All right, I'd like to thank everyone for their patience. Welcome to the Tuesday, August 26, 2025, McGomery Township Board of Education meeting. At this time, I entertain a motion to resume in open session. >> So move second.
>> It's been properly moved and seconded to resume the meeting and open session. Any questions on the motion? All those in favor say I. I. >> Those opposed same right extensions.
Please rise as we salute the flag. To the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible and justice for all. Do not have excuse representative report
today. Superintendent reports and andor presentations. Superintendent. >> Good evening everyone. >> I hope you all had a wonderful summer because it is over for the most part. We welcome our staff back next Tuesday,
September 2nd. It's an early start this year and our students come on Thursday and we cannot wait for them. We some of our principles have already sent out their welcome back letters to the staff and to the students and some fun videos. If you have a chance, go on the high school Instagram and watch the video.
It's so sweet how they're they've been so sad waiting for the kids to come back and they really have been. So, we're all excited that school is starting up again. I have um one highlight. Um, so we every year the National Association of Music Merchants designates certain
school districts ac across the country with the BCME designation which stands for the best communities for music education. This designation is granted through an application process. Mr. Adam Wowski was our supervisor of visual and
performing arts. He was encouraged by many of his colleagues from across New Jersey to apply as they are familiar with Montgomery's reputation for excellence in music. We are excited to share that we successfully applied for and received the design designation of the best communities for music
education. This is an honor for our music program and our district. The application required significant amounts of information about our staffing, budgets, programs, offerings, schedules, enrollment, performances, events, curriculum, instruction, and more. All
of our successes in these areas are a direct result of three things. First, our support of the program received received from the board of education, administration, and the community. Second is our fantastic faculty who leverage their talents and passions every day on behalf of our students. And
third are the amazing students who work hard and dedicate themselves to excellence. So congratulations to us for being designated um the best communities for school of music education.
Thank you to Adam Mashowski. he's not here tonight, but thank you for all the hard work and diligence you and your staff put into applying for us to receive this significant award. Thank you. >> Thank you, Superintendent Kbaka. We'll
now move to committee representative reports. First up, NTA report, Mr. Rizzo. >> Hello. Good evening. Um, the MTA was busy all summer. Our summer reading program ended up handing out 786 books to 101 students. So, that was an awesome
thing for our students be able to access some summer reading if they were in need. Um, we do return next week. MTA is excited to be back. Despite working under an expired contract, our staff will continue to support our students in our community. Thank you. >> Thank you.
Do you have any board member or delegate or representative reports? I just wanted to uh read a brief statement if Oh, okay. With everyone uh in regards to >> Is that okay? >> Oh, absolutely. I'll go ahead.
>> In regards to the negotiations, um the Montgomery Board of Education values the important work of our educators and remains committed to collective process. Throughout these negotiations, the board has engaged in
good faith discussions with MTA in an effort to reach an agreement uh that is fair, fis fiscally responsible, and sustainable for all of our students, staff, and community. We recognize that contract negotiations can be complex and
that different perspectives are part of the process. The board has made a strong effort to address the key priorities raised at the table and continues to be guided by our responsibility to balance the needs of our employees with the
educational mission we serve. It is important to note that delays and negotiations do not leave teachers without contract. Educators continue to work on the terms of their previous agreement. Our shared
goal remains clear, ensuring that the students of Montgomery Township receive the highest quality education in a supportive and respectful environment. We look forward to continuing productive discussions with the MTA and remain
hopeful that an agreement will be reached in near future. Thank you. >> Board committee reports. Anything from ACI? No, we did not meet >> OSS. >> Yes.
>> The operations uh facilities and finance committee met on August 19th to review ongoing projects, financial updates, and facility planning priorities. The administration is evaluating the feasibility and cost of restructuring
Orchard Hill and Village Elementary Schools to implement a 4 to uh a K24 program. Will Ross of Peret Sjen Architects presented an update on the K2
on the K2 uh form restructuring noting that phase two of the analysis is underway. Stakeholder meetings are being planned before cost evaluations are finalized. Mr. Ross also provided an update on the
long range facilities plan. Walkthroughs of four school buildings are complete with the final visit scheduled before the school the start of school. Initial findings highlight significant infrastructure needs at the high school,
including HVAC upgrades, roof replacement, and pool wing repairs. The committee also discussed the future referendum to f to fund major capital projects. November 2027
was identified as the next possible ballot opportunity. The committee reviewed the remaining balance of the 2016 referendum which stands at 197,000
and requested a detail accounting of completed projects, expenditures, and outstanding items. Members raised questions about whether the remaining funds could be applied to room repairs at Orchard.
