of June 9th. And could we have a roll? Oops. He's not ready. Oh, you're going to do us. Okay, >> he's ready. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Appel, >> here. >> Appel is present. Dr. Armstrong. Dr. Armstrong is present. Mr. Burkin, >> Mr. Berkin's present. Mr. Cow
>> here. >> Mr. Cow is present. Mr. Castile. Mr. Castile is present. Miss Yong >> here. >> Miss Yong is present. Dr. Clark >> here. >> Dr. Clark is present. Mr. Harris >> here. Mr. Harris is present. Miss Holloway. Miss Holloway is present. Miss
Melerin. Miss Melerin is not present. Mr. Morris. Mr. Morris is present. Miss Columbus. M. Columbus is present. You have a quorum. Thank you very much. Uh, first item. You ready? First item. >> Your consent agenda is ready for
approval. Adding items 4.1 and 4.2. Is that it? You done? >> Okay. Uh, we need a motion. Mr. Harris moves. Mr. Castile seconds. Okay. Okay. So, um is there any presentation
from the staff on All righty. Uh I guess we have one public comment from Steven Stewart. Is it I read that right? Frontline practitioners of integrity and
fidelity. Uh dealing with item 4.2. Where'd he go? There he is. Good morning. Uh, could just state your name, please? >> I'm sorry. Good afternoon. You're right. >> Oh, wow. Thank you. I'm Stephen Stewart.
Please forgive me. I'm Horse. Um, I'm pleased to be able to speak in front of this esteemed body. Um, I'm representing the frontline practitioner. This is not an organization. I'm just a little lowly
teacher in the state of Louisiana by choice. I am proudly with, some of you may be familiar with Louisiana Rebirth Academy. It is a newly formed charter school. We're in our second year of existence. We cater to the adjudicated youth and
those that have been expelled and suspended and and who are having problems. was catering, I'm sorry, traversing their way successfully through the typical brick andmortar setting. I'm just giving you a little background on me. I I' I'd really like to
for this board and Dr. Brumley and the Senate and the Louisiana Legislative Educational Committees to take this into consideration, please. I returned to public education after a 10-year hiatus. And having been dispatched throughout the state to proctor LEAP and ACT tests,
I think it is very uh necessary that all of you need to know how our frontline practitioners are being treated when they are hired, dispatched to monitor, to proctor these tests. Teachers feel like they are being
treated like criminals. They cannot bring any reading material in the room. They cannot access a computer. Can you imagine if we took your computers from you and all of your reading materials from you and you and we ask you to sit in this forum and just look at the audience and not have any line of
communication whatsoever with them. teachers feel like every teacher I spoke with indicates that they feel demeaned, disrespected, being treated like a criminal, um uh insulted. I'm asking you
to please look into these guidelines. Uh it is it is um facilitating a it may be a very small percentage, but it is helping to facilitate a teacher shortage. Many teachers who participate in this process
leave so disenfranchised, so disgusted that some of them quit. They're like, "I'm being treated like a criminal. I'm the most powerful source in the room. I don't need a daily newspaper or Time magazine or the Atlantic or the Economist or a National Geographic
magazine or some outside material to assist our students cheating. If I want to help them cheat, I'm the most powerful source in the room as a as a well- educated instructor. I can help them cheat. If if that is if I lack that
fidelity and then that integrity, I'm I'm imploring you to please um look over the guidelines that govern teachers proctoring LEAP and ACT tests because far too every teacher I talk to
says that it make the process makes them feel disgusted, disrespected. Um they leave they don't leave happy camp. Can you imagine our teachers returning to the our classrooms after a week of being treated like this and they're expected to to to to tiptoe through the tulips
and and come back to the classroom with a jolly personality to teach our future. It is very demeaning and I am begging you and Dr. Brumley to look into these guidelines and to change this stuff please. >> And and let me just note that um we
introduce you as referring to item 4.2 but it's actually 5.1. you your comments were t well taken but they'll be applied to 5.1. >> Yes sir. I will leave that to you as a distinguished panel but again please I I
am um there's not a gesture that I can express to convey my gratitude to have this forum. >> Thank you. >> Thank you very kindly. >> We appreciate it. Thank you very much. Okay. Any uh questions or comments about the motion?
Any objection to the motion? There's no objection. And that motion stands adopted. Next, >> your first item is on page four, item 2.1, consideration of the 2026 2027 non-public school academic classifications report to renew
previously approved non-public school classifications and to consider new non-public schools and academic classifications. The recommendation is to approve. >> Okay. Motion by Miss Champan, second by Miss Holloway. Um, you have a
presentation. >> There's there's no presentation from the department. This is just the approval of the schools requesting uh non-public schools requesting Bessie approval. >> Okay. Any questions uh before the board? Hearing no questions, any objections to
the motion. The motion stands adopted. The next item, please. Your next item is on page 37, item 3.1, consideration of an update report regarding AI workg groupoup deliverables. The recommendation is to receive. >> Okay, Mr. Berkin moves and Mr. G
seconds. Again, any based on recommendations from the Bessie AI workg group, this report is going to represent the continued implementation and further development of a comprehensive AI strategy. We have Assistant Superintendent Townsen and
Miss Jamie Mixon from the department to provide the presentation. >> Okay. Who wants to go first? >> Well, thank you. Good afternoon. I'm Ashley Townsen with the department. Um, I'm excited to come and talk to y'all a little bit today about LDOE's progress
on implementing AI in K12 education. Um, Mr. Mo thought it might be helpful for y'all to have a little handout. So, you've got a handout with you. He thought that might be helpful as we track along. You may also notice that the slides are um in a slightly different order than what they might be in your packet. In true teacher fashion,
I was reviewing my lesson ahead of time and thought some resequencing might be helpful. So, same content but a little bit different order. So, wanted to give youall that disclaimer as well. Okay. So the LDLE's vision is that AI serves as a tool to support learning,
enhance teaching practices, and prepare Louisiana students for a technologyrich future, all while keeping classrooms safe, engaging, and innovative. While we recognize AI as a valuable tool within our schools and systems, educators and leaders remain at the center of
instructional decision-making. In fall 2024, the LDOB published its GA AI guidance for K12 schools. The guidance offers suggestions for schools and systems in relation to safety, privacy, academic rigor, and integrity
when integrating AI. In October 2025, Bessie formally established the artificial intelligence work group to develop recommendations for expanding AI integration in classrooms and workforce programs. The work group chaired by Dr. Henderson developed recommendations to
ensure Louisiana proactively prepares students for an AIdriven economy while supporting effective teaching, innovation, and alignment with workforce needs. Incorporating the recommendations of the Bessie AI work group with the existing
LDOE work, Louisiana's comprehensive plan for AI and K12 education addresses the six recommendations through an AI literacy framework. So, I'd like to start with recommendation two, which was the AI literacy framework because it anchors Louisiana's comprehensive plan
for AI represented by the five areas you see on the slide. This framework provides a roadmap for actions at the state system and school building and classroom levels. These five areas are also represented in a coherent way through the updated educational
technology plan, updated tech readiness tool, and professional learning opportunities for educators and leaders, student and teacher AI competencies, all of which were developed as a part of recommendation one. This recommendation that LDOE develop policy and
implementation strategies to support LDOE's AI comprehensive plan is where the bulk of our recent work exists. As y'all see on your handout, there are a lot of a lot of bullets in that area. The Louisiana Student Standards for Computer Science already address
emerging technologies and foundational concepts that support AI literacy through existing computer science learning expectations. To strengthen alignment and clarity, the LDOE has developed a crosswalk.
