representation. So, I know Miss Millerin is on top of it. So, >> 27 years and this is my first one and I get to speak. So, I guess I'm I'm all
right. So, I guess y'all are welcome in that. Uh, we just want to thank you on behalf of the students and the principles in our district. The benefits of the high dosage tuing. We're very instrumental in success. Our district has 22 elementary schools, well over 50%
of the population of the students in our schools are economically disadvantaged. Uh, we have affluent neighborhoods. We have schools that receive title one funding. uh and it's just a big variety of students and principles that really embraced the concept that you all were
able to put forth. I want to thank Dr. Chaon, the LDOE, a few people uh behind me. This team right here has been nothing but supportive from Baton Rouge all the way to the northern part of the state and that means a lot to us. Uh Mrs. Clay Bear, Adam uh Debindo, I'm
sorry if I said that wrong, Adam uh and Holly Manson and several others. We were also able to participate in the outcomesbased contracting for the spring. Uh what made this a unique one was that we were allotted extra money for that program but the vendors had to
provide the results or they did not get paid the amount that they initially sought and uh we saw great results with that. In Boer Parish, we have over 1,600 third graders in our district and we were looking at 650 that were below
proficient on the beginning of the year dibble screener that we used last fall. So, a little bit less than half of those students were in jeopardy of failing. And we were able to reduce that through the high dosage tutoring initiative that we were given from the the legislature,
the Bessie board, and the LDOE. 96% of our third graders passed the third grade and got promoted to the fourth grade. So I do I do think that is uh attributed to some of the great principles that we
have. Our supervisors, our curriculum staff, our elementary supervisor Kimmy Smith is here and we have several others back home. But the tutoring definitely gave principles a little bit of leeway to navigate things and those waters that were rough, they were able to use that and implement it and provide for all
children. So the the thing I would leave you with is this. In the future, you know, if you have the ear of anybody in the political sphere, politicians, the governor, anyone that deals with money or funding, this should be a a slam dunk easy one to advocate it. This is a
no-brainer. it will benefit children and as long as we're doing what's best for kids, especially the littlest kids because they they are the the ones that need it the most because that's where the foundations of reading start, then this should be an easy decision for all of us and it affects and impacts all
kids positively. So, thank you very much and I appreciate you letting me speak today. >> Thank you. So, let me uh as a retired politician, let me suggest that the voice of you guys in the field to your local politicians is far stronger than our
voice and we need your help. So, absolutely. >> I'm turning it back on you. So, >> well, I'll accept that. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Any >> superintendent? >> One comment. I just want to acknowledge like for the systems in the room, it was mentioned that this was the first year
of um uh this particular law that required the tutoring. Um and you know, our agency of course tried to support a great deal. Um we provided uh vendor relationships. Um we provided support for for scheduling. Um we worked to help
secure the dollars, but the people in the room had to make all this work. Um, and so they had to rearrange schedules and staffing and just a ton of lifts to make all this work. And we were able to see results, but I think that those
should even improve more this year once those processes have been streamlined and everybody has a little familiarity with how to do this. So, I didn't want to not acknowledge the work that you all had to do to fundamentally shift schedules within your systems. Thanks. >> Thank you. U, any other questions or
issues? We have a motion on the floor. Any objection to the motion? Motion stands adopted. Thank you all very much and congratulations. >> Um at this point, I'd like to recognize President Morris for a moment. He wants to make a comment. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. U we have a guest this morning like to recognize. Uh
Senator Regina Barl reached out to me and uh wanted to address our next item, item 7.1 on the agenda. Unfortunately, she's unable to attend this morning, but she did send her representative. I believe it's Miss Adrien Conrad. Is that right? Um, so I want to recognize Miss
Conrad and then at the appropriate time give Miss Conrad an opportunity to come to the table and and address 7.1. So, uh, I would ask you to go ahead and, uh, introduce item 7.1 so the board knows the the topic that we're addressing and and then we could call, uh, Miss Conrad
to the table, uh, at the appropriate time, uh, to speak on, uh, the senator's behalf. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. Uh, let's take about two seconds for the audience to clear a little bit. Okay, next item. >> Your next item is on page 110, item 7.1,
consideration of revisions to bulletins in response to act 409 of the 2025 regular legislative session. The recommendation is to approve as notices of intent revisions to bulletins 137 and 139. Sorry, President Morris moves and Miss
Champine seconds. Um, who wants to make it? Who's going to present this? 71. Okay. So, just to provide a little bit of of context here, um so over the course of the spring, there were a
number of hearings relative to um uh child safety. Um and Senator Barrow uh was the lead on this particular uh issue and authored an instrument uh for
legislative consideration. Um and it is quite impactful um and it has prompted um uh a lot of action u particularly on the uh non-public side as Dr. Armstrong
knows very well um and and shifts and changes and some of these are are really significant uh shifts and changes and so our agency certainly believes that everyone entered into the space wanting what's uh best for children. Um it's
just with the uh degree to which that this this now law uh Charlie's law is uh in effect uh it is taking considerable effort um for the uh systems to be able to make adjustments. And so uh our
agency has been working uh overtime uh to the best of our ability to to to support providers and systems and and institutions as they make the responses that they need to make to the law. uh and has also met uh face tof face with
many of them, but also has met many times with uh several times with the senator. Um and she's been very willing to to hear feedback on on the law and consider possible adjustments down the road. So, uh what I think you'll hear
today is some commentary from the senator's office. Um and then I think you'll probably hear uh some in individuals from in the field that are uh working to implement these changes provide some some commentary. So um at this point just want to open it up with
that Mr. Fail and then turn it over to your speakers. >> Thank you. Do do you have a card for us? >> Not yet. You can do it eventually. Just get it to us. >> Okay. >> Why don't you introduce yourself and go ahead. >> Hi my name is Dr. Adrien Conrad. I am here on behalf of President Pro Tim
Regina Barrow while she's on um the road to uh other callings for the state of Louisiana. She asked me to fill in for her this morning. Um she wanted to let let you know that this is a an important piece of legislation that was drafted and in
response of series of uh committee hearings highlighting numerous gaps of in our system on that are aiming uh about safeguarding our children and she wanted to acknowledge that that the bill is not perfect and ineffective uh
critical issues that I have been identified with. So, she wanted to come in and uh come in and fill those gaps where the kid where she felt that the kids were unsafe that put pieces of legislation in uh perspective to um
pretty much protect them and with uh and I did give out a letter. I know a letter has been uh given to the to the members and the same thing that uh that is in that letter is what I'm reading. So, I wanted to see if you wanted to come in and and give a piece
of your testimony um to help out to let them know exactly how Charlie's Law began. >> Same thing. Introduce yourself and give us a card when you're finished. >> Yeah, I turned one in earlier. Oh, you did? >> I did forg item I believe 9.1. Um but my
name is uh Major Roger Williams. Behind me is my very beautiful wife, Dr. Jana Podrred. Uh we started this journey uh long ago. um this says the prepared remarks I had but um so we had an incident that happened at one of our schools uh one of the schools in
Jefferson Parish um where my daughter was sexually assaulted by another student. Uh from that uh we fought for a long eight months and we stumbled upon the uh se the task force for sexual assault investigations. Um from there we
identified um some issues that there was 254 schools in the state of Louisiana that weren't required to be licensed uh and therefore fell outside of any meaningful regulation. Um there was some mand uh mandatory reporter issues uh and and that led to uh the passing of act
409 um Charlie's law. Um and uh you know from there uh obviously our goal was never to make this uh expensive. We don't want schools to be any more expensive than they already are. We don't want to make we wanted to make
sure that uh we don't make early learning unattainable for most families in Louisiana. Um and that's just kind of how we got here today. So again on behalf of Senator Barrows does apologize for not being here but
she is on the road um handling other uh business for the state but that is what she has come to the conclusion of how she can fill the gap in safeguarding our kids in the state of Louisiana. Well, um my understanding is there's some there
are ongoing issues with the legislation that needs tweaking and working with the legislature between department and so forth. And and we want to thank my former colleague that uh for working with us and we everybody's working toward the same goal. There'll be some
push and shove for a little while until we get the bugs out of it, but we think we're going to get there. Um okay. Do we have any questions of this group? All right. I've got some other folks wishing to speak. Oh, I'm sorry. You want to say something? >> Yeah, if I could just read my statement that I had. I wasn't wasn't planning on
this part of it, but uh >> Okay, go ahead. >> Okay. Good morning, members of the board and superintendent Brumley. Uh my name is Major Roger Williams and besides me as my wife, Dr. Janna Pod. Uh many of you are familiar with our story uh and our involvement in act 409, also known as Charlie's Law. Oh.
>> Uh sorry. Uh many of you are familiar. All right. Uh many of you familiar uh with our story and our involvement in act 409, also known as Charlie's Law, named after our daughter. Uh Superintendent Brumley, uh when we began this journey eight months ago, I'll admit uh my wife and I we were
skeptical. Uh but sir, I must say you and your staff, you heard us uh and you delivered. Back in January, I met with Miss Townson and Mr. Liji uh to discuss the gaps in the law that allowed our daughter to fall through the cracks. Uh Miss Town, both Miss Townson and Mr. Lei gave me their word that they'd be part
of the solution and they've kept that word. Uh for that, my wife and I uh are forever grateful. Uh because of Charlie's law, tens of thousands of kids uh tens of thousands of Louisiana's children are going back to school this year uh far more protected than they were last year. Uh this is no small
accomplishment. And sir, I'd like to recognize your staff uh before this board. They're really the unsung heroes in all of this. Uh you touched on it earlier. Um they're the ones that have sacrificed time away from their families uh fielded countless calls uh to ensure
that the implementation of Charlie's Law was as smooth as uh as possible. Uh we know that change is never easy. In fact, it's often hard. Uh but your department has remained committed uh to one goal, making sure every child in uh in Louisiana is safe and every school uh is
supported. um and they've done a great job um listening, hearing, making accommodations uh and and trying to get to yes on lensure. On behalf of my family and all families, uh this loss protects, we thank you. >> Thank you so much.
>> Uh okay. Um >> yeah, look, I dad to dad, Major Williams, um I just want to say thank you for your advocacy. Um I didn't experience a situation like you experienced. Um, and I think that you handled it very well. You were an outstanding advocate for your child, but
also other children. Um, I think that, um, you realized many of the complications of the legal process. Um, and so, you know, while we realize this is an ownorous shift and while we realize that there probably are, to use
Mr. for pills words tweets that need to happen uh with with the law. Um we because of what you experienced, you know, we wanted to make our team as accessible to you as we possibly can. So I thank you for acknowledging them. Um and I just want to ask you to stay
committed to the process as this moves forward. Um because I think over the next year, you know, you'll hear from some of the um the the the the schools and the centers on some of the the concerns they may be having. Uh, and I fully expect next legislative session for there to be some type of updates to
this. So, I don't want you to just abandon the process. I don't think you will. Um, but, uh, I do feel like that that this is not completely settled. Um, but it is a is a result of well, it would not be happening without your advocacy.