On transportation, Mr. Italana reported that the district will temporarily lease a bus from Kensington Bus Company at 5400 per month with maintenance included while awaiting delivery of seven new
buses. The lease will be staffed by an existing district driver. The committee also reviewed the auditor's RFP results. Two bids were received. one for $35,000
from the existing auditor and another for $70,000 from Homeland Frenia Allison PC. The difference in the fee quoted relates to the time each firm is committed to dedicate to the audit engagement.
While the hourly rates are compatible, the scope of the services differs greatly. The current firm provides primarily financial statement compilation service with limited audit review. Whereas the competing firm HFA
offers a more comprehensive engagement including internal controls assessment, strategic sampling, and administrative followup to strengthen compliance. The existing contract meets minimum state requirements but does not in my
opinion deliver the level of assurance and support the district deserves based on the information available to me. I strongly recommend the board to support the change of the auditor. The change will not only provide a greater
assurance for the board and the community, but that the administration would benefit from working closely with the professionals who focus on strengthening internal controls and process improvement. Under old business, Mr. Italiano
reported that a draft pool shirt services agreement has been circulating for the committee to the committee for review. Progress on the pilot program remains limited, though legal assistance is being pursued.
The committee also reviewed a three-year comparison of the district's extraordinary aid awards. The district successfully secured 2.7 million this year, an increase of 1.2 2 million over
the prior year thanks to the diligence of the special education director Michelle Dreamer and our business administrator in our business administrator. The work assures that all available state funds
were captured to support the district special education students. The committee expresses great appreciation for their expertise and very thorough application process. >> Any questions? >> Any questions?
>> Can I ask a question? When you guys talk about the transportation, I remember earlier this year some kids was wondering whether we can track the bus for them and is there a follow on discussion on this rough topic we discuss about transportation.
>> Right. I don't have a quote right now for that tracking service. So if that's something that we would like to revisit for me to get a quote for. I remember that was at like the winter time and the different students and they had had to wait outside. I could talk with uh our
transportation director tomorrow and see if a reasonable quote could be obtained and um bring that back to everybody within the next month. Does that sound good? >> Thank you. >> Excellent. Thank you. >> Any other questions? >> None. Thank you. Anything from PCC? >> No meetings.
>> And HRC as well >> did not meet right. >> We'll now move pivot back to superintendent >> kind of has to do with HRC. So, we have um a supervisor who's being appointed tonight who is here in the audience and I wanted to introduce her and Mrs.
Michelle Dreamer is here as our director. Um do you want to introduce her? Okay. >> All right. Good evening everyone. It's my pleasure to introduce Miss Emily Keys as our new supervisor of special services. Miss Keys holds advanced degrees in educational leadership from
Satan Hall University and has extensive certifications including supervisor, principal, and teacher of students with disabilities. She will bring a wealth of experience having served as supervisor student services in Ocean Township as well as in leadership roles in South Planefield, Newark, and Hillsboro
Township. Throughout her career, she's been dedicated to supporting diverse learners, fostering collaboration among staff, and implementing effective instructional practices. We're very excited to welcome Miss Keys to our district and look forward to the expertise and passion she brings to supporting our students, families, and
staff. On behalf of the board of education, welcome to the district. All right. All right. At this time, I'll entertain a motion to approve the July 15, 2025 executive session minutes and July 15, 2025 business meeting minutes.
>> So move. >> Second. >> Been properly moved and second to adopt the executive and executive session and business meeting uh minutes. Any questions go on the motion? Roll call, please. Mr. Caliano. >> Dr. W. >> Yes.