Nope. >> Recommendations one and two formed the Bessie work group clearly articulated the need for expectations or competencies based on the role of leaders, teachers, and students. This aligned well with the LDOE plan to create an addendum to the K12 computer
science standards as a vehicle for periodic review of certain components of these standards. To keep with the dynamic nature of this content, LDOE has now developed teacher and student AI competencies which further expand the framework to provide clear expectations
for responsible and intentional AI use in schools. These competencies are are organized around Louisiana's AI literacy framework and are designed to support ethical implementation, professional learning, and local decision-making. Student competencies are organized by
grade bands like our computer science standards are, while teacher competencies support instructional practice and responsible implementation. And the LDOE anticipates publishing these competencies later this month. And so the crosswalk I mentioned is
important because it shows educators how those AI competencies connect with the Louisiana Standards for Computer Science. So to strengthen alignment and and clarity, this crosswalk connects those two, helping educators better understand where AI related concepts are
already embedded. The standards continue to emphasize computational thinking, responsible technology use, and problem solving to support college, career, and future readiness. And the LDOE anticipates publishing the computer science to AI competencies crosswalk
this month. The updated educational technology plan now includes additional considerations for AI enabled technologies as part of broadm system planning. And if you're thinking that technology plan sounds familiar, you did just receive it in
January, but the team was able to put together an updated version based on their recommendations. It's about 11 pages longer and that's available now. So we were able to publish this twice in one year. So huge thanks to the team for that work. New questions are now designed to support local reflection,
readiness, and responsible implementation with alignment to digital responsibility, privacy, and instructional priorities. These updates are intended to support more coherent technology decision-making at the local level. The technology readiness tool is
currently open for school systems to submit and is due October 15th with the expanded AI related considerations included for the first time. This data will help to address recommendation three which highlighted the need to gain a better understanding of AI competency
and use across the state. The LDOE has also developed an artificial intelligence evaluation tool that school systems may use to make thoughtful informed decisions when considering AI enabled tools. The tool includes structured review criteria
focused on instructional alignment, privacy, and implementation with a strong emphasis on highquality instructional materials alignment, and educator support. It also promotes an evidence-based approach to evaluating educational value, and includes considerations for professional
learning, technical support, and scaling. The LDOE anticipates publishing the AI evaluation tool in June 2026 to support local decision-making and responsible implementation. And this tool begins the work in relation to charge 3, which outline the need to
point schools and systems toward quality AI tools. The ODLE is also updating the AI guidance for K12 schools to reflect continued implementation efforts and lessons learned since the initial release. The updated guidance will include some updated implementation
considerations. Importantly, this update is intended to serve as a centralized resource, bringing together many of the deliverables I just discussed all in one place. The updated guidance will include the teacher and student AI competencies, the artificial intelligence technology
evaluation tool, and the computer science to AI competencies crosswalk, providing schools and systems with a comprehensive resource to support local planning and implementation. and we anticipate publishing that updated guidance later this summer. At a close, I'd like to briefly recap
the information shared. Louisiana's AI plan gives us a clear vision and structure through five strategic pillars. It aligns actions at the state system and school building or classroom levels, always keeping educators at the center of instruction while helping students build the AI literacy they need
for the future. Recommendation four was to investigate appropriate assessment of AI literacy. Our LDOE office of assessments, accountability, and analytics is leading this work. Recommendations five and six centered on continued collaboration among key stakeholders to ensure students are
ready for work that may look very different as the technology and workforce demands continue to change. An initial meeting with the core group called for in the recommendation is scheduled for a little under two weeks from now. Next steps are to finalize and publish the new resources now that we've
received additional feedback from educators and leaders at Teacher Leader Summit. And of course, those are available to all of you. If you would like to engage in those or see any um versions of those, we welcome your feedback as well. Next steps include expanding opportunities for educators and
teachers, students to engage with AI, to strengthen collaboration with external partners such as workforce commission and industry partners, and to continue state level communication and support. With this plan, Louisiana is taking bold, thoughtful steps to lead in the effective AI integration for Louisiana
students future. And Jamie and I are here and happy to take any questions or feedback you might have at this time. Uh just a question. We're not teaching AI in exclusiveness
to traditional logic and coding and that sort of stuff. In other words, it's an addon, not a substitute. Correct. >> Correct. And this is one thing that I know as I've had conversations with other states, they've really appreciated this approach and many of them are
adopting this approach as well as far as incorporating AI literacy into their computer science standards because when we do it that way, it's teaching students what that logic and those patterns of thinking are like. It's helping them understand what AI really is. It's not, you know, a magic answer
giver, but it's, you know, there there's logic behind that. And so it teaches them the tools that they need to be able to understand what it is and how to use it appropriately, which we think is very important as well. >> Thank you. U soon to be Dr. Morris. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair.