>> Thank you, Superintendent. I appreciate your kind words. >> Thank you. Okay. Um, Dr. Rel Houston from Catholic Arch Dasis in New Orleans. Um, Howard Davis from Providence Classical Academy.
And finally, Erin Bendley. Do you want to speak? You don't. You didn't. Mark, come on down. Okay, who wants to go first? You want to go start on the left? Straight up. Good morning to each one of you and thank you tremendously for all the support that you allow the LDOE to work
with us mightily the last six weeks in order to almost perform a miracle in each of our Catholic schools. Again, I'm Sister Carol Shively. I'm an urine sister. I serve in the dascese of Shreport. I've been doing this about 30
years. So, um I kind of love what I do and I love what you all do. I think it's very good to know that I am in support of act 409. I want to share that the expedency to make changes in
our school program such as changing studentto adult ratios presented significant challenges to us in the dascese of shreport. The laws implementation timeline has put immense pressure on our schools. Our principles in in the dascese of shreport were focused on planning summer academic
programs had to quickly shift their attention to this new mandate. They were surprised to learn that their schools, PreK3, PreK4 are already accredited and are are maintain high academic standards
throughout the year without daycare license at that point that they now would need to apply for a daycare license by January 1st, 2026. This has created several immediate challenges for us in shre in the dasis of shreport which is the whole northern
region of the state. To meet the new studentto adult ratio, we must hire more teachers and aids on a very tight schedule. Finding qualified and willing staff is especially difficult given the current teacher shortage. A larger staff means a higher
payroll. When you add the cost of new staff training or some staff, a third background check, and potential facility upgrades. This creates a substantial financial burden to us. We must either absorb these costs which strains our budget or pass them on to the families
through tuition increases. In many ways, this can make private Catholic education less accessible. With more adults in the classroom, we may need to reconfigure classrooms, layouts or expand even expand our physical space to meet the the square footage
requirements for licensed centers. This is time consuming and is very expensive process. The laws admiral goal for child safety are not in question and never have been ever have been. Child safety in our
preschools and in our educ in our education centers is always priority. However, but its rapid implementation has put a strain on schools that were not equipped for such a swift and demanding transition. Still, with God's help, he's still
there. And the support of the waiverss that we're asking for, I have no doubt that we will meet the January 1st, 2026 deadline for initial daycare applications. >> Yes, sir. >> Hi there. I'm Howard Davis. I'm the
founder and head of school at Providence Classical Academy in Bojer City, Louisiana. Um, we are a school that started 20 years ago, 17 students, K through 4th. We're now a K4 through 12th grade school, has close to 700 students.
Um, I just want to say two things and then I I'm going to kind of go on a little bit of a rant. Uh, K, uh, you do an awesome job at being superintendent state. I'm really grateful for all you do. I'm even grateful for like how you've been communicative and supportive
in this. And I'm grateful to use the Bessie board. I'm also My heart goes out to Major Williams and his wife. Um, the thing I'm most passionate about is safety of kids. Abuse is not okay. Kidto kid, especially adult to kid. It happens all the time in our state all the time
in our community. And and their kids, these kids are not being protected. And it's not private schools that are the primary problem. It's daycarees and public schools, just to be frank. >> Sorry, I'm really passionate because this
the timeliness as sister Shriveley said we found out May 20 July 23rd that we had to implement this in the middle of starting a school year we're a tightly uh efficient very efficient school we charge a lot less than uh New Orleans and Baton Rouge schools and the reason
we do that is because we're very efficient we're very effective we have the highest ACT score of any school in shreport boer even back close to 28 we have had no instances in 20 years any instances of abuse, physical or sexual,
nor of any accusations of such. When I see uh employees that are doing things that that shouldn't be doing, I I'd let them go. They're no longer employed at PCA. Having said that, I believe that the way this is structured and my real question is this.
I long that you would delay the implementation of this for at least a year because this is not fair to our schools. as sister Shaveley said. But the other thing is is that how is it fair to apply it to private mostly Christian schools and to exclude
monasuri public schools? I have no idea. The law is not clear on that. The 30 pages of law, 29 of them are fine in terms of implementing safety. The thing that's not okay is forcing a school like ours that has 43 four four year olds to
be now become a daycare. That that's ridiculous. The reason why we took on four-year-olds is not because we want to be a daycare. It's because we want to be a school that valued pre-K education like was previously advocated by your public school representative. We do that super effectively. As a matter of fact,
our whole school started on the science of reading on virtue and nurturing character. I'm going to be out of time, but all that to say, there's abuse that goes on in the daycare right beside me down the street.
We get their kids They're frequently reported. It's frequently no nothing happens. I hear about uh public school employees who are arrested and fired because they abuse kids. None of that's happened to PCA. We are very safe
school. Our bathrooms are right by our four-year-old classroom. But but there's so many levels at which forcing us to be a daycare. Just because we have four-year-olds is is not fair to us. It's not healthy to our education. may even force us to not be able to offer one of the best four-year-old educations
in the whole state. So, I'd urge you to to figure out a way that delay the implementation of this for a year possible. >> Thank you. Uh let let me point out one thing so we all understand this is a a law of the state of Louisiana. It's not an it's not a policy of Bessie or the
Department of >> I do understand that. And here's the thing. Y'all have been given a very un unfair reality, especially Kaden Department of Education trying to implement this. But our schools are given even more unfair reality, right? >> We didn't know about the law until after
it been passed. When I called my representative, he said, "I thought PCA was excluded." >> And so there's a lot of problems with it. >> I understand. >> It's really unfair for us to have to. And and then the whole thing about funding, we don't give any funding for
any four-year-olds. We don't want any funding. We just want to educate them well, but getting all these other rules is ridiculous. I >> I may not disagree with you, but in effect, our hands are tied. >> Now, I would suggest that those of you that are having these problems need to
get together and work together and work with the s the uh uh the senator and and resolve them. But it'll have to be in the ostresses of the next legislative. that what we're thinking about doing is is filing an injection because >> well that's not us
>> targeted towards religious religious schools public schools and monastery schools many of which are are non-religious >> it's it's just ridiculous and it's not on you but it is affecting us and y'all need to know that >> you're certainly within your rights to do anything you choose but uh that's not that's not our minimum anybody next
ma'am >> good morning um I'm Dr. Dr. Rel Houston. I am the executive director for of the department of Catholic education and faith formation and the superintendent of Catholic schools for the arch dascese of New Orleans. Catholic and other non-public schools
serve thousands of Louisiana's children, providing safe, highquality early childhood education and faith formation. Student safety has always been a top priority and we fully support enhanced regulations that protect our children.
However, Act 409 as written places schools in a very difficult position. It imposes two mid-year compliance deadlines, October 1st, 2025 and January 1st, 2026. These mid-year deadlines threaten continuity for our students and
stability for our families. They risk creating inconsistencies in care, disruption of operations and routines, and causing unnecessary stress for our children, our parents, and educators alike. We are especially concerned about the transition from bulletin 741
non-public to bulletin 137 licensing for three and four year olds. This shift carries staggering financial costs and logistical challenges because bulletin 137 was designed for licensed daycare models, not for school-based models like
ours. Our prek3 and four programs operate within our elementary school frameworks and they operate as elementary schools, not as daycarees. Act 409 tries to force our programs into a daycare framework and it does little
to enhance the goal of protecting our children. Instead creates compliance problems that don't fit the way our schools operate. We need time, a full academic year to implement new policies and a strategic, intentional, and safe and sustainable
way. When compliance dates fall in the middle of the year after enrollment and tuition agreements are already set, it disrupts everything for our schools. There may have to be new facility staffing and procedural updates and and changes in our schools. For example,
bulletin 137 has a square footage requirement. Beginning January 1st, 2026, 35 square feet per child will be required. Adjusting this in the middle of the year is just simply not realistic. Staff
ratios on October 1st, ratios for preK4 shift from 20 to 1 to 15 to1. While many of our classrooms meet this, the requirement also applies at recess, lunch, afterare, and co-curricular times, PE, music, art, uh, mass, etc.