>> Mr. Stallion. >> Yes. Spina Herman Felac. >> Yes. >> M Harris Jernigan. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. Todd. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Motion carries. Thank you. At this time, the board acknowledges the
correspondence to the board. Action agenda items. Public comments. The board of education welcomes and encourages input from the public. Members of the public are allotted one opportunity to address the board regarding the action agenda items only for up to a maximum of three minutes per speaker. All comments
must be directed to the board. Before you make your comment, please state your full name and address and enter both on the Chromebook provided. Being mindful of privacy rights regarding students, board employees, and board members, and to avoid any liability on the part of the speaker, the board discourages
defamatory and discourteous remarks. The public comment portions of the meeting are not structured as question and answer sessions, but rather are offered as opportunities for the public to share their thoughts with the board. The board may need to refer an issue to the superintendent if the issue has not been handled through the appropriate chain of
command, usually starting at the school level. Responses may be provided at the end of the session. Any public comments for action agenda items hearing? None. Public comments now closed. At this time, I'll entertain a motion on Jack agenda items, action
agenda items 1.1 through 4.3. >> So move second. >> It's been properly moved and seconded. Any questions on the motion? >> Have a question? >> Yes. >> Uh agenda item
to post to 2.6. >> Uhhuh. I think it lists the courses that are listed for approval by the board and it seems like before the summer we
made approvals for the curriculum uh writing to significantly more courses. So I'm just wondering why the list is so short. So the board only approves major revisions and new uh courses. So the new
course is AP seminar and then um the list there is the major revisions. We have a um chart and the amount per hour that staff members get for writing curriculum remains the same but there's different tiers. And for minor revisions
which just might be um let's say maybe perhaps it was a new course last year and the pacing guide was off. the teachers spend time a couple of hours over the summer and they revamped the pacing guide. Um, so as long as no content to the curriculum is changed and it's just minor revisions, they don't
get board approved. Only the major revision courses. stuff like math in LMS for science um in LMS and UNS and um English engineering and hyos in
high school those courses even though the curriculum writing was approved there was uh no major change to the curriculum no major change to the substance of the curriculum there might have been assessments change there might have been pacing changed rearrangement of things but nothing substantial
Thank you. >> Can I hit back on that comments you made? I think for even pacing change things like that 2.6 kind of like have a hidden condition here is uh
we may the board continues with the pres I I feel like even with the pacing change or there's a you know personnel changes for the existing curriculum it should ask the board to reapproval those courses. Right. Is that a hidden condition here
for 2.6? >> Well, that's never been the practice because there's no substantive change to the curriculum. >> So, the assumption is there's no major changes. We just carry on. Um
>> I guess for me, I remember us approving significant financial impact, right? So when I think about it, if if we're going to invest in something, it would be good to see what it is that we invested in, right? So I think that's where we're getting at. We're just getting very high
level view. Mary, maybe we could get a little bit more detailed view as far as how the funds are being allocated across, you know, quite a few other areas that we were looking at. That I think that's the ask. >> Sure.
because like financially uh we approve over like 57,000 right for the curricular writing >> and only uh few courses are listed. So if you add the cost of those courses that adds up to a little bit under 20. So there's
like 37,000 that was approved for the curriculum writing. So it would be appreciated to to kind of share some detail like what exactly changed to to >> because school starts next week and uh
we spent so much money on those courses revision and the board is really like I I don't see that what are the changes are even though you say change for the pacing but then the pacing shouldn't type so much fun you know so I like need
more clarification on at so there's different tiers I don't have it right in front of me but perhaps just changing the pacing guide will be just a few hours of work so all the curriculum you can access at any time so if you look back at that board agenda and it says um
whatever the courses were that you were just noting you could go in Muicon Atlas and see >> I so that's why I emailed you I appreciate that you outlining the revisions for the K12 literacy curriculum so from what I understand this changes folks mainly on the
instructional activities, resource organization like you mentioned, choice boards, activity list, streamline teacher resources, but do not really update the core literacy program. So I I I would appreciate more for the summary of those major revisions and also for
the ones that not list here, but financial perspective, we approve those. We we we prove to spend money on those things, you know, but it's just kind of like misaligned for me to say we approve 2.6 six, but they're not listed here. So, I don't feel I have the information
here, too. >> Well, the only thing you're approving tonight are the ones that are listed. You wouldn't be approving the ones that aren't on here. >> Okay. That's something like you said, put it in the September ACI. Oh, in the list.