>> Um Miss Townson, can you help me through this from an operational perspective? If if I'm a school leader, there's an expectation that um my students, my staff across the entire campus are going to have a certain level of AI literacy
and uh depending on my role and responsibility on the campus, um my skill set with regard to AI literacy is going to vary. Um, so, so as that school leader, um, how does it look for me operationally to make sure that I', I've
got that first of all, that fundamental foundation across my campus? To me, that's step number one. How does that happen for a school leader? >> So, we have a few resources that we're making available. for one the teacher competencies which we developed in um
conjunction with the teacher work group that we have we've gotten um feedback on that from our teacher advisory council as well as at teacher leader summit and those that set of competencies has enabled us to develop um a very basic training an AI literacy introduction
that will be available to all educators in Louisiana on our professional learning platform in August and that could be a place where a school leader might start with just for themselves They're doing that training to see where their own understanding is, to see what kinds of competencies their educators
might be working toward. I think one thing that's important too is just to remember what our primary goals have to be. You know, even as an agency, you see them reflected in our priorities. Are students reading on level? Can students do math on level? Um, are our teachers effective? And we have processes in
place for measuring teacher effectiveness. AI literacy and the way that they're integrating that within their campus is going to fall into those key priorities. and we have resources there to support them along the way and differentiating that support for teachers and students. >> So, so they should be able to get this
fundamental AI literacy training through course offering in August is what I heard. >> Correct. And then there are other resources available as well if they decide they want to go a little deeper. Um Louisiana Tech is offering a micro credential. It'll be available this fall. Um there are other training
resources that'll be available too. So just as a starting point for them to see what's that baseline level of literacy, what kinds of things can I be working toward on my campus as resources are available now. >> Okay. And then uh as as a school leader, another thing that I might be considering lot been a lot of discussion
around the vetting tool. So there's, you know, um 100 people at my door trying to sell me something greener than grass, right? Um I'd like to get that down to something that's manageable. And so we've had discussions about a vetting tool or clearing house or or some sort of approach that would help school
leaders out. Can can you help us out a little bit with regard to what the status of the vetting tool is now and what kind of circulation it's seen and and when this board would potentially see a final product. >> Yes, sir. We'd be happy to share that that with you all right now. So it's um
excuse me. So it was released um for some initial feedback. We shared it at Teacher Leader Summit. We've heard good reviews so far. I actually heard from a a few school system superintendents that they appreciated the comprehensiveness of it. It's kind of lengthy if you go through it, but it gives them lots to
think about as they look to make those decisions, but it keeps that decision making local, closest to the student and um gives them resources that they can use to evaluate products without telling them exactly what direction they have to go. And then if you call, one of the recommendations of the work group was to collect information about what products
school districts are using because that's helpful to other districts too for them to see what each other are using. So our tech readiness tool collection will collect that information now and it will get reported in conjunction with our statewide educational technology plan report. So that way they can see what each other are using and be able to get some
feedback that way as well. >> So So when will this board see the vetting tool? >> So the the Oh, anytime. We can send it into this week. We took some feedback from summit. We incorporated that and into this >> and so we can send you all a copy if you're interested, whoever's interested in that.
>> Right. Okay. Um, so I'm a school leader and I've got to hire a math teacher for this next semester and I want to make sure that, you know, my full staff is got that fundamental level of AI literacy, but but also going back to the
vetting tool and and the work process there. um how how do I go about um staffing that position with someone that's not only qualified to uh present
the material but also is familiar with the with the tools that that are now available in the marketplace. >> I think it depends. >> How do I guess actually my question is really how do I recognize somebody with that skill set so I know it's a good fit for my school? Well, you know,
administrators will be responsible for that hiring process on on their own. Like DOE certainly is not um attempting to be involved in the personnel decisions there. Um but as an administrator, you're going to want the best math teacher. So, who you think can most effectively teach those students
that math content that you're hiring that person for. Um you know, and we do have processes within our teacher evaluation tool even for um activities and materials. technology integration is there within that um with within that component of the rubric. And so that's
something that as an administrator, if you're familiar with um what effective math teaching practice looks like, part of that is going to be the way that teachers use activities and materials with their students and the way that they plan for their instruction and the way they're using student assessment to inform their instruction. And so, um all
of that just plays together. But the most the most streamlined way for an for an an administrator to be able to help differentiate teacher support will be through our teacher evaluation process that we have that builds in that professional growth for educators with what they're seeing in their teacher in
their teacher observations. >> Right. So So I I appreciate that, but that teacher evaluation um would be after I've hired that person or may maybe from a previous school I guess from previous history. I was really thinking more along the lines of credentiing. Has there been any thought
about uh any sort of credentiing process to recognize a particular skill set in in this in this growing field? >> The Louisiana Tech course I believe comes with a micro credential. So that could be something I don't know if you want to give details about that. >> Jamie Mixon
Jamie Mixon Louisiana Department of Education. So to answer your question, the micro credential that is being developed through Louisiana Tech, there is a possibility of that. we've used it in other places but there hasn't been like broad discussion about that but
certainly we could look into that a little bit further. >> Okay. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Chair. >> Thank you. Anybody else? Mr. G. >> Uh yes. You uh you stated uh about AI literacy. Uh and obviously uh my biggest
concern is um what kind of guidelines are we thinking about or we uh implementing or even have in place in order to um prevent the dangers of AI in somehow
overly uh affecting our our kids and their ability to think. So I think one important consideration is that we've incorporated this into our computer science standards which emphasize computational thinking and so that that logic piece that is really
going to be core to our computer science standards that's where this AI literacy concept is housed and so in our teacher competencies and our student competencies we'll continue to review those um every year or so as the tech continues to emerge but that it's
couched within this um framework that emphasizes computational thinking which has logic built into it. I don't know if you want to add to that Jane. >> Yeah, I think I would just add to the conversation that among our AI literacy guidance that we're publishing that
teacher placement and student thinking has been centered. And so continuing to offer those guidelines to our schools and systems and leaders, I think that will be key so that we're not replacing student thinking, we are supporting student learning. Does that answer your
question? >> Yes. Yes. Uh and and also, you know, we we read uh in the news how uh AI might have contributed to um suicides and things like that. Uh I wonder uh whether
or not uh what kind of system do we have in place uh in order to possibly uh prevent those in those things from happening uh with with our kids. >> I think that's one reason too that local
decision making is so important. You know, and we we talk a lot of times about AI literacy as this very broad concept when really it's got several different components to it. you know, you have AI literacy the way we've been speaking about it a lot today, which is what students know and are able to do
when it comes to artificial intelligence and that we house within our computer science standards. And that piece we've been very proactive on as a state, but there's this component of and I think this is a little more what what what you're referring to where students are using artificial intelligence to engage
with the content and we've been a lot more um conservative I feel like on our approach with that because we're prioritizing content development and understanding. you know, our conversations with our curriculum providers around AI has been has been
that it's been it's been within the confines of of high quality instructional materials which um are centered on our student standards and that helps protect instructional integrity which is something that's been very important to us. And so, you know, and as a former, you know, I've taught lots of different subjects, but, you
know, as a former English teacher, I wouldn't have my students learning how to use AI to write a paper if I wasn't confident that the students could really competently write a paper on their own. And I think it's that similar idea. We want to make sure that we're prioritizing the academic learning that
has to happen, not chasing shiny things. And so that guidance that we're giving to educators and leaders about how to think about the way in which they're incorporating artificial intelligence is is going to be really important too. One one thing too, you know, um starting June 30th, teacher prep providers are
going to have to provide instruction on computer science um um competencies to those educators who are in those those pre-ervice programs. And you'll hear a little bit about that tomorrow in our joint conversation with the um with the board of regents. But I think that those
um those pre-ervice experiences that educators will have too in terms of thinking about how to think about AI and incorporating that into instruction will be really important for them to be able to make good decisions about not compromising instructional integrity. >> And I would just add to that
conversation that I think all of our AI vendors that we've been engaging with are also very concerned about student data privacy and that sort of thing. So we have agreements in place with some of those vendors to ensure that there is safety and privacy in in in part of
those agreements. And we also have one of the items that's going to be at our first um meeting with this group of of the core agency stakeholders that we're having in a couple of weeks um centers on new legislation that OTS requested that we include that on the agenda that
does um a bit more on the data privacy side as well too because that's an important when you're talking about safety considerations. That's something that we're continuing the conversation as well as well. But OTS is driving that charge because that's that fits more neatly within their shop than with LDOE's. >> Anyone else? Mr. Moore.