Um, budgeting and staffing were finalized last year for the current fiscal year. This will significantly harm some of our schools and compliance um will will or may require structural changes. We need adequate time to
prepare. Lastly, our schools received Bessie approval for preK3 and four programs for the full academic year for 2526. Under the new legislation, those approvals are effectively shortened, creating inconsistency and confusion. We
respectfully request that there be consideration of grandfathering an existing Bessie approved programs so that we do not in incur these intentional I'm sorry, incur these additional costs. postpone the implementation of the new requirements
until the 2627 school year so that we have a time to allow for these changes um and allow reasonable use of campus space without categorizing normal activities as field trips. For example, our pre-K3 and four students attend mass in our churches every week and in
licensing that is considered a field trip because they are leaving their licensed classroom space to go to another part of the campus. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, ma'am. >> Good morning. Thank you for the opportunity to speak on this issue. My name is Aaron Bendley with the Pelican
Institute for Public Policy. Many of you are aware that we work on K12 education issues, but I think on this issue I'm here in more of a capacity to address government regulation, which we see all across state government. Uh we know that
there's a lot of it in our state. We are one of the most highly regulated states in the country and we have seen after decades how that has played out with negative effects on our people, on our businesses and ultimately on our economy
and and our individual liberties. I think what you're hearing here is a lot of angst, a lot of concern um and recognizing your unique position. Yes, this is the law. um you are not able to undo it. You don't have that power. You
are a policy setting board. You're an administrative state agency charged with implementing the law and you have to do that. On the other hand, there's no other meeting to my knowledge. There's not another public forum for these individuals who are most impacted to
show up and be heard on this issue. Um so you guys are it. Um and so I I want to address a couple of things. One, I I want to start by thanking the department because I know the lengths that the
department has has gone to to try to get questions answered to seek every bit of relief and number of waiverss that are available under the law, working with the bill author, working with non-public schools. This did come as a surprise to
many people. Um, one of the reasons this kind of flew under the radar even for us is that most of the time legislation affecting schools goes through the education committee. This bill went through health and welfare. You have some non-public schools, your bigger ones, Catholic schools for
example, are part of a statewide network. They have the ability to hire a governmental affairs person or a lobbyist. Most non-public schools are little tiny schools all across the state. They rarely come to Bessie, much less the capital, to see what bills are being debated that affect their
day-to-day operations. So, when word got out and and I'm sure you heard it, you received the phone calls and the emails, there was a sense of panic, um people thought they were going to have to shut down their businesses. There's still talk um of non-public schools across the
state having to completely shut down because of the real costs that are reflected in this new law that to them came out of nowhere. real implications for their staffing models, their cost to to pay their employees, construction,
um, and also just a a a shift that they're feeling, particularly religious schools to have to change that focus from one of a spiritual focus and certainly a a developmental and and educational focus, but also now one of compliance. And we need to be very
careful when we are doing things that basically causes them to shift their their complete focus um to one of of of just you know checking the boxes and making sure that they're not getting written up. Um so our ask here um with
you or or of you as partners in this is to help these individuals help us to tell the story and make sure that these messages are being conveyed to lawmakers. you all and particularly the department has the day-to-day communication with these schools. They
depend on that so much. Um so as this unfolds, we realize there are limitations right now on what you can do to provide relief under the law, but this is likely one where some changes to the law will be needed in the next session and beyond. During this time, I would really urge you to collect all of
what you're hearing, help to amplify that to lawmakers. Um, and also, you know, this is a time to just stay really close to these small non-public schools across the state. Uh, again, I want to commend the department for doing that, for sending probably more emails and
offering more webinars to those entities probably than ever before. Um, I know it's been tremendously helpful and appreciated. Um, we want to offer ourselves as a resource as well. We uh we all have an interest in making sure that this sector in Louisiana remains
vibrant and available to the families that depend on it. Uh we need to be careful that when things like this come up, significant changes in with all all of the best of intentions, child safety, um that these are robust discussions that happen about how these mandates
will be felt on the ground before they are enshrined in state law. Thank you very much. >> Thank you, Superintendent I I just want to um I want to acknowledge I I think Dr. Bendley is like right here. You know, there are a lot of stories to tell. Um and there are
a lot of conversations that have to be elevated. And I appreciate you raising that point. Um and it all begins with Charlie, you know, and and what happens there and then it filters to Sister Carol and Howard and everyone else. And so I, you know, I just want to acknowledge for the group to whatever
extent um we can be helpful as an agency in continuing to navigate um this in the best interest of everyone um you know, we want to do that and I want to continue to encourage Major Williams and you know your your family to to remain
involved as well. >> Special thanks to Ashley Townson for her help with all of this. She has been absolutely amazing. Thank you, Ashley. Okay, Deep, you want to speak? That's fine. You get your time.
That's fine. >> Okay. Good morning. Um, I am Jana. I'm Charlie's mom. Um, so I have my doctor of nursing practice. I'm not in the education world. Um I help teach um people working towards their doctorates
uh doing certified registered nurse and essesist the microphone closure. >> I work at a large teaching facility in New Orleans but nowhere in the realm is my um expertise in education. Okay. Um, so obviously
we all have opinions on on uh I I would feel the the support of whoever just spoke is a not full support by any means. Um so the law itself is very extensive. It's
36 pages and it's not just um lensure. Okay, lensure is a very small component of that 36 pages and it each part it's not just for my family, it's for multiple families. So, um I don't know if anybody's had the unfortunate luck of
having a family member sexually assaulted or physically. Um but this is to protect all children of Louisiana, not just mine, right? And we want to focus on cost of a school. Well, what about the cost and the burden of the
family of do I pay for my child's therapy, right? Psychiatry, psychology, behavioral therapy, seeing if my child can actually sit through school anymore because they get triggered at school because that's where it happened, right?
What about that financial burden that's passed along to the families that's not covered by insurance, right? I understand that this is not it is not an easy topic to talk about and I'm so fine and content living in the shadows and not being the face of this. I didn't
want this. Okay. So to sit here and say that it should be delayed a year, okay, and file an injunction. In 10 days that this has been active, we have had 10 reports accepted by DCFS of
child-on-child crime. Was it specifically in a school? I will acknowledge no it was not specifically in a school. But that is 20 kids that are potentially not safe. 10 have been assaulted and 10 have learned that
behavior from somewhere. So that is where this law comes from. Okay. So you know if you want to compare this to Mississippi, this law is a 1:15 ratio. Mississippi is a 1:10 ratio for a
four-year-old class. I don't think that's an unreasonable ratio. Um, and there there's so much more to it to put in five minutes, but you know, I I just would say that if the schools were so
safe in their structure and their accreditation and they always did the right thing, right, we would always do the right thing. But unfortunately, that doesn't happen and that did not happen at my daughter's school. And this holds somebody accountable because when you don't have lensure, if the school does
whatever they want, there's nobody else to hold them accountable for what happened. And I just want accountability for all children, not just my own. And I love my daughter to death. That's the only reason why I'm here today and speaking. But to delay it a full year
and tell me that that's that's acceptable. Well, that's a full year of our children not being having any accountability to make sure they're safe and they're safeguarded from physical abuse, sexual abuse, and then also
reporting caretaker definition. Um, but it's it's very extensive. Please look at the 36 pages. It's not just lenture. >> Thank you. Appreciate it. Okay. you want to say? >> I mean, just keep it brief. >> Yeah. Well, I I just want to I just want
to address a few uh a few key points. Uh this isn't an attack on religious freedoms. Um it's not it's all non-public schools in the state. I know there's some work that would still needs to be done for public schools and for monastery schools. Uh and hopefully in the next session that's something that can be done. Uh as far as
accreditation, um you know, a lot of that is accreditation. Yes, it it does talk about policies and their accreditation, but if there's nobody like the Department of Education uh to ensure that these policies are being enforced, um then then who who is who's keeping all kids safe? Um, you know, as
far as uh I think that the the message that's being sent is is that this is going to be expensive and I'm sure Miss Townson um could give an update, but from my understanding of what's going on right now is there's a lot of uh accommodations for the classroom size.
Um that is being accommodated. um for the moving around campus. Kids are still going to beow allowed to the law doesn't stop them from moving around campus. If they got to sign a form uh to go to um to go to chapel, then that can
be done. That doesn't stop that from happening. Um you know, as far as uh I think there's a lot of doom and gloom, but sir, your staff has been amazing. uh they've been listening and they've been getting to yes. Every time something's
been brought up, they've found a workaround to make sure that we can still do licensing. >> Well, thank you. But again, this is this is a debate that needs to be held in the legislature, not in this forum. >> We appreciate the passion on both sides.
uh and the and the there are issues obviously that need to be worked out and we certainly will do our best and the I know speaking for the department they'll do their best >> to help everyone but it's an issue for the legislature. >> So thank you all. Do we have any uh
questions or comments from the board? Nobody. Then we have a motion on the floor. Is there any objection to the motion hearing? None. Uh the motion stands adopted. Next item. >> Your next item is on page 118, item 7.2,
consideration of revisions to bulletins in response to act 479 of the 2025 regular legislative session. The recommendation is to approve as notices of intent revisions to bulletins 741 and 1706. >> Thank you. Mr. Burkin moves.
Mr. Harris seconds. You gonna present this or anything? I mean this uh the this is just um us promaggating rules around uh legislative action uh relative to students with disabilities. Um it was really the
omnibus special education bill from this last session primarily focused on seclusion restraint. >> Any questions from the board? Any comments from the audience? If not the motion stands uh is there any objection to the motion hearing? None. The motion
stands adopted. Next item. Next item is on page 125, item 7.3, consideration of revisions to bulletins in response to legislation of the 2025 regular legislative session. The recommendation is to approve as notices of intent revisions to bulletins 111, 118, 119,
7:41, and 7:41 non-public. >> Uh, Dr. Clark moves and Miss Champan seconds. >> We want a presentation. This is just a collection of rule promulgation. Um after the legislative
session, we did set aside um 409, Charlie's law, and the um students with disabilities um law just because uh of some of the additional interests there, but this is just a collection of other acts that are being promulgated into rule.
>> Okay. Uh anything from the board? Uh Mr. Richard Baker would like to uh speak to some elements of this. Come on down. >> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. Uh, thank you, board. Thank you, superintendent.
Uh, what I'd like to I'm supporting this and supporting the changes made to bulletin 741. I'm Richard Baker speaking for the Louisiana Federation of Teachers and School Employees. Uh after employee pay, discipline is one
of the highest rated issues on our uh spring surveys. So, what I'd like to speak to is bulletin 741 and you've made changes in there which are excellent. We appreciate that. Um across every job class, discipline was
in three categories. was one of the top three categories. More than half of the paraprofessionals who took our survey said that they had been struck or attacked. Half of those were still in the same room and working with the student who attacked them. And
then 72% said that they did not have access to protective gear. Uh, act 439, which is one of the changes in this item, directed that paraprofessionals be included in city or parish school boards disciplinary policy review committees.
And LFT is just requesting that Bessie find a way to include that in bulletin 741 and later in bulletin 126. Thank you. >> Okay, any questions? Uh, I I'll I'll share a small vignette. I have a very close friend who was a teacher for many
many years in Jefferson Parish and uh one day a student pushed her down the stairs and she's limping to this day. This is 20 years later. Quit immediately being a teacher and she was a valuable asset to the school system. So I mean
it's something that u it's an ongoing problem. We've heard a lot today about discipline and violence and everything, but it's just it's really important to all of us to understand that teachers are in the line of fire and I appreciate that. >> Thank you. And we're all we're asking is that the pair of professionals be
included in those disciplinary committees as per act 439. Thank you. >> Thank you. Uh any discussion on the motion hearing? None. Any objection to the motion? None. Motion stands adopted. Next item. Your next item is on page
170, item 8.1, consideration of a report regarding algebra 1 LEAP 2025 scores in the accountability system. The recommendation is to receive. >> Um, so any Oh, we got to have a motion. I'm
sorry. So, Dr. Clark and Miss Murn. >> Oh, yeah. >> Yeah. M Mr. Chair. >> Oh, yeah. We have a chair in a second. Uh first in a second, I'm sorry. Motion in a second. >> We already got it. >> Okay. Uh yeah, I I' I'd like to give an
opportunity for uh uh Superintendent Powell to come to the table and maybe share with members uh his perspective on this item. I know there's been a lot of really good discussion on it. I know there's um uh common ground here uh
that's very clear uh for all parties involved in the discussion and uh super superintendent pal has worked really hard with his his group um and I really appreciate uh uh a moment here to uh get his comments to start the conversation.