>> Well, we the board does not approve any minor revisions. They approve the major revisions, which is what are the ones that are listed here. >> Okay. And as a board member, I also have concerns for the ones have been proved in the past and I want to know what's the strategy for that.
>> I I'm not quite you want to know what about what was approved in the past. >> I can give some examples. for the stay for the literacy this one because um I think in the earlier this year we talked a lot at ACI meeting too is um I believe
the Lucy Caukins unit of study that one remains the primary literacy program and I went to see the website link to the agenda and I think it's confirmed is still the core of the program literacy program but for the context for folks
who are not familiar the unit of study rhythm written by Lucy Caukins has been long served at the foundation of our EL ELA curriculum but starting actually in 2019 and 2020 there's national conversations about the science of
reading have grown significantly many professionals actually raised concerns uh that Lucy Cawkins approach lacks explicit systematic instruction aligned with this research and parents in our township have also voided concerns publicity at previous board meetings I
believe some of the board members who've served here uh for many years probably heard of can record that conversation and the parents in our township have also voiced these concerns public uh in response I think our schools began
supplementing with programs such as Hagerty and I remember uh uh uh um director uh Fiona talked about that I think that's really a positive step but I think Lucy Cauin unit of study continued to serve as a primary
framework for the reading and writing. I that's a concern and also there's some extensive public reporting that questions the effectiveness of the unit study. Um so for example there's some podcasting on that uh from Atlantic you
can search for that there are some APM reports for that educational week for discussing about that and also uh new the New Yorker talk about that um this materials you know really effective um
for the literacy teaching so there's a strong belief that this materials um is problematic but if our townships still thinks um this is effective and supporting the best practice then I
would think the board need to see more evidence uh to to support this choice. Um and the board member as a parent and an educator I really have concerns of continuing rely on this unit of study as
a core program of our literacy instruction. Um and secondly I think for the curriculum approval this is tied to the topic t we just talked about if there's no major revisions will not bring up to the
boards to vote. Um but then for the correspondence you can see we received a appealing letter a group letter submitted uh by over 20 higher education faculty members. Their expertise really spans from business, mathematics,
science, biology, chemistry, medical, school psychology, and special ed. So this is what they write and I quote, okay. Uh several years ago, a key pathway, math pathway, for example, algebra 2 at grade 8 was removed. The pathway was once provided strong math
skill students with robust preparation in algebra thinking by the end of middle school. Its elimination has created a noticeable ripple effect that is now manifesting in high school science especially in physics. So uh
and they go on and say we cannot simultaneously claim students are strong in math while removing the very structure that develop develops those strengths. Uh this contradiction suggests a policy misalignment that deserves closer scrutinity. So those
faculty also raised concerns about the science law. >> Dr. Wayne, I'm sorry to cut you off, but how does this relate to action item 2.6 because there's no math provisions on there. >> There's nothing about math. There's no math. >> Discussion about even there is no ma
major revision. It does not brought to the board to uh vote. But I think the good thing is even though there's no major revision you should we should the board should vote on to continue you know those previous courses.
The board did vote to change physics years ago. >> Yeah. But here we can continue discuss about that right because we received a group group letter from the faculty and uh uh >> but again this >> this portion of the meeting is for the
action agenda items specifically 2.6 that's the discussion point. >> Mhm. >> Nothing to do with math. There's nothing to do with math. >> Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We're talking about the literacy and that's that um what we Yeah. We don't have a mask. Okay. we can save that for the public
speaking for the open uh for the to the end of the discussion because right now we're focusing on the literacy because the literacy is on 2.6. So that's what I want to talk about is uh the literacy part. So we can talk talk about the science and math part from the faculty's
uh appealing letter towards the end of this meeting. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions on action agenda items? >> I have a question on 2.2. Um, I see that two students are approving for ESY at Morrison County
Special Services School and one student is being approved for ESY and regular school year. I see it's only 14,000. Is that the correct amount for ESY? It's 8,750 and then for the entire year it's
14,000. I'm just >> this looks like but the 14,000 doing off the top of my head but looking at here it looks like it's from July 7th to August 8th and part of it is for the special services tuition 8750 part of it for the 1:1 aid for 5250 and if you add