>> Yeah, one other thought. Um, and I want to share this with board members, too. I know Miss Townson, you and I have had this conversation already, so bear with me, please. Um, I was in a really good meeting about a month or so ago with some DOE staff and some faculty at a
local elementary school and they had partnered with uh a vendor that uh provided HQIM high quality instructional material uh to to the school and this particular vendor had built on their HQIM and added the the AI component. So,
they've added this additional tool that they can leverage when it's appropriate to supplement the HQIM delivery. Um, and that the teachers were were I'm going to stop a little bit short short of euphoric, but but they were very excited about their experience for the entire
school year. Uh, both on based on their personal experience as educators, but also the way the students responded. this this whole concept of differentiated learning um when when it was first introduced to me, Superintendent Brumley introduced me to Salon two or three years ago and and and
he uh showed us his product at that time. And this whole idea that every kid in the class has has got a tutor built into their laptop and so you're you look at the kid in the back of the room is totally zoned out and u afraid to raise their hand and ask this silly question
to re-engage. Well, now now they just ask the tutor in the laptop. And the cool thing about it is the tutor in the laptop is going to respond at that child's level. So the child the child that's really struggling in the back of the room might ask a question differently than the kid that finished a
half hour early. But but the but the AI tool is going to respond at that individual students level. So that student has a better opportunity to re-engage. But one of the cool things about the conversation with these teachers was that Yeah, Mr. Morris, that's true, but it also works on the
other end of the spectrum. We've we've had students that were advanced in the class, get through 30 minutes early and they're going to go read a book or play a game or do something else. But with the tool now, it'll take the advanced students to the next level on the same subject matter content. And so the
teachers were really excited about um their ability to leverage the tool at the appropriate time and be able to meet every student at their level. Um and and additionally the tool gave them the feedback to know that this group of students understand standard number one,
that group of students understand standard number two, but this group of students doesn't understand standard number three. That's where I go focus my time instead of trying to spend two minutes here, two minutes there, two minutes there with every student in the class. Then I'm stressed out and nobody really gets the quality attention that
they need. So the teachers were really excited about their productivity in the class. the students uh engagement in the class and and they felt like they had really learned leveraged the material really leveraged the tool really well.
But the the other learning that that I got and that I wanted to share with this group was that the eighth grade class had the opportunity first and the principal received a lot of positive feedback and so the seventh grade staff wanted the opportunity to use the same
tool. So the principal endorsed the move but they didn't get the same results and they concluded they didn't get the same results because the PD was introduced differently. The PD was introduced to the eighth grade group uh face to face synchronously but the seventh grade
group it was asynchronous and and they didn't get the same uh quality of orientation and how to use the product and they didn't get the same results. So I just sharing that because I think it's a critical learning both the differentiated learning uh concept
across the full spectrum AC how the PD is introduced for the tool be you know my experience has been that you know the value of the tool is knowing when and how to use the tool assuming you select the right tool for the task. Um, so I think the PD instruction is really significant. But then the question that
I have for you guys, and to me it's the million-dollar question, and we've had some uh conversations already with you guys, but the bottom line is what what is the value of the tool? So, I'm interested in how DOE plans to assess the value of the tool
when LEAP results come out. And I'm interested not only in the academic outcomes, but I'm interested in the qualitative results that you get from educators. Um, so I'm I'm looking forward to hearing about the educator experience over the school year for the pilot programs that that we rolled out
across several districts in the state. What kind of qualitative feedback are we getting from educators about that experience? And then and then also obviously the academic return. So um not not sure when you guys are going to be able to come back with something, but that that's what I would look forward to hearing. Thank you, Mr. chair.
>> Thank you. Anyone else? >> I just want to add a couple of things. Um, just so the especially the audience in the TV land will understand the significance of this. The state of Louisiana has languished economically behind the rest of the South for
decades. We are we've always been known as the last of the last. We've turned that around in education and suddenly big tech has discovered Louisiana. We've got mega uh data centers going in all
over the state. Uh yesterday I think it was announced that Meta is going to invest 1314 million dollars in education for uh people to work basically for META obviously, but that will spill over. Um,
what I'm seeing is an opportunity for Louisiana to catch hold of a of a uh a wave uh that we haven't had that chance in a long time. So, the significance of what we're doing is raising the expectations of our
state so that we can economically prosper. So, especially look look at those poor areas. They were talking about Grant Parish the other day and how much money is flowing to Grant Parish government now that they can use for government services and for infrastructure and so forth as a result
of the big data center. This is an opportunity we haven't seen in in a lifetime. So we need to grasp this opportunity with all the strength we can and hold on to it. Yeah, we have to worry about safety and those sort of things. It's really important
guidelines, but we if we don't grab this opportunity, somebody else will and that other person is probably going to be speaking Chinese. So, I I'm very very excited for what DOE is doing, what higher ed's doing. Uh, and and I think
this is the chance of many lifetimes for our state. So, that that's all I wanted to say. Anybody else >> with that? >> Or Vietnamese Conrad. Oh, you want to say something? >> I said or Vietnamese >> could be Vietnamese,
but I think the Chinese got a little bit of lead. Anyway, thank you very much. Uh, any uhbody have any questions or issues with the motion that's on the floor hearing? None. The motion stands adopted. Thank you all. Appreciate it. Your next item is on page 50, item 3.2,
Two, consideration of the authorization of course providers for the CO course choice program and reauthorization of successful course choice providers. The recommendation is to approve and receive. >> Mr. Morris moves and Dr. Clark seconds.