>> So also let's get some more to the table. We have uh Dr. Stefan, Stephen Zaffra, and Dr. Erin Bendley. So, why don't you'all come on down while we're >> Go ahead. >> Mr. Chairperson, while they're coming down, I'd like to clarify something on
this motion, if that's okay, >> please. >> The motion back in June, we made a motion to uh allow banking for advanced and mastery students in our LEAP score that our advanced and mastery. and we
referred this to uh the accountability council and the superintendent's advisory council. In addition to just receiving the reports, I would like for us to go back and reconsider the original motion for approval, which is
what we referred to everybody and it's not written as such. So, in addition to receiving the report, I move that Bessie continue to use the current version in bulletin 111, the Louisiana school district and state accountability system
and bulletin 118, statewide assessment standards and practices as it pertains to the banking of schools for students who score mastery or advance on high school elite 2025 assessments during middle school. This motion didn't
include bringing the actual motion. >> Let me let me suggest we got a motion in a second on the floor. Hold that for a second. >> Oh, I got it. >> Let's clear this motion and then we'll do your motion. >> Gotcha. >> Okay. All right. So, who wants to proceed? You want to go first?
>> Absolutely. I was waiting for y'all to figure out which motion we're going to be. >> Well, we just got a little bureaucracy. >> Thank you. And I I do want to thank uh President Morris for all the time over the last few days and weeks as well as department staff for the conversations, collaboration, and engagement around
this topic. Uh many of you as bestie board members have had conversations with your superintendents and your local communities, and we're so very appreciative of that. I have just a couple things to say. It kind of brought us to this point, but interestingly enough, I I was just scrolling through the Bessie website and saw the mission
that says, "Provides leadership and creates policies for education that expand opportunities for children, empower families and communities, and advance Louisiana in an increasingly competitive global market. Also, the vision says >> to have a quality public education system of such excellence that all
children are given the opportunity to develop to their fullest potential." Oftentimes we talk about things like we've talked about earlier today with highdose tutoring and helping our students who are not proficient get to proficiency. We seldom spend a lot of time talking about those students who are already proficient and what types of
opportunities are we providing them. So of course this this mission and vision applies to all students including those who have academically gifted potential. However, due to some of the confusion around changes aligned to the new accountability system, we've seen some what I hope to be unintended
consequences. We've had entire school systems stop offering algebra 1 to students in middle school, even though previously it was deemed that those students were more than capable to be successful. In fact, one system reached out to me that said last year they had over 400 students taking algebra 1 in the middle
school level. This year they only have less than 70 doing so. So, how did we get here today? Of course, uh we were just reminded of some of the motions from the previous meeting. And then since that meeting, one of the things that has come out is the department received communication from the US
Department of Ed that the Louisiana's practice of banking scores for high school students when they're already counted at the middle school level will not be approved the same way that it has been for years. And so for some this means that any attempt to try to continue double counting or banking
scores would be in effect asking LDOE and Bessie to go against recommended guidance from the US Department of Education. And obviously I would not sit here and ask you to do that. But of larger concern concern although it has been presented that banking was never supposed to be part of new
accountability. It is my understanding that every projected score SPS and DPS that systems and schools has received for the last two years in the new for the new accountability system actually includes those bank scores in our high school performance scores which is what
has created so much confusion around this topic. In fact, the cut scores for new accountability that were set on 23 24 school year data included those bank scores. Therefore, no school or school system in the state who offered high school credits for their middle school
level in 23 24 or currently actually has an actual accurate projection of their school or district performance score under new accountability. So after speaking with the LDOE staff, this is recognized and it is expected that we will receive some confirmation that
we'll receive adjusted scores with adjusted cut scores that don't include the banking prior to the release of the 24 25 school year data. Obviously, this is an imperative so that we can all have good data to make decisions. When this happens, we should be able to more
accurately compare uh the two the last two years with the new accountability system. However, additionally, with this new information, obviously, we do not want to see any major changes considered until we can at least see what that data looks like. With the new information, we're still back at one of the major goals of Bessie LDO in school systems.
How should schools and systems still promote academic advancement of our students who are ready for high school credit in the middle school without seemingly penalizing the high school by taking scores of their higher achieving students out of their math testing population. I do appreciate those from
LDO staff and this board who seem to share an appetite to help ensure that we continue to offer academic programming that grows all students. And here are some of the options that have been promoted or or floated out there for that. There was there was at at one point and this is just for students who would take algebra 1 in the middle
school. Some some say English one two, but this motion specific to algebra one. Uh it was floated initially that maybe we could let their geometry scores in the ninth grade count double. Well, obviously with the information from US Barber to edit, if they're not going to double count algebra scores, it was even
foolish to ask them to count geometry scores twice as well. Uh some have floated the possibility of using uh having a second high school math assessment uh considered such as the ACT pulling out just the math component again just for those students who took
algebra 1 in the eighth grade. There seems to be some strong consideration around this point. Of course, you know, some some major consideration or concerns would still be what what would be decided as the proficiency cut score on the ACT. Um, and so, uh, in order for
us to consider that or have the board consider that, there would be some some more questions that would need to be answered and how would grow be calculated for these students as well under the new accountability. These are just if we're going to consider those types of options, there's still some
questions that need to be answered and we don't have enough data uh for that. So, because there are pretty major questions that I believe everyone should have interest in answering, it is it is the recommendation of our association that Bessie still considers delaying moving forward with anything that is different from what schools and systems
have been planning around until they at least have these things. accurate projections for school and district accountability that can be provided for each school and system without the banking included in the calculations and the new cut score placements if that's what the new accountability is supposed to be. Also, we need additional
consideration for and projections of what the new accountability calculation would look like if other assessments were used for a second high school assessment such as ACT for students who take algebra 1 in the eighth grade. And we would need included with that what growth would look like with that
alternative measure. and when this assessment would be expected to take place for our high school students. And finally, systems and schools are provided time to plan their staffing, their master schedules, and other decisions to reflect what is best for students and meet the goals of the department. Investing, again, our
association is extremely appreciative of all the what I would consider to be effective dialogue over the last couple weeks with so many of you, so many of you communicating with our superintendents and other members of the community. and we look forward to continuing to work together as we come up with a what we note there to be a viable solution for this issue.
>> Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Hi, good morning. I'm Dr. Steven Zaffro with St. Charles Parish Public Schools, um the accountability contact for that district. And I'll just say what is remarkable about this debate around banking is that no one is arguing that doing away with banking won't result in
fewer students taking algebra 1. There seems to be consensus implicit at least that doing away with banking would change incentives for schools such that fewer students would end up taking algebra 1 in 8th grade. So the debate now has shifted to whether or not that
is a good thing. Are Louisiana's students better off when they take algebra 1 in middle school? On this question, all the data we have suggests that yes, they definitely are. Based on statewide data provided by the LDOE, regardless of a student's LEAP level
when they entered eighth grade, students who take eighth grade algebra 1 score as well or better in algebra 1 than they do on the eighth grade leap, and they ultimately have higher math ACT scores by the time they finish high school. This data is inconvenient for all those
who feel that simplicity and the accountability system should be the most important consideration. And to some extent, I agree with them. Everything else being equal, simplicity in the accountability system is a good thing. But this is just not a case where everything else is equal. Kids benefit
when they take algebra 1 in the eighth grade. And eliminating banking without putting in place an alternative incentive will mean that fewer kids will be given this opportunity. Thank >> Yes, ma'am. >> Aaron Benderly with the Pelican
Institute for Public Policy. I and others came to the table the last time this came up um reminding you and thanking you for the strong policy changes that you made on the accountability system. You passed a very
strong accountability system that we believe should be preserved and implemented in the way that it has been written. We also urged on this issue to just do what's right for students
and for our schools to just do right by our students. It is right to offer rigorous course offerings to highly capable students. That is a no-brainer. If there are real burdens and issues,
staffing issues, cost, whatever the case may be, then those are certainly worthy of discussion um to the extent that they might present a barrier for students to be able to get what they need. If however these are issues of negligible
accountability points for adults, that is a different matter. And certainly if we do have entire school systems that have stopped offering courses to students over a couple of accountability points, I want to know
who those are and I'll just say shame on them. I I came to the table today um and really took an interest in this item because based on what's written on the agenda, it says consideration of a report. So, I thought there was going to
be a report. I now see this as more of a discussion item. Um, but there had also been some talk of possibly this coming up for a vote somehow, which I wasn't sure how that was going to happen. I would say
respectfully, if there is a motion on the table to go back to previous policy, that is not something that you can do by by vote today. That is a policy change. Many years ago, you put into your own administrative code that policy cannot
be changed without publishing proposed policy and giving 10-day notice. So, that I would argue is not an appropriate motion for a vote today. However, I will agree with Superintendent Powell. We do tend to agree once in a while that this
is something that warrants further discussion. I think you've heard there are a lot of factors at play here and I don't want to be insensitive to the accountability implications for schools. I've done this long enough to know um that I can sit here all day and say let's do right for kids, but these are
real implications for them and I want to acknowledge that. However, we can't have those things stand in the way of doing what's right for kids and giving them the tools that they need to reach their full potential. I would urge you to let's continue the
discussion. Let's let's get into the data. Let's look at what other states do. Let's look at the future of assessment in our states and uh in our state and what opportunities that may bring. Let's not have a knee-jerk reaction to just make things the way
that they used to be for the convenience um and and the assurance of of a couple of accountability points. that is not what's in the best best interests of our students and our educational system going forward. Thank you. >> Thank you all. Any questions for these?
Okay. Then the next group is uh Jason Van Meter from Council Q. Um Greg Tero from Charter Schools USA and Dr. Ken Erdling from St. Charles Parish. That's the last Oh, I'm sorry. That's it.
Good morning. My name is Jason Vanmeer. I am superintendent of schools for Kakashu Parish. Uh I'll be brief. I spoke to you at the last Bessie meeting on this topic. Um ours is a district uh that currently offers 8th grade uh algebra and uh in some cases uh eighth
grade English one. We continue to offer it this year, but this would greatly impact us. Um, I won't make the same points I made last time, but one of one of the things I will bring up is something that came up in the superintendent's advisory council. So, you all asked for data and so did we in
terms of the impact of this on districts. And the impact looks minimal, right, until you consider what that data actually says. Because when I asked in the superintendent's advisory council, does this include districts who currently don't offer 8th grade algebra?
The answer was yes. which means a district that this doesn't affect, it's not going to affect. Yeah, we know, right? The question becomes what happens to those districts who do offer it, right? And my my argument would be that
it's going to be a whole lot more than minimal uh for those districts. Like Mr. pal said right now we don't even know because none of the data that we have even the data that's been released already has this as a consideration where where we don't have banking in it.