the two up it's 14,000 I think that's what we're asking the board to do and >> that's just for ESY. I see that it's a part of ESY. Okay. And the second question is again uh we are sending a student from Montgomery school to South France board of education. It's another
private public school. And uh I was just wondering is it because they have a special ABA program which we don't have here. >> Well, we can't speak about a specific student here. >> No, no, no. I'm just saying that the the
program the student is going for South. They have a special program which we don't have here. That's why >> I can't speak to that right now. >> Not in public, not in public session. >> Okay, that's fine. >> But I just wanted to mention that South
Brunswick is also a public school, >> a private out district. >> And we could accept students here like if we had a program that other districts wanted to send our students to on the reverse, we could do the same thing. And our goal is at least a restrictive environment. So if we find that there's
a student that we do not have a program for, I'll first look at is other public schools then other private schools that are public private schools and then private schools. Right? So there's like this delineation of least restrictive environments. So our first look for out
of placements is always other public schools. I see. >> Thank you. >> Any other questions on action action agenda items? I have agend a question to agenda item 2.5 and uh uh thank you again Mary for responding my question uh
it's for the IDE corp that consultant or vendor um so from wait here the funding sources so Mary uh clarify the funding sources and scope of the proposed work with IDE corp I
believe this is important for the board to review the evidence of impact to ensure our investment are producing results. So could you share what longitudinal data from previous years demonstrate the impact of UDL
implementation for example student academic and the behavior behavior outcomes early indicators of student growth. I believe that we talked about that during uh the spring ACI meetings, but what I heard was the school
administrators are doing some uh program evaluations. I don't believe the data were shared with the ACI committees, but Michelle can correct me if I'm wrong. I was previously uh I also previously requested benchmark assessment result to
review the growth modeling evidence, but that information has not been shared. So without access to such data, I don't feel I have sufficient information to cast informed vote uh for this agenda item. So I respectedly request the board
to be provided with a clear uh formative measures of impact before moving forward. >> I just want to speak to one thing you mentioned the financial impact. These are paid for with federal funds. >> I just wanted to clear the record for that.
The federal funds also comes from taxpayers, right? So >> your request is noted. Yes. >> Any other questions? >> Hearing none. Roll call, please. Mr. Chelato, >> Dr. Wine. >> So I will vote uh no uh 2.5 as I
mentioned and also vote no 2.6 as I noted. Yes to the other motions. >> Yes to the other motions. >> Okay. Thank you st. >> Yes. >> I would like to have more information on
ID. So no on 2.5 and yes on the rest. >> Noted. Thank you. So we'll have to turn again. Um I'm going to say um no to 2.6. I do feel like we continue to ask for
specific around curriculum and approval. So I would like to see that expanded view as well as uh per my colleague on ACI will vote no for 2.5 and the rest yes. >> I just want to clear out one thing. Initially you just said 2.6 and then you
said 2.5. Which one is it? It's no on both and the rest >> for both. >> Yeah. >> Thank you, Morgan. >> Uh, everything except 2.6. >> I I want to point something out on 2.5. There's also the American Red Cross
lifeguard reertification classes for the teachers on there that they need to be uh swim instructors at our pool um as part of our PE curriculum. There's also Bridgeway PEST which is the behavioral health services based on referrals of
the guidance department which is our suicidal risk assessment team that gets sent out and the social institute for academic support to LMS and on there. So it's not just the IB. >> So so I have a I have an idea for everybody if we could maybe consider the
things that Mlan said. I believe at the moment in time that the items of concern are the IDA corporations. that that's pretty clear. So, if we'd all like, I could make a revision at the table in public and I could strike those two
items from 2.5 and we could do this again if the board supports those other items. Kind of look like there's some approval right here. So, I'm going to kind of just start from >> I'm going to start from the top again. Dr. Wang, uh do you approve uh the
change to the agenda that I just said right there? >> Yes. >> Okay. So, >> just for clarification, in 2.5, we're striking the >> twoations. Yep. >> So, if I'm going to go back to my notes, uh, Dr. Wang, we're just going to have you um striking the two items for 2.5
and 2.6, correct? >> Yes. >> Noted. >> And there's one other thing I just wanted to note. So, all of that ID went through, all of our services provided through our grant that's been approved by the state. I just wanted to mention that >> IDA has been approved. The title grant
that's still like in the works, but yes. Um, Miss Don, >> same vote. >> Yes. >> Thank you. I'm trying to keep track, too. Uh, Miss Felix, you approve the agenda with the changes?