Do we have any uh presentations? No presentations. Do we have any questions or issues? Not uh hearing no objections. That motion stands adopted. Next item. >> Your next item is on page 53, item 3.3,
consideration of jumpstart 2.0, graduation pathway enhancements and fastforward pathways. The recommendation is to approve. >> Uh Mr. Castillo moves and Mr. Burkin seconds. Presentation, anything on this one?
>> No, no presentation on this one. This is just uh 25% of our high school students are on a career diploma pathway. Part of that career diploma pathway includes taking a bundle of nine CTE courses. For those students that are focusing on IT, what this agenda item is doing is adding
CT is adding IT courses to that pathways and it's also IT courses that meet the new computer science graduation requirement. >> Thank you. That is a presentation. So, any questions or on the issue or Morris?
>> Yeah, Mr. Bradford. Um, there's a lot of discussion over this over the last year or so. I'm just curious, um, is this the complete list? I'm curious where I would find the complete list of courses that satisfy the computer science graduation requirement.
>> Yeah, we'll let Miss Townson speak to the courses that are required and we would locate them. >> Good afternoon, Ashley. It's five right now, I think. >> Okay. So, you all as as a joint Bessie and board of regents in December approved course equivalencies for
computer science. And so, right now, um computer science for the graduation requirement, which goes into effect with next year's eighth or this coming year's eighth graders. Um you can satisfy that in a few ways. Uh you can take CTE computer science classes, which might be able to even satisfy a CTE requirement
or a foreign language requirement. you can take um certain computer science classes that satisfy a math, some that satisfy a science. Um and then you can take computer science as an elective. So right now you've got a list of several course equivalencies where you can take for example there's one that's on um
like data manipulation and modeling and there's a class that our team has evaluated the computer science standards and said this satisfies the requirement for computer science. So as we get um course proposals for additional courses, we expect that list to grow. Um, for example, at some point you might get a
course that would be more specific to AI. We've got two that are um a little more on the AI side than others, but you could find some that are even more explicitly centered on AI. So, as we get course proposals, we'll continue to evaluate those and then bring them to a joint meeting to um add those to that
list. >> So, just one of clarification here for the general public's benefit. Um, you know, for a long time if we were thinking about a computer science class and it's it's basically we're teaching a kid to code. Um, but my interpretation here is there's more uh range in in that
scope. Now, just maybe you could speak to that and just give the public a little bit more appreciation for what that computer science requirement really encompasses. >> Yes, sir. We really built it to be pretty comprehensive. So, it's computer science. There's definitely some some programming pieces like elements of that
in there, but there's also cyber security, there's data science, you've got um you've got um like emerging technologies, um you've got like ethics of computing. So all of that is right there, which is really interesting because even some national organizations
like code.org, which is now code AI, has recently decided that it's going to be like digital literacy instead of just computer science focused. And our standards really already satisfy that. So the way that we thought about that has put us out in front of what a lot of states and even the national organizations are doing in terms of
embedding all of these related concepts within computer science standards. So instead of layering on additional um requirements, we're able to use the requirements that we already have more intentionally to make sure that we're preparing students for a range of of different things after high school. >> But but bottom line, these are really
applications as opposed to just writing pure code. >> Correct. Correct. Because you never know. So, I mean, a student who takes computer science might not end up being a a software engineer or a programmer one day, but it's very likely that they're going to use those patterns of thinking in whatever they do. Like I've
told y'all before, whenever I taught computer science to fifth graders, that my biggest initial takeaway as a teacher was that it made them so much better at solving math word problems because it just made them so good at breaking down a problem into smaller chunks and going after them one at a time. So, it's it's something that the the type of thinking
that they'll come away from from this computer science course is really going to be beneficial of them regardless of if they choose a computer centric um pathway in the future. >> Thank you. Thank you for sharing that. Thank you. >> Anyone else? Any objection to the motion? Motion
stands adopted. Next item. Your next item is on page 62, item 5.1, consideration of revisions to bulletin 118, statewide assessment standards and practices regarding LEAP 2025 science testing. The recommendation is to
approve. >> Mr. Morris uh re moves and Dr. Armstrong seconds. Any presentation on this? >> No. No. >> Oops. No formal presentation, but this is
aligning the science assess LEAP science assessment with legislation from 2025 and assistant superintendent Thomas Lambert is here as our assistant superintendent for assessments if there are questions. Okay. Uh anything from the board? We do
have one person wishing to speak for information. Samantha Mendenhal. I hope I got that right. You're right. very well. By the way, >> written exactly how it said, so you're good. Um, good afternoon. Thank you for
allowing me to step up here. Um, you all have a copy of the letter that I'm about to read to you from, uh, Louisiana Science Teachers Association. Um, again, my name is Samantha Menhal. I have been a Louisiana educator for 19 years. Majority of that time has been in science, specifically middle school
science. Um, so our president and our board members have put together a letter that we would like to read for you just a consideration. Bessie board members, the Louisiana Science Teachers Association would like to make public comments regarding Bessie's policy for science assessments to align with act
472. We want to begin by recognizing the exceptional work of the science content and assessment teams in the Louisiana Department of Education. Their work in the development and implementation of both high quality instructional materials and state assessments are recognized just not in the state but
nationwide as a leader in these fields and the growth of student achievement. We suggest assessing students in grades four, six, and eight for science for a complete picture of student learning across these grades. We are concerned about what a grade seven only middle
school assessment ask of that single test. If a science if science is assessed only in grade seven, that assessment will be expected to represent three years of content spanning upper elementary and middle school grade bands. That is an unreasonable ask of any single assessment and will likely
reduce alignment, reliability, and instructional feedback for all stakeholders. We respectfully urge this board to ensure that a grade six science assessment is included in the implementation of Act 472. Louisiana students, science teachers, and school systems deserve no less. Science
assessments are not optional. The Every Student Succeeds Act requires states to assess science at least once during grades 3 through 5, once during grades through six through nine, and once during grades 10 through 12. Louisiana has gone above and beyond this federal obligation for years with annual assessments in grades three through
eight. And we believe maintaining meaningful science assessment across grade bands is both a legal requirement and an educational necessity. We have a serious concern with the current assessment plan under act 472. As we understand it, science assessments are planned for grades four and seven with
no science or social studies assessment plan for grade six. This gap is not a minor scheduling issue. Sixth grade is the entry point for the middle school science gradeband and carries some of the most fundamental content in all of K12 science. Cellular biology,
ecosystems, Newton's laws, and atomic theory. They are the cornerstones of content that students carry into every subsequent year of science instruction, including high school and beyond. State assessment keeps the cadence of high-quality instruction. The reality in school systems is direct. If a subject
is tested, it is valued. Funding decisions, personnel assignments, and teacher evaluations all respond to what is assessed. When grade six science goes untested, administrators face no accountability signal to protect it. Instructional time erodess. Personnel
decisions and scheduling compromises fill the gap. The result is not a neutral outcome for students. It is a loss. So sorry my papers got mixed up. I am missing the back part. I am so sorry.