Um that's really all I wanted to do today was just kind of bring that point to you and then remind you that we do share as superintendent and districts the same goal that you have of offering expanded opportunities to our kids. And
my argument would be if we remove this, do you think more districts are going to put eighth grade math on the table for their kids? Right. And my argument would be no. Good morning, uh, Superintendent Dr. Ken Orton, St. Charles Parish Public
Schools. In St. Charles Parish Public Schools, we support accountability that reflects the work of schools where students are taught. uh our concern is not with the principal with but with how this change is being introduced and the message it sends to districts about advanced opportunities for students. For
eight years, schools like in our system have offered algebra one and eighth grade under the clear understanding these scores will be banked for high school accountability. That message was very mixed came early spring of this year in preparation of this school year. We staffed courses, built master
schedules, guided families. With that in mind, to reverse reverse course now, as we have previously stated before in late of last year, it would be a detriment to many school systems. Without recalibrated cut scores or accurate simulations, creates uncertainty and
undermines the confidence in the system. Even as recently as the message from the Department of Ed, we still don't have accurate cut scores based on uh additional simulations. More importantly, this board has referenced in some special interest groups that promote their representation of K12
policy have said accountability systems shape behavior. They do. When they incentivize opportunities, districts expand them naturally. Right? When they deter opportunities, districts reduce them. Period. End of case. As Superintendent Pal me mentioned, it's
not to deter. Right? If algebra 1 and eighth grade is no longer recognized in high school accountability, the risk is that fewer systems will offer it at all. We will continue to still offer it. Some systems don't aren't afforded that opportunity. There would be a step backwards when Louisiana is stepping
forward in so many categories, including this. The evidence is clear. Algebra 1 and 8th grade benefits students. State data shows that students who take algebra 1 in middle school perform as well or better than their peers on LEAP. and ultimately score at least two points
higher on the ACT, which is college readiness standards. Uh even students who entered that basic level in seventh grade grew stronger by taking algebra 1 and 8. And that's from the state department data from the 23 24 school year. These students are not being set
up to fail. They're being set up to succeed. Accountability should encourage, not discourage these pathways. For these reasons, I respectfully ask Bessie to delay implementation until the 2627 school year. That would give time to
recalibrate the system fairly and give districts a chance to plan schedules, staff, communication with families. More importantly, it would send a clear message that Louisiana values student advancement and wants accountability to promote, not penalize opportunity. And
of course, we we would always encourage continued dialogue. Very appreciative of the dialogue that we've had with Bessie, with Department of Education, and members of our organization as well. Thank you. >> Thank you. Yes, sir. >> Mr. Chair, if you could could get a clarification. >> Sure. Go ahead. Uh, superintendent, you
had mentioned defer or delay, but I wasn't really sure what the request was to defer or delay what >> as the uh the current recommendation, I believe, from u member Armstrong to delay it at least a minimum of one year
to gather additional information, delay the the new implementation of that portion of the accountability system. The >> my understanding is banking is not in the current accountability system. So I'm I'm trying to understand what it is you want to defer. >> Yes, sir. So I'm I'm trying to correlate
what I'm asking to simulate the same recommendation that's on the table now, which is I believe uh Representative Armstrong motion is to delay it one year. That's what we are in support. >> So I'm trying to understand what it is you want to delay because banking is not in the current system. So do you want to
delay the current accountability system? I'm I'm just trying to understand what the ask is. What What is it specifically you want to delay? asking Bessie to consider Bessie Member's Armstrong motion to delay the current or what it will be the current application of the of the new accountability system and
defer it back to the original accountability system that we've had in in play for the last eight years that considered banking of algebra one scores at middle school level to the high school. >> So you're not if I understand correctly then you're not asking to delay you're asking to change the the current
accountability system. May I clarify >> please? >> So the original motion in June was to provide for the banking of scores for Jun uh for students whose score mastery
or advance on high school LEAP 2025 assessments during the middle school. That was our original motion provide for the banking of scores. So at that meeting, we deferred that because we wanted to go through the accountability
council and we wanted to go through the superintendent's advisory council as is what's regular protocol when we make this type of motion. So we did that and we deferred it to this month's agenda. So, what I'm hearing is that in addition
to the regular motion that was presented in June, we're bringing it back and we're just putting a timeline on it for one year rather than just all of it totally. We're saying for one year. So
provide for the banking of scores for students who score mastery or advance on high school leap 2025 assessments during the middle school for one year. >> Yes ma'am at a minimum one year we can
one get accurate information that has yet to be provided to school systems so that we can make appropriate changes. >> That's the clarification I was looking for. So, you know, if we can all find the common ground here on interpretation for the ask, it it would not be a deferral, it would be a change. In the
in the base case, banking is not in the current system. So, if if we were to decide to go against the the federal uh ruling that we've got and and implement banking for one year, then it would require a change to the current system.
So I just want to be clear, make sure if we need to bring attorneys to the table or whatever, but but in order to implement banking for one year wouldn't be a deferral, it would be a change to the existing accountability system. Is that is that your understanding? >> Yes, sir. That would be my
understanding. And obviously, you know, seeking legal guidance, I think, is important because for the last eight years, we've operated under this current system which has allowed the banking part. Let me remind the board that we're the motion on the table is to receive a
report. We're not on a motion that's yet to be presented. I just just keep everybody on their toes. >> Right. And and and I just want to make sure that we were clear on the ask before we further the conversation so we don't get off on a try on a side
conversation. So, I just want to make sure that we're we're both talking about the same thing and so we make sure we pursue that conversation, you know, directly for for for a common good. >> Mr. Harris, >> just briefly, uh, since uh, Mr. Mars
brought up the federal thing, I didn't see that as a an opinion or as a mandate. And when I researched the ESSA that section, uh, and I did a little bit of research
and it can ask you to hold that. >> Yeah, >> we're not on that motion yet. >> I get I get that, Conrad. But he brought it up. I just want to make it clear that it's not a federal directive that we not do this. They said it may not be
allowed. And that section C of 1111 gives the states a lot of latitude to uh do their accountability system. So I just wanted to clear it up that it's not a mandate from the feds yet ruling.
>> Okay. Uh do we have any other Oh, I'm sorry. You want to speak? Please speak. Yes, sir. And remember, this is a motion to receive a report. >> Gotcha. >> Okay. Greg Tero. I'm the regional superintendent for Charter Schools USA, 37year educator, former LDOE member of
uh PR high school principal at North Main High School and an elementary principal at Cecil Pecard Elementary at Maurice. So long-standing history in Vermillion Parish of Good Education. And I want to encourage us to uh continue the dialogue about what we're trying to
do to incentivize children. Currently, I serve about 4,000 students at a Kadan Renaissance Charter Academy High School. And our junior high last year had about 78 children take seventh grade algebra.
Thus, they have about 80 or so kids taking eighth grade geometry. And then you can go stairst step that up. They're going to take algebra 2 as freshman. You feel where I'm going here, guys? And their dual enrollment opportunities are going to come in on the backside in a
tremendous manner. it was done and based on the guidance that banking was going to occur and that we had an opportunity for our stu our students to do it. I do see that there are uh opportunities where you know high schools they didn't do the work quote unquote to get those
algebra and geometry scores of those students. But on the backside, I think we could do something with the preac at ninth grade for our kids that have a seventh grade algebra score and eighth grade geometry score to take a preacat test as a ninth grader and include those
scores and accountability for both for both growth and achievement. I think the dialogue is what we need to have here because I think the beauty of the SPS system that we have had in the last 10 years has given us the ability to graduate kids. I'll go back to 10 years
ago when our graduation rates were in the 70s, right, Ken? And now most of them are about 93. And it was done because lots of courageous ideas came through committees and best uh board members making sure that we did things differently. Likewise, I served on the
jumpstart uh you know 1.0 etc and through 2.0 and it was courageous to think about things differently. So right now, I'd encourage all Bessie board members to have that dialogue. As a 37-year educator, I would be more than willing to serve on any kind of
committee to do so. And it's just to think about these certain things, okay? You know, the benefits of any kind of policy like this would be equitable access across schools, uh early college readiness, which I spoke to just earlier, access for all students. you
know, when we limit access to just high school people because we deincentivized people, I don't think it's right. And a continuity of instruction, I think that's allowed us to really be able to offer the calculuses at LSU that we do now because we've had that continuity. And I just want us to think about what
it looks like, a timeline of a year for us to be able to look at a data frames to be able to push our kids because I know there are many kids across the state of Louisiana that with given the opportunity they can excel in advance courses. So, thank you for your time. >> Thank you. Um, is there any comments or
from the board on the motion on the table? Excuse me. If not, is there any object? The motion is to receive the report. It's item 8.1 to receive a report. That's it. So, is there any objection to that motion? Hearing no
objection, the motion stands adopted. Now, Dr. Armstrong, you have a motion. So, my motion is the one that we presented in June and that at the June board meeting, we said we were going to send the motion to our accountability
council and to our superintendent association advisory council for input as is normal protocol. So, we did that. We've heard from them. And so I want to go back to the original motion with a
time limit. So the original motion was to provide for the banking of scores of students who score mastery or advanced on high school LEAP 2025 assessments during middle schools for one year to give us time to review
data and come back and make them. I think we need I agree we need to engage in these discussions. >> Okay. Do we have a second motion? We get a bunch of seconds. >> Okay. I have as on behalf of the committee, I have some some specific
questions that I would like to have answered by someone. If this is a policy change, then what is the procedure the proper procedure under Bessie policies for this? Don't answer. I'm just just asking. And number two, I'd like um the
superintendent to address the issue that Mr. Harris raised about the educ national the US education department's response. And number three, um I guess that's it. Just those two. So >> you want to go
fine. >> If it's >> I can't answer number one. That's a best >> Let's talk about the pol the aspect of this motion as relates to policy. >> Amanda, >> hold the microphone close, please. >> Amanda Lru, assistant attorney general.
If this is in fact a policy change, then it would have to go through the administrative procedure act. Um, that would require the notice of intent formal procedure set forth the procedure act. Do you do you anticipate because this is
a modification of an existing policy which is the um accountability system >> and if it is I I haven't had the opportunity nor I've been asked to fully review this so it may take some more legal analysis on my um part but just
offhand if it is in fact a policy change then the admin the procedures of the administrative procedure act would apply. Okay. So, you can't tell us do we need that or not at this meeting? >> Would have to review the in the entirety
of what's being done um review what the if it is in fact policy in my decision or my opinion and then get back with you guys. I have not um done that nor have been asked. So, it would just be kind of like just off the cuff. It's if it is a policy change, administrative procedure
act applies. >> Mr. Castillo would like to >> I just have a clarifying question. Have we been allowing banking in the past? >> I would have to review the rules on this particular area. I'm not familiar with
this particular item or um what's been done up until this point, but I'm happy to review that if the board needs that. >> Perhaps I should direct a question to someone else. Mr. Superintendent, have we allowed banking for some period of time >> in the past? Do you know how long?