>> There is another paragraph on the back. I'm so sorry. I'm missing my second. >> I'm sorry. Can you um Oh, he's got it. They got it. You want us to read it? [laughter] >> Thank you. >> You should have used AI. It would have worked. >> We cannot ignore the broader context.
STEM careers represent one of the fastest growing sectors of the Louisiana and national economy. The pipeline to those careers runs directly through the science classrooms of our middle schools. Weakening assessment accountability in those years sends the wrong signal about the value we place on
science preparation at a moment when the preparation matters more than ever. Respectfully, Kelly Bouet, LSTA president. >> Okay. Um, Mr. Hang on. Don't leave. >> You want to go ahead explain that in layman's terms,
>> Mr. Bradford? Yeah, I know if Superintendent Brumley were here today and I'm sitting here for him, one of the things that we have been doing is significantly trying to reduce the testing time with our students across the state and and we have done that. This here is meeting actually the
requirement of the law act 472 and additionally, but it also keeps us in compliance with the federal testing requirements. And so I would ask uh Thomas Lambert, our assistant superintendent for assessments to come up and just speak to that. >> Mr. Lambert.
>> Hi. Um I I would like to >> if you want to sit down and instead of standing there >> and and before I start, I'd love for uh you have the opportunity to respond to Mr. Burkin who was asking for I think just a a short summary. >> Yeah. >> So
>> are you asking for more testing? >> We're asking for an included year. As of right now, sixth grade is not included in either science or social studies. So there's a whole year that gaps between the two. And so we're going fourth to seventh grade with no science testing.
>> So we're asking for sixth grade to be an addition to fourth and seventh. >> So is there any reason why you or the science community can't come up with a test to do yourselves as versus one that
is a requirement because like Mr. Bradford is saying we kept hearing for ever since I've been on air is too much testing, too much testing. Reduce testing. Now you want somebody wants more testing. So I I'm I don't
know what to do. Basically, as the the letter stated, we're worried that that crucial year being skipped and not held to I guess the higher standard that a lot of us hold to. It's not going to I guess the
instructions not going to be led to as high of a standard. >> Please. >> Sure. Um th this is something that we do hear that that uh things that are tested on the leap test folks uh tend to focus
on. One key thing it's on. >> You can't hear me? >> Not very well. C can you pull it closer? >> Uh sure. Is that better? Uh Thomas Lamber with the department. Uh we do hear this that if something is not
tested um it may not get as much instructional emphasis. uh the state law that we are satisfying uh requires us to not give science and social studies in the same years. Um when we looked at it uh we determined that we could do a
really good fourth grade and a really good seventh grade science assessment. Um and there are going to be gap years where science is not assessed because that is what the law says that that we must do. Um and we're bringing policy to do that. One key mindset shift that will
have to happen is people to not say we're going to not teach this because there is not a test at the end of the year because every single year's learning is cumulative and compounds. So if school districts make that choice to not teach science or social studies in
that given year, um they are going to have a major consequence when that information is assessed in seventh grade or in fifth grade in social studies. Um adding an additional test might signal some kind of shift that makes you focus
a little bit more on teaching that content. Um but that that is a local decision that if folks are making uh instructional decisions like that uh that consequence is going to come to catch them uh on the the LEAP results when the kids do take the test. Uh so
I'm not sure adding another test actually moves the needle on that. >> Mr. G. Um yes um being a science person myself I I am concerned about uh our students uh proficiency in regards to
science. Uh I believe that the the numbers shows that our students only around 28 or 29% uh proficient uh in regards to science and of course that needs to be improved. And uh
and I'm wondering whether or not what you are proposing that we should look at again whether or not it is through testing or or what have you. How can we improve um
our students ability to understand and to know science throughout our school systems? Um and that is uh I believe um something that we as a system needs to revisit if
we are to improve on our kids uh proficiency in regards to science. >> Tests are a measurement. Tests are a measurement of how students are doing. Um some folks approach testing as a treatment and testing is not a treatment. It is a measure of how
students are doing. Um and and as we can get our communities to pivot away from teaching to the test, right, and instead teaching the standards, our test results are going to go up. The tests are not designed to be taught to. They are
designed to measure the academic standards that we have set as a state. Um, so from our perspective, reducing the amount of testing should not have an impact unless schools choose not to teach the standards for that grade
level. Um, and that is, I think, a different conversation than is there going to be a test in sixth grade or is it going to be in fourth grade? >> Miss Holloway, >> if you excuse me, if you don't mind, I'd like Amanda to speak. >> Oh, sure.
>> Yes, she's gonna jump right in. >> Yes. Hi, I'm Ava Glamus and I really am interested in your perspective of when they're not being tested, it's not like being valued because I think that
is less of like a quantitative problem and more of a culture problem if like that would be the right way to say that. And I think that as like students, there should be more stress on us to value our education and not value the
test so much. And I've taken plenty of these LEAP tests. So, um I don't think that there should be more or less stress on a test. I think it should just be your teaching the necessary information to continue on and have that like building
block to go into high school and into the next level. Thank you. >> Anyone else? >> I don't think that's the answer you wanted to get. >> No, nothing but >> to bring well >> our conversation to the board. That's
>> I'm glad you did because I think it opens a door of conversation between us and the department uh because it does raise an issue of very strong importance and so I want to thank you on the science teacher too >> miss >> uh we appreciate it miss Holloway. Yeah,
if you don't mind. May I please speak? Yeah, it's a comment. [clears throat] Um, I just want you to know that this symbol here goes way back into the mid80s when I was on the science association, very involved, taught science. I administrator was very
unique, led the science association and this is where it came about at the time. You probably weren't born then, but it was back at that time mid mid80s. >> It is it's a very unique I love it. >> Yeah. You got to know that Miss Holloway started teaching when she was six.
>> Yeah. Well, thank thank you. Thank you for the love of science and uh to speak today >> to come forward and and share your thoughts. Thank you. >> Thank you. And and please feel free to come back at any other time. >> Thank you'all. >> Thank you. >> Okay. Any objection to the motion on the
floor? No objection. The motion stands adopted. Next item. >> Your next item is on page 64, item 5.2, two, consideration of revisions to bulletin 1508, pupil appraisal handbook, regarding IDA alignment. The
recommendation is to approve. >> Mr. Burken moves. Mr. Harris seconds. We have any comments from the staff? No comments. Um, we have one person in opposition
and I will never be able to read this. Co cohonda Cordley Kand I'm sorry. Yo, she had great writing. No offense, but I can't read it.
>> I want me to stand. >> You can stand. >> Okay. >> Pull the microphone down too. >> Thank you, Mr. Walker. Good afternoon, everyone. Um, and I would love for this meeting to be very interactive. I see so many faces in here today that um I am very familiar with
and love. Um good afternoon. My name is Kanda Kley. I am a proud parent and disabilities advocate. Um, and the concern that I have with this, if you allow me the opportunity to, according to IDA, whenever a parent um requests
for a school's for a local education agency to actually do a bulletin 1508 evaluation, that school district is supposed to have 60 days to actually do the evaluation and disseminate that
report. The issue is the local education agencies are not doing the evaluations. Let me explain. I as a parent I asked the school district to do an evaluation on my child
who has a disability who has been in the school system and it was for his trienal. The trienal eval evaluation is when the district actually performs a three-year evaluation to determine whether or not a child continues to need special education.
The district never did the evaluation. I provided the district with a 45day notice letting them know that I was planning on taking my child to a private school. The school district still never did the evaluation.
While my child was in the private school, the school district still had a legal obligation to provide my child with the evaluation and the accommodations outlined in his IEP. The school district still never did the
evaluation and they never followed the IEP. The problem that we're going to do today if we were to follow this recommendation is that we would be giving them a a pacifier or a rationale for their bad behavior instead of a
consequence. In IDA, it actually has a consequence for when our school systems or our local education agencies do not adhere to IDA. One of them is holding their funding. That's not something that has been taking place. If you were to
actually do a poll, which I know we believe in surveys, polls, and task force, if you were to ask how many of the special education department man uh executive directors and their pupil appraisal departments actually know IDA
bulletin 1508, bulletin 1706, and any other bulletin that this Bessie uh body has, they're not going to know it. And that's the problem. The problem is not that we need to give them more accommodations for why they did not do
their job and their due diligence. It is a problem when we do that. But what we should do is hold them accountable. We should definitely make sure that they actually do their job of making sure that they provide the necessary
evaluations so that we can see if these children actually need services and how we can actually provide them and that is already outlined in IDA. I I'm open to all questions, comments, and concerns.
>> Anyone have any issue questions? >> And it's nice to see you sitting up there, Mr. King. Did you want to ask something? >> Nice to see you as well. Um, no, I would I would just add that this this item um
these revisions to bulletin 1508 actually ensure our alignment with the IDEIDA requirements um per the office of special education programs. It actually mirrors the federal language. >> It actually don't. And so and and and I
would greatly appreciate cuz I can actually pull it up on the statute and I'm also aware that this body right now is actually actually is not in compliance with IDA according to the office of special education programs per their report that they disseminated out
this year. So when we talk about the lack of the the lack of what's happening in us in our local education agencies, it's because we're not doing any monitoring, any um enforcement, and any implementation. And that's something that I know that Dr. K. Brumley has
actually spoken about many times as Senate ed on how he doesn't have the authority, but actually under IDA and other um federal laws such as Every Student Succeed Act, that is actually what this body and him actually have a job to do. That's just not happening.
And so what's happening is causing our families to actually go to do process hearings and it's also causing them to actually file cases um in federal court. So if you look at if you actually go and look right now, there's a lot of federal
cases happening right now on various school districts across our state. And a lot of them is just simply because the school districts are not doing evaluations and they're not doing them in the timeline that they're supposed to do that's outlined in regards to IDA. We
have a lot of bulletins right now where we have been promulgating rules that are not in line with the federal laws that they're supposed to be in line with. That's what's been happening. >> Okay. >> Again, I would just reiterate that this policy language was crafted in
consultation with the US Department of Education. >> Okay. Well, obviously there's a difference of opinion. >> Major a major difference of opinion, especially when children are at schools every day. We have children that um that are English language learners never
getting evaluations. Children that are being abused never getting evaluations. Children that's having maladaptive behaviors never getting evaluated. And we're saying that oh the school district is saying that the child is not there. We know that a lot of these school
systems are not putting the correct information in J Campus. We know that um that a lot of their reports are not accurate and a lot of that is going to continue to happen and continue to manifest because they right now have the authority to be able to make up
information as they go along as well as there's nobody that is truly monitoring them implementing or enforcing any rule or law that we have. >> Okay. Thank you. Appreciate that, >> Mr. Conrad. >> Okay. Um any comments from the board?
But I would say that Dr. Lauren Wells from the Department of Education team is here who leads our office of diverse learners um who's worked with this policy before. If she answer any specific questions. >> Good afternoon. Lauren Wells with the Department of Education.
>> Thank you, Miss Corley. Oh, can you hear me better now? So this bulletin update, this is following a directive from OEP, our office of special education programming. Uh based on OEP's recommendation, the update is occurring to our evaluation
exception timelines and the bulletin language that you have before you. It is verbatim from our federal mandate of IDA. Um specifically referencing section 3301. >> Okay. Any questions or >> All right. Well, thank you.
>> Sure. Thanks everyone. >> All right. Any comments? All right. Any objection to the motion? Hear him? No objection. That motion stands adopted. Next item. >> Your next item is on page 66, item 5.3, consideration of revisions to bulletin
741, Louisiana handbook for school administrators, regarding a required reading. The recommendation is to approve. >> Uh Dr. Armstrong moves and Mr. Castile seconds. You have any comments?
>> I had a question. No, I'm talking about the board. >> Yeah, I had a question. >> Um I I thought it was really impressive that the effort uh you know there's a lot of lot of concern now that students I think at all grade levels maybe they're not the entire uh book or novel.