>> I I don't know the answer to that. >> Okay. >> Do you know if it's been more than five years? >> I would assume so. Yes. Okay. >> So So we at least have a practice that has allowed for banking if we don't have an official policy that allows for banking. Is that correct?
>> Yes. It it has it has been utilized up until the point of the revision in the accountability system. So in terms of legal analysis, we've been allowing this if not a policy of practice for five years. If we continue
the practice for another year, do you believe that we're in some violation of law? >> That would require me to look at the specific provisions of the law and provide you guys a response. That's um something I would have to look at in more detail. >> You wouldn't advise us then to stop
doing whatever we've been doing for the last eight or nine years with respect to desire. That's the practice that you guys have been doing and you're what you're asking essentially is to delay further implementation of that practice. Is that my understanding of the motion that um Dr. Armstrong provided?
>> Dr. Armstrong is just asking that we continue the practice for another year while we continue to study the item. >> Okay. >> But just I was talking to superintendent. It was actually in Bessie policy. it just and and was
revoked when we changed the policy to go to the new accountability system. That's according to him. So his belief now. >> Yeah. And Ashley can correct me if this isn't accurate, but this was in Bessie policy, but it was not something that
was in the ESSA plan that was submitted and approved by the feds. And so, can I swing to Mr. Harrison? So then once once we started preparation for accountability council based on Dr.
Armstrong's motion and engaged in conversation with the feds um that's when we ultimately got to the point when they told us that you know you know people aren't going to agree with this but when they told us it was not
allowable. Um, now that was not a, you know, our conversations were not based on a Bessie motion and on a letter head and a formal process. It was just an engagement between our office and their office on something that was being
considered by this board. >> Okay. Mr. Harris, >> I guess you're referring to the information you sent the board. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. And what I read there, it says, and and I would like to I certainly
don't want to do anything that messes up our ESO, but it says, as shared in our prior correspondence and on the call, consistent with ESA section 111B2C,
a state may not use a student's performance on a single assessment administration for multiple years when implementing its accountability system. Please let us know if you have any questions. So, that really wasn't say it's consistent with 111. Uh, and
looking at at some of the things that some other states have have done, there's there's no real uh addressing of banking in that section as the the banking the term. And from what I could
see, it says that uh section C does allow states to have some leeway in the accountability system, which you know. So, I would, you know, before we rely on this email
um for something uh as critical to some of my constituents out here, uh I would have to have something a little more solid than this u uh Karen or Peter,
excuse me, my eyes are so terrible. Uh education program specialist saying that it's consistent with that part of ESSA. So that I'm just bringing that to the board's attention and the way things I've seen work in the past in my career.
Um sometimes passing or continuing this practice, someone's going to ask the feds to look into it. this may be the way to clear this particular issue up is to allow the banking to continue so then we can get a real solid and definitive
answer from the feds of whether that practice of banking is allowed or not on >> just yeah and I want to be clear Mr. Paris like our exchange was not a formal board problem. Absolutely. I know that.
>> Yeah. It was simply, you know, a relational conversation around something that we were having to deal with as a staff that that could come in terms of policy. >> And look, I app and like I told you last week, I appreciate the information that I could bring it back to the superintendent in my district also. you
know that um it's it's good to look into all these things to make sure we are in compliance with what we have to be in compliance with. So I I certainly appreciate you doing that, but uh in order for me uh to be comfortable
because what I did hear is from some folks that the feds say you can't do it. They you can't do it. The federal government says you can't. Well, that may not be concise and precise information concerning this issue of banking, the term banking. It's just so
anyway, that's all I have to say about that issue. Thank you. Uh, Mr. Thank you, Mr. Harris. Anybody? Dr. >> I have a question for clarity. I am be I have been told by several superintendents that it was stated on a call in the spring that banking would be
allowed um for this school year. And I don't know who said it and where it came from. was from LDOE to the superintendents, but was that ever stated on a call that it would be allowed for this school year from LDOE? >> Mr. Mr. Lambert may want to respond to
that. I I am not aware of that. I I am aware of correspondence between LDOE staff member and a particular superintendent um that shared that information. And we've had this discussion with the the superintendent before. And I I'm not suggesting we didn't. I'm just saying I'm not aware of
us saying that. We we have a ton of calls. >> When you when you say current school year, do you mean the one that just finished or for the upcoming school year >> because we're in that liinal >> from 2425 >> that banking would be allowed for the
SPS that is coming out this school year and the school year that's coming up. It would be allowed one more. And let me say this, I don't know what was said. I just want to get some clarity on what was actually said. So >> yeah, the the policy for 24 for the 23
24 and the 2425 school accountability system includes banking because it's the old accountability system. It wasn't until we recently had these conversations with Ed that we were informed that it was never permissible to do banking. Um but but the policy
that is in effect at this moment for the scores that will be released in the fall does include banking. Um and it wasn't until we met with the feds that they let us know not only won't it be approved going forward. It it should have never been done and they didn't find it in our
asset plan as something that we were doing. So it is in the policy um and then that gets repealed essentially as the new accountability system comes into play. I'm trying to think of what how that could be, Dr. Clark. And maybe it
is in relation to the SPS that's going to be released this year for this last year because it is on the the previous system. So banking would have been a part of that. >> Okay. Anything else from the board right now?
>> If if I could be allowed. >> Yeah. Well, we also have another speaker, too, but go ahead and introduce yourself again. >> Jeff, super microphone. It's not on. >> The light is green. I don't know what else to do. >> You got to get closer. >> All right. Um, I can't attest to having
heard on any particular call that the scores would still continue to be banked under new accountability. But what I can attest to is the projections that we have received from the department for new accountability SPS and DPS did
include does include the scores being banked. So um I do understand that the policy potential policy changes are supposed to be for the new accountability system to go into effect when those scores are actually put out. If if the intent was that banking was
not to be allowed in those, I think it would be reasonable to expect that banking should not have been in the projections that we've received for the last two years. >> Okay. We have Mr. Danny Garrett from the Louisiana School Board Association. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh Danny
Garrett, check Council Louisiana School Board Association. And really, we we do support retaining the banking because we do think it is an accurate representation. And if there is going to be a change, I think the superintendent outlined that you're
using data that includes it to make to set rules in the cut scores for the next year. And I think that's where the a lot of the confusion arises. Uh from a process standpoint, I know that there was raised a concern about how we do the rule making. I I will let you know it is
my appreciation and you can check your own counsel. Certainly uh this board has on a not uh has has routinely utilized emergency rules uh to get something in place temporarily that need to um because we
are in the beginning of a school year and so uh that I think that isn't what may be an option from a process standpoint is to look at this more of a temporary emergency measure so that you can then get into the full rule making and maybe go back and have the
discussion that the superintendents and the accountability folks talked about as to how this is going to work, how we would implement it because it sounds like maybe that was just absent from that other conversation and and I think we've even heard that maybe some people thought it was going to still be in there and some people not and then
there's this email from US DOE. Uh and so just from a process standpoint, I'd like to offer that that may be something that that may allow y'all to move forward. Thank you, >> Mr. Marks. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Yeah, the first thing I'd like to speak to is that we
all got common ground here. You know, I don't think there's an argument on the table that we don't want to create opportunities for high performing students to to um have have u opportunities that um
um would not meet their capability. So, uh I think there's common ground here. We we all want to get to the same place. The conversation is how do we get there? Uh you know what's what's the means to the end? Um from a procedural perspective, my question is um does the
current accountability policy approved by this board include banking? Yes. For for for this next school year? Uh yes or no? Can somebody answer that one for me? >> No.
the the school performance scores that will come out for the 2425 under the previous system would the 2526 under revised accountability would not because it is not a component of the
revised system. >> Okay. So, so if that's the case, then uh during the course of this meeting, as we understand it, without some sort of emergency action, what would require unanimous board approval to change the agenda, um then my understanding is you
could not make a policy change that would affect the 2526 accountability system. Um because it it wouldn't follow the APA guidelines. Um, so if we want to change the agenda uh so that we could vote, then we then I would offer we
could vote on that, but my understanding is that would require unanimous vote uh at this time to get the agenda changed. Um but but clearly what we've heard is that uh in order to make a policy change
um we we could not do that in compliance with APA rules today. So, um, but that's my thoughts on and then my other question was, um, if if we followed through that process and said,
well, you know, we want to honor the APA rules and we we would not be able to make a policy change on the 2526 SPS, then it seems like the appropriate followup would be to make a a formal request uh to the feds uh to see if it
could be approved or not. And then so my question is how long does that take and is that a response that we could get uh before October Bessie? >> So I I can't speak to nor should I speak to Bessie protocol on process. Uh I can
share with you that if we're asked to uh essentially do something similar to what Mr. Harris suggested um we could certainly submit, you know, a formal request to ED to um explain the issue
and get their response to the issue, but there's no way I can tell you, you know, what their timeline is going to be. You know, I mean, we can we can pull something together relatively fast, but I I can't speak for them. Yes sir.
>> Do do we have any um I don't know uh historical practice that you know could get rule of thumb. Is that typically a week, 30 days, six months, a year? What would typically be historical practice? >> I mean I can't see something like that taking month. I mean three or four
months. Um but again I there's no way that I can answer for how long Ed's going to take to turn something around. I I would assume they would turn it around in a in a in a speed that would be helpful to you. Um but I can't confirm that.
>> And and what is the uh right now the planned release date for those SPS scores that are in contention right now? >> Um which SPS scores are in contention? uh the the 2526 school year is what I
understand that when the new policy is implemented >> um 2526 school year is the school year we have just begun and so uh SPS we would project would be probably October November of 26.
>> Okay. So, so if the scores that are going to be released prior to that, um, the new accountability system is is not utilized is what I'm hearing, if the new accountability system is only used to
establish the baseline going forward, then then these scores wouldn't actually be published uh using the new accountability system. Is that the right interpretation? We will we will publish um the final SPS
and letter grades on the previous formula this October, November. Um and then what we will do as we you know did last year as a as a courtesy and just to be helpful is we'll publish a simulation of where everyone would fall on the
revised system. >> Yeah. But >> okay. So then apparent >> apparently then uh uh the talking point here then is the sensitivity with regard to the simulated SPS. Is that right? Which establishes the baseline for the
next year. >> Um I don't I don't understand what you're asking me with that question, >> Mr. Chair. Yeah, I think I understand what in the for the scores that are coming out now, what's the implication of existing law? We're under the old
system. So there is no implication right now. >> That's right. >> It's not for 12 months. Plus or minus before if this motion were to pass, it wouldn't have any impact for 12 months. That's what he's saying. >> There would be no published impact in
terms of a score. There may be impact in terms of the way in which a school system might choose to staff or schedule, >> but that's what he's driving. That's >> okay. Uh Mr. Castile. That was next. >> Mr. Lu, I want to call you back out one
more time. Mr. Morris outlined uh certain legal policy or APA violations should we choose to proceed uh with Dr. Armstrong's u motion as she presented it. So, it really is a a legal sort of
policy process question. And I don't know if you recall his sequence of questions, but it it probably requires us to get some legal counsel and advice because they are very legal specific questions. Do you recall them? And can
you advise us as to how we should proceed procedurally based on his outline? This would require me to review first the federal law, the enabling statute and the policy regarding this um item. I'm happy to do that, but um I
would need to look into that perform legal analysis and get back with you guys on what I think that the best avenue is is whether the statute affords for the adoption of rule. There's a lot of nuances that are come along with the administrative procedure act and enabling legislation, especially when
federal leg uh legislation is involved. So, um, I'm happy to review that and give you guys an answer on it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So, what are the ramifications if we were to pass a motion and then it be found to be violative of
um of policy? In other words, what what if we pass this motion >> and then two weeks from now you came back and said, "Wait, that's violative of the policy of the Bessie." >> I mean, it could be subject to legal action. It just kind of depends on the how that action is brought. If the
Bessie enacts a policy um or enacts a policy that should be done pursuant to the administrative procedure act and it's outside of the administrative procedure act, then there's different legal reces to um that could be taken, but it's kind of fact specific too on um
a number of scenarios. So it's >> well wouldn't is there any internal actions that would result from that or we would have to wait for external legal action >> really I mean the the ideal thing is that if it should be in policy then it should be done pursuant to the
administrative procedure act um if there's enabling statute that gives you guys the ability to do something you have the ability to create rules based on that enabling >> my point is if there was a motion passed and then you did your research and came back and said no that was not correct Correct. What would be what would be the
ramifications of that? Would we have to revisit that motion at a later meeting? What's the consequences? >> So consequence of continuing to act outside of a pol of a >> Yeah. If you came back and said we would we did it improperly,
how would we fix it? >> It would by rule. If if it was supposed to be done pursuant to rule, then a rule would have to be enacted. So, in other words, we just put it back on the agenda and follow. >> So, okay, Miss Holloway, you wanted to
say something? >> Yes. A couple of things. From what I'm understanding, Dr. Bramley, that um we do not have accurate simulations because the simulations have been or or like they include bank scores for
coming up. Is that right? Um so on the simulation what we have our conversations that we've had with leadership of the association is that we are going to be getting them the new simulations without the banking you know
in the next couple of days. >> Okay. So now we're in a a different a limbo state of scores because scores have been simulated with banked scores. Right. So now you're going to go
back to the join board and redo >> right with banking. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> And that was the and that was the conversation that we've had with superintendent. >> Okay. The other question is we celebrated last week US department was
um handing over the states running the schools and uh so can you tell us when is this going to happen that we run our schools and make these decisions without feds involved? Um, I mean, you would
have to ask a congressman about that because, you know, for the Congress for the um education department to close, it takes uh it would take 60 votes to get over the filibuster. Um, so uh at this point I know that ED is working to move
functions of their agency to different agencies um across the federal government. um and they have tried to give us some additional flexibilities which we intend to use around um funding which I think is positive. Uh and we
have advocated for um uh more of a block grant approach to the states so that boards like Bessie and our own state legislature, local school systems, moms and dads can make decisions on dollars aligned to the priorities of this state.
Um, so that has been some of our advocacy, but uh, for the federal education department to fully close and Secretary McMahon would, you know, she has shared this publicly as well, that does take an act of Congress.
>> Thank you. Anybody else? Mr. Harris. >> Go ahead. >> Just I want to clarify a couple of things. What got us to this point? U, Mr. Marsh and I have had some really good conversations on this as with the rest of the board and it's not like
we're we're fighting over this banking issue. My understanding and my appreciation of this is that the superintendents were told whether uh verbally or whatever or they
understood in March that banking would be allowed in this next coming school year. So they planned for it. They did their things. the story I'm getting and they they uh made all these arrangements and then just a month or two or a couple three months ago they were told it would
not bail allowed. So what I was searching for, what I'm searching for in this particular situation is something to work us out of that. Uh, and it may be to say allow banking one more year, but I can tell you
because I voted for the our current accountability system, it's going to be very difficult, if not impossible, to get me to vote for banking next year. Okay? Because of the unless I'm shown a lot of data that and we put it through
the proper channels. But my understanding and my appreciation of this is that we are trying to find a way uh you know and it may be continuing letting them bank this year that they're already into their school year. Classes
have begun and they were counting on this. And the other issue that has come up is the cut scores now. So, uh, I just want to make sure that me as an individual on Bessie representing the
fifth district that I am fair to my superintendent and I'm fair to my school boards and I'm doing what's best for those students. And I know that eighth graders take algebra one, I never been
able to do that, but they need we need to support that. But I mean, our whole accountability system, the new one, is predicated on us pushing these these dual enrollments, these other things. So, I just wanted to get that out. That's my appreciation of
this. today. I would be prepared to vote for another year of accountability and let's let the attorney work about worry about the the procedures and all that kind of stuff and let the feds worry about it and then we'll take that up at
that point. But we need to be fair to our superintendent and to our school boards in our district. That's all I have to say. >> So, um if I may, uh when this began, there was going to be a report, but Mr. Morris called up Mr. Pal before I could
make any comments which I understand you had an ongoing conversation not question that um but what I I did want to uh just share and I shared this with Dr. Armstrong previously is that you know to in in many ways the points here are negligible
one one way or the other but what we want to make sure that we do is that we uphold a strong accountability system. You know, we've been called out for this board having passed the maybe the most robust accountability system in the country. And even though there's been
four years, five years of push back and conversation, I I do believe that we're in a place as a state now where everybody's kind of ready to move forward. Um, and that represents the conversations I've had with school and system uh leaders. Um,
Mr. Harris and Dr. part. I I want to I don't I don't want to accept for the record that the department told everybody that they could bank because I I don't know that that's true. I do know that there was one communication from a staff member to a superintendent that that provided uh information that was
not accurate. I'm also not going to suggest that we did not say that, you know, because there are a lot of conversations across 500 employees and a ton of calls. um we we are more than happy if it you know if it's the will of of the board to to do a formal request
and ask for the one year um or something like that formally. You know we don't have a problem with that. Um but I think you know to Mr. Morris's point is accurate is that that that would be a change to what was approved because it wasn't approved in the I guess the the
revised accountability model. So that just we're just offering that that we're willing to do that to to be helpful if that's something that you would like us to do. >> I think when we're talking about procedures
in our June meeting, the proposal was on the board as a motion. And so as we discussed the motion of providing for the banking for the advanced and mastery students then we said okay normal
protocol would go through and get some more information from accountability and from the superintendent. So the motion was still on the board. We deferred the motion for this meeting although that's not what's reflected on our agenda but
the actual motion that I made last uh in June was to defer the motion seeking the input and the report from accountability council from the superintendent's advisory council and from the list of questions that we provided the
department of education but the motion was just to defer voting on the motion because we wanted to hear that information. >> Mr. Castile, did you have a comment? >> I think Dr. Armstrong may have addressed
my issue because Mr. Morris raised the issue of whether it would be procedurally appropriate for us to even consider the matter because it's not on the agenda as an action item, but rather only as a report to be received. Uh Dr.
Armstrong Strong's appreciation is that it would be appropriate because it is a continuation of an item from June that was a motion to be considered and therefore her interpretation is that it would be appropriate to consider in in
light of uh it being an ongoing ongoing item that was previously presented to the board. I don't know if that's legally correct, but Miss Dr. Armstrong addressed the concern. >> It sounds >> except that the verbiage of the motion wasn't to to
request a policy change. It was an implementation. So my question in the legal side is if this is a policy change, are we doing the right thing? And then number two, the school systems are already in place for this year.
Everything everything has been done. It's not going to be undone likely. So, it seems to me that we could request a legal u uh review of this procedure
um and move it to the next meeting. H >> um >> that's what I'm saying. Come back in October and do it right. >> Mr. May I clarify that because the original motion >> did request policy changes to bulletin 111 and 118
and provide for the same banking. So the original motion did say that it was requesting policy changes. That was the motion in June. I'm just reading it. >> Okay. M >> seems to me there's a huge question with
the policy. um depending on which side that you're on. It also seems to me that there is a big question with regards to the federal government whether they would allow us to do that. I would propose and uh suggest that this item
be properly deferred to October so that and that the LDOE would make a formal request to the feds to see if this would be allowed. This could be a moot point
um if we did something on this. Now um also that would allow parties involved to come up with an alternative solution that possibly was suggested um with Mr.
Morris and also I know there's some other things coming up with um Dr. Brimley. Um, I don't see how we can h how I can comfortably make a vote on this without answers to
those two questions. >> Thank you, Mr. Burke. Anybody else? Mr. Castillo, you want >> I was just going to ask if uh Mr. Burkin Berken is offering that as a substitute motion to the to Dr. Armstrong. >> Yeah. >> Do we have a second for the substitute?
>> I I second it, Mr. Gustia, we have a question from Superintendent. >> I just I just want to get um so as I appreciate the motion because I'm going to have to execute on the motion. Um the motion is for us as an agency to send in
a request to the feds to understand if this is allowable and what what exactly are we asking for? Are we asking is it allowable in you know eternity? Are we allowing are we asking is it is it for a period of certain amount of time? I just
want to make sure that this board doesn't come back to me in October and say you asked for the wrong thing, you know. So I I want clarity there. >> As far as I'm concerned, um it would we have to make a change. I think had to
do something different. We cannot continue in my opinion with the bank. We need to come up with something that is proactive for the students and for the schools and that those schools that are
allowing seventh and eighth grade kids in English and math to on these early harder subjects that um that the high schools would still benefit. there is a way. Um we just need to move forward
with that way. So as far as my motion is concerned is to see if it's allowable even at all. Um because it doesn't matter in my mind the time period u but I would accept something from
someone else as well. >> Yes, Dr. I do agree with Kevin, but my question is if we formally ask the feds if it's allowable or not, does that cause us issue if they say it it's not allowable, shouldn't have been allowed,
isn't allowable, period. Does that hurt us for the last nine years and what we've been doing. I'm just trying to make sure that we're not putting ourselves in in more trouble. >> I don't know how I don't know how that's
would harm us. um because it's done if it but they say if it's not allowed are our school performance scores and our actions >> I mean do they count? >> I'm I'm just trying to make sure that we don't go steering up a pot.