It's it's really just a paragraph or a chapter or something like that. And so there's an effort here to uh make sure that students have exposure to to an entire book um at least one in in a school year. Uh so I I applaud the effort, but I was it applies to K
through 12. You know, I was just curious number one, what is the uh LDOE classic literature list? And then number two, how does that work for K through two? uh we're we're having struggles right now
with third graders passing their reading test. How how does it work when you're requiring K through two to to read a book from the Louisiana classic literature list? So just from an operational uh perspective, Dr. Chason, can you help
me out with that? >> Department of Education. >> Happy to answer your question, Mr. Morris. um for the selections on the kindergarten through 2 grade part of the list. Um the list is set up currently so that
there are 10 literature selections per grade level K through 8 and then 10 for high school. Um and for kindergarten through 2, the majority of those are actually set to be read alouds. And so in that case, the teacher would read the text aloud to the children for kindergarten through second grade.
Could can we get a copy of the classic literature list? I'm just curious. Thank you. >> Sure. >> Thank you. And >> just for curiosity, who makes the final selection of the books that are to be read? Is that the district level? >> So the classic literature book list is
actually curated by the Department of Education. It's a carefully vetted list. We do have experts on staff that examine text complexity and developmental appropriateness. And then from that point, the individual eleas will be able to select. >> That's what I was thinking. >> Yes. They'll be able to select per grade
level. >> Okay. Anybody else questions? Miss Corley, are you still here? Did I see you? Oh, you're in the back. Come. Do you want to speak on this one, too? Okay. Come on down. I can't hear you. I'm sorry.
>> See how much I love y'all today. Um, when we talk about bulletin 741, are y'all aware of how many of your people don't know these bulletins? Um, as Miss Lauren Wells came up here and
spoke about IDA, that was one of the that was one of the things they violated um all of the districts. Um, that's because the bulletins are being interpreted by the by each school, each local education agency the way that they
want to because we never Bessie has never given them a real true road map on how to implement any of the of the um in any of these bulletins any of them. 741.
When you talk about reading, I as a parent of a child with disability have nothing would want nothing more than to see many individuals in this state be literate. Our illiteracy rate is extremely high. But it's a problem when
you have educators come to the table that can that actually is supposed to be a part of your team that don't know that your child can read. They didn't know that my child could read. They didn't know that my child could write. They didn't know that my child know American Sign Language. They
didn't know that my child know French, Spanish, or Mandarin. In fact, they didn't know that he know Swahili and Ebo. As a parent, when I come before you, I'm coming to say that the problem is not
always that we need to change the bulletin. The problem is that we're not having any real true goals or measurable outcomes that we could really look at to say whether or not it's working or not working before we make the change. We always make a change. We make a change
in here every time we have a meeting every time. But nobody give any real true data to justify the rationale for why the change is being proposed and why it is actually coming to fruition. And then once you make this change and the
districts roll it out, nobody measures how it's actually being rolled out and what it looks like. Um what did they do and how it's implemented and and what um what goals
or um what evidence-based practices they're using cuz everything in education is supposed to be evidence-based. No different than how it is with science. No different than how it is with medicine. No different than how it is with life. >> Yes, sir.
>> This particular motion is about a reading list. >> Yes. And I'm saying that you can put a reading list. You could put a writing list. You could put as many list as you want. The problem is the local education agencies do not know them. We have 64
parishes, 69 public school systems, and we have over a 100 charters. And each one is going to roll out something totally different and nobody is doing any monitoring implementation or enforcement. And so and because they
don't know these bulletins. They don't know bulletin 1508. They don't know bulletin 741. They don't know 1706. They don't know any bulletins that you have. And they don't know any law. And so when I come up here, I'm not coming just
saying they don't know it. I can send you the recordings of the meeting. They just half of y'all are in my email. They just provided a recording of the meetings where they could not tell you not one single thing from the bulletin
including the changes as it relates to LEAP or LEAP connect. >> Okay. But again, >> I I'm just giving that as an example. >> You're a little bit off the subject. >> No, I was giving that as an example to say that they don't know the bulletins.
And so even with you adding a list, a reading list, they're not going to know it because they don't know it now. >> Okay. All right. Now, since you're going to speak again, why don't you just have a seat up front? >> Yes, sir. >> Save yourself a walk.
>> Yes, sir. >> Thank you. >> Thank >> um Okay. Any objection to Mr. Morris? >> Yeah, I don't object, but I'm going to abstain on this one. I don't feel comfortable voting for something when I haven't seen a list, so I'm just going to abstain on it. Okay. Anybody else?
All right. Any uh objection to the motion? The motion stands adopted. Next item. >> Your next item is on page 68, item 5.4, consideration of revisions to bulletin 1903, Louisiana handbook for students with
dyslexia regarding parental notification. The recommendation is to approve. Um Champon moves and doc well Mr. Morris. Uh, seconds. Any conversation from the board?
Okay. Uh, Miss Corley, you're up. I am always in agreement with uh parents being notified, but sometimes the parental notification is not in the parents language, in their native language. According to IDA and every
student succeed act, parents are supposed to always be at the table to help with the creation of policies, but also it is supposed to be in their language. So if you have an English language learner, for example, um Mr. Joseph Cow um
I don't know exact um but if Mr. Joseph Cow let's let's say for example, Mr. Joseph Cow may be from China and Chinese is his I'm just using you as an example, Mr. Joseph. Please don't get offended, but let's just say that he's from China and Chinese is the language that he
speaks. When we wrote when we give the parental notification, it needs to be in Chinese, not in English. And that's not what's happening currently in our school districts right now. What you have in our school districts is that they always give everything in English regarding
regardless of what that person's language is. And according to the federal law, we are supposed to provide it. Now, when we look at um Louisiana Department of Education's website, we can actually change our stuff and put it in the native language of the person.
And when you look at Jefferson Parish School System, which is the largest school system in our state, they actually have a lot of their resources in the actual respective language for the comm for the constituents that they serve. And so all I'm asking is when we
provide parental notification that we're mindful of their language of the language that they um actually speak including if the parent has a disability because if they have a disability then again you would not you would not need it to be a two-page or three-page
document but something that is minimal so that they can actually really and truly understand and comprehend it. And so I'm always always wanting parental notification, but I also want parental notification where it's accessible for
the parent to really and truly understand it and comprehend it. >> That's a well well taken point. Thank you. Anybody have any questions, issues. Okay. Uh any objection? What's that? What she said?
Is there any objection to the motion? Motion stands adopted. But thank you again. Okay, next item. >> That concludes the agenda. >> Okay. Well, thank you all for coming. How long when do we have the next meeting? Five minutes. >> Five minutes for the next meeting.
>> We'll start our next meeting in five minutes.