>> I I I really think that there's a path forward here that's going to benefit everyone. It's going to benefit the kids going in seventh and eighth grade. it's going to benefit the high schools so they're not in their mind penalized for
allowing those seventh and eighth grade students to take algebra and English. So, um I think there's a path forward. I would like an opportunity to work on that path forward. Uh because as I said, I think we could be having a vote that
just would do us no good to have a vote. Now, >> I want to agree with you too, Mr. Burton that I agree there is a path forward and I've you know had some initial conversations with some of you on the board on what that could be. I've had some initial conversations with the superintendent association on what that
might could be. I think back to Mr. Harris's point, this is a um a short period of time for which we're having to make a decision. Um I just want to make sure that whatever you're asking us to do that we we do that the way in which
you intended for us to do it. Mr. Harris, >> just just a real quick question for the superintendent. You we have to submit an ESSA plan to the federal government. Is that correct? >> We have to. So, if we're going to make
alterations, you know, the the board would vote for those alterations after the proper public process. We would post those. We post those. We get additional public comment. That goes into the feds. they turn around back to us with a decision. >> Okay. So, because a comment was made,
our ESSA plan did not have banking in it, but our accountability system did the last eight years. So, I'm just I'm trying to clarify in my mind what procedure you'd have to go through for the next 30 days if it's if like Dr. Clark said, is it worth it? You know,
we're talking about this. I can't I can't imag I mean I don't want to speak for the feds and I I can't imagine them coming back and penalizing us in some particular way >> based based on that and and we've we've already you know shared that this is
what we had been doing. Um so I I would not anticipate any form of you know them going back and trying to create some action relative to that. I think the question is just going forward. Yes, please go ahead.
>> Well, I just want to first just take the time to say thank you to everyone. I know that this is not an easy issue. It's not complex. And as a student, I can't claim to be an expert on the accountability system or any of that. But I really do believe that it is in the best interest of students to allow
eighth graders to take Algebra 1. Um, as a eighth grader who I took algebra 1, I got an advanced. I've now as a junior, I completed AP calculus. I got a five. only 20% of students nationally get a five. And now I'm able to go to
Southeastern uh University and take discrete mathematics. So for someone like me, taking math and my parish and my schoolboard allowing me to continue this educational journey has really helped me not only with my standardized test scores, but in my personal life, um
in my love for learning and in my intellectual curiosity. So I just want to take the time to thank everybody who I know it's not easy. I know there's a lot of moving parts, but I just really want to thank you guys for doing the best for our Louisiana students. >> Thank you. So, is there any other
comment? Miss Holloway, >> I want to follow up on the question I asked about uh the simulations. When will superintendents receive the accurate simulations? Was anything >> uh we we'll uh try to get them within a
week from today. >> Today? within within a week of >> oh say you okay and I think that we're still unclear about what we're asking the feds what question in on banking are
we asking are we going to allow banking counting scores twice we just need to leave here clear on what are we asking >> Miss Holloway my to to be clear my only question I'm asking of the board is are you asking me to ask is this permissible
for for eternity or are you asking for me to ask for a transitional period? >> Needs to be stated. >> Why don't we ask for both? >> You what? >> A boat. Both. Both. what what
Superintendent Romley had said, you know, for clarification was uh you know, in general terms, we're talking about banking and whether or not banking should be allowed in the accountability system. So, we would want to clearly define banking for the feds as it's been
applied historically and then ask them uh if if that is allowed in an accountability system. And then we'd want to go a little deeper and we'd want to say uh you know c can we extend it for uh one year uh and then part B would
be uh is this something that could be applied longer term? Why why not ask both and then and then go through the the appropriate uh legal review of Miss Mrs. Lru and and all the other legal parties. make sure this board makes a well-informed decision, not rush into
something uh that that that I I haven't understood yet what the rush is that we can't wait till October. Um but we get a, you know, a good thorough review both from the legal perspective, federal feedback, uh and then this board can make a well-informed decision, you know,
whatever it may be. >> So, does everybody understand the motion where we are right now? >> Yes, I do. And maybe it might be wise as we communicate with the federals um I almost said federalis but we're
wrong country uh that that we maybe uh give the reason why we're asking as a matter of context because we're going to a new accountability system. We're asking for one year because of a
misunderstanding with the some of our school boards and superintendent. It may be uh I would suggest maybe putting the story background in your request to them because they may say, "Yeah, you can do it for a year, but maybe not next time."
>> Mr. Chair, if I could um along that line of thought about um u if we can agree to uh to um come back in October well prepared, better prepared for this conversation. Um, another thing we might
consider in that preparation would be to uh consider some of the alternatives that we had discussed, you know, as a means to again this common ground that we all have. Um, you know, I I think uh I would certainly open that up to
suggestions, but you know, if we could uh um work with u superintendent, if we could work with LDOE, if we could work with national experts uh and you know, and come back with a couple of options that that wouldn't be perceived to be
contentious and and that could be uh implemented uh and and agreed upon by all parties. Um this the particular one that interests me now personally would be to look at the math ACT score. Um and and hey, can we come up with a number? You
know, hey, if you can score a minimum of X on your math ACT score, uh you know, you you've demonstrated, you know, a level of excellence that we're we're really proud of and want to acknowledge and and it merits some additional credit for the high schools. High schools would get the same credit that that they would
with the banking system. So, any concerns about uh SPS scores, that would be addressed. Any concerns about ethical concerns, who's taking credit for whose work, that would be addressed. Um, and and we're still providing uh incentive
for eighth graders to take algebra 1. Um, so I would just uh encourage us uh to work with those parties to see if we couldn't add that to our preparation list for October if we can approve Mr. Berkin's motion. Okay.
>> To that end, I um Dr. Van Meter was spoke earlier and he's one of the biggest districts in my area that utilize this. So, I commit to working Jason, you and I, on some a path forward
that would help and work with you. So, um I think and I I believe we can have something by October. >> Okay. We have a substitute motion by Mr. Burkin. Is there any questions or comments further? None. Is there any
objection to the substitute motion? So, no objection. The sec the substitute motion stands adopted. Next item. Your next item is 9.1. Consideration of requests from non-public schools for waiverss of policy contained in bulletin 137 Louisiana early learning center
licensing regulations regarding rat share requirements for four-year-olds. The recommendation is to approve the waivers as outlined and authorize the state superintendent to grant future waivers of the same requirement for schools with requests meeting the specifications. >> Paris moves.
>> Yes. >> Okay. Do we have any comments or questions or do you want to present this? >> Do we have comments? >> We have some comments. >> Okay. Yeah, let me let me go ahead. Uh, thanks Mr. Appel. So, uh, this really goes back to the conversation that was held earlier, um, relative to act, um,
409, which is Senator Barrow's bill, um, for Charlie's Law. Um, we we have worked, um, you know, our team spent, um, uh, worthwhile time with the family on this particular issue. Um and then
after the legislation has been passed, we've spent considerable time working with non-publiclix on thinking through implementation. Um we've developed um FAQ sheets to be helpful. We have um held a number of webinars. We have gone
uh physically to a number of non-publics to visit with them and and they have they've been fantastic in in trying to work through the implementation of of of this new uh uh lift which is act 409. Um one of one of the issues that I think I
think it does make sense um as we think about this concern more long term is just the immediacy of staffing for this particular year. Um, act 409 calls for tighter staffing uh restrictions, which
I understand and it and it makes sense. The complication is for this for this particular year um much of the staffing has already happened for non-publix and so for them to be able to apply a stricter ratio um can become um um a
factor uh on their operations which we are hearing might prompt some of them uh to to deny students who want families who want the care um or not be able to fund some of some of their operations moving forward. So what what this
particular request is because 137 allows me in section 319 to um uh to request for you all to wave um issues when there is an economic burden um so long as that
an alternative means is provided for uh for safety that um I can make that request. And so what what we are requesting is uh to be able to wave this uh ratio for this particular year. Uh
presently I believe non-publish are around typically around 20 to1. Uh the legislation calls for 15 to1 but as you heard earlier they're just getting this information right now um as it's into law. And so what we're asking is just
for this this particular year for a waiver of this ratio um should they apply? And so we would also ask that you would provide me with the ability uh to have authority to handle these requests so I'm not having to bring them all back
to you over the course of the next few months particularly whenever um we're not we may not be meeting in time uh for some of these needs to be met. >> Thank you. Uh any other I mentioned the board >> and one one other comment. We're not we're not arguing that the the ratios
might not be more appropriate moving forward. We're just suggesting because of the the immediate impact and the timeliness providing a little relief for this particular year. >> Okay. Anybody else? >> I think it's also important that Senator
Barl did in the letter that she wrote us, she did uh appreciate our review of these waiver applications. So, I think that's notable. And we have received waiver applications. >> Okay. All right. We have three folks
wanting to speak. Roger Williams, Sister Carol Shiveley, and Dr. Rel Houston. >> What's that? >> They all waved. Everybody's waving. Well, we can wave back. Anyway,
um Okay. Any questions or comments? Anything? Any objection to the motion? No objection. The motion stands adopted. Number 10. >> Next item is on page 175, item 10.1, consideration of the summary of public comments and agency response concerning
public comment received in reference to the May 20th, 2025 notice of intent regarding bulletin 1508, people appraisal handbook. The recommendation is to receive this PAR and authorize Bessie staff to submit the summary report to the legislative oversight committees. And I might remind you all
that we're going to pick up 7.4 when this this one's done. So, uh, Mr. Morris moves and Miss Champan seconds. Do we have any comments or questions? Any audience? Okay. The motion, uh, uh, is
there any objection to the motion? The motion stands adopted. Number 7.4. >> Your next item is on page 153, item 7.4, 4 consideration of revisions to bulletins 1508 people appraisal handbook regarding screening and evaluation of students for special education and related services. The recommendation is
to approve as a notice of intent revision to bulletin 1508. >> Mr. Superintendent. >> Yes sir. One comment. >> Oh wait wait wait. We have a motion. Mr. Harris moves and Mr. Burkin seconds. Now you go. >> Yes sir. So one one comment. This is this is why we made the request Mr.
Appel and Mr. Morris motion for this to put this item behind the spicar. So what happened is um we had a new policy or revised policy with 1508. We received some additional public comment that um we agreed with and we wanted to make
those adjustments, some technical, some more substantive um which is all part of the process. Uh and so now we're coming back and saying as a result of those additional public comments, we want to make these uh shifts. And so that's why you have that's why it made sense for us
to put this item behind the spicar. >> Thank you. Any comments or questions from the board? Anybody in the audience wishing to speak to this item? Any objections to the motion? Motion stands adopted. Next >> that concludes your agenda.
>> Thank you. Thank you all for the patience. It was a long struggle. >> So the next committee will um convene at 1:15. Allows for lunch and a nap.