>> Yes. >> Okay. So, Jernigan. >> Yes. >> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Darun. >> Okay. Mr. Todd. Yes. >> And Mr. Todd, I believe that there's a notation that you wanted to make, right?
>> I will abstain from 2.6. >> Thank you. So, okay. So, based on that, um motion 2.6 does not carry and, uh 2.5 does carry. With the revisions, all the other
motions carry. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Charandu. >> New business from the public. The board of education welcomes and encourages input from the public. Members of the public are allowed one opportunity to bring any new business to the board for up to a maximum of three minutes per speaker. All comments must be directed
to the board. Before you make your comment, please state your full name and address and enter both on the Chromebook provided. Being mindful of privacy rights regarding students, board employees, and board members. And to avoid any potential liability on the part of the speaker, the board discourages defamatory and discourageous
remarks. The public comment portions of the meeting are not structured as question and answer sessions. The board may need to refer an issue to the superintendent if the issue has not been handled through the appropriate chant of command, usually started at the school level. Responses may be provided at the
end of this session. Any new business from the public? I just want the board to know that that there's a new course that students are registered for that they will be sitting in next Thursday. It's an AP course that
there is no curriculum for right now. You're all good with that? Just check in. Yeah. Okay. >> Or you can um tease out because the discussion was around the literacy. So can you do that agenda revision too? one of the board members would have to
make a motion during >> at the end of the meeting and sure say you have to walk that back up with the revision after the public comments if that's something the board wants to cons consider I'll help you through. >> Thank you. >> Hi.
>> Hi. I'm Borland, director of curriculum. Um in terms of in addition to the new course of AP um seminar that students are registered for and ready to like excited to take and start um the the
literacy that you are not approving has been worked on and revised by teachers through the summer. It is being the professional development has been planned for it for September. you are talking about only the writing curriculum that is the the literacy
curriculum in a school district and in our K4 includes word work phonics. So there are separate units for phonics that has been revised. There is reading which is a separate unit that have all been revised and they have been re revised to align with the New Jersey
student learning standards. And then this is only the writing department that has now been revised to also align with the New Jersey learning student learning standards. Everything is aligned to produce the outcomes that we will report out on at the annual assessment
presentation that will be the demonstration of you know how our students are doing and then can be further talked about in ACI. But right now to not pass this curriculum means that teachers who have been working to revise to make sure that the best
curriculum goes in front of our children who have looked at pacing guides and best practices and done research about teacher lessons has just been voted down and I'm just confused. We should revisit the seminar.
>> Got it. Any other comments from the public hearing? Now the public portion is now closed. We now revisit 2.6. I have a motion for 2.6.
>> Um before we have motion uh motion what exactly we're doing? Can we have a discussion first? So um I think so go back to the timeline again. I believe earlier this year I really appre appreciate our policy committee chair
Ania who reminded the board that curriculum approvals are recommended in May under the a and JSBA guidelines. Um beyond this Ania's contribution at the county level and who were drafting the new board member is really supporting me and h helped me a lot. So I believe
there's a clear clear reason why this guidelines recommend the curriculum approval in the spring right so then we won't come to this stage say school going to start next week and the board don't have the approval for this we don't want this board just being symbolic
so earlier this year I did request the curriculum approval of all this process frankly speaking I feel the spring approval comes still a little bit late and it leaves no opportunity for the public feedback that and in many government settings educational
proposals submitted for the board review a full year in advance. So maybe we that's something we can think about that. Now circle back with 2.6 according to um the research and also the parents concerns from multiple years talk about
using Lucy Copkins unit of study. This is the real concern and now now I want to work with the board together and see how we can address this question for the the curriculum that is just a resource just like we have the signs of reading
resources in there as well. The curriculum is written to follow the New Jersey state learning standards. >> Yeah. But using the unit of study is a concern and some of the state DOE departments pay the schools to get rid
of this curriculum, get rid of this program. And this is not I believe this is not board first time hearing about this. We understand the school starts next week but this is not something is aligned with the science of reading and
that should not be in the field. So as long as for the AP new courses seminar Spanish 4 AP literacy composition I don't have question but for the literacy K to four is very
important and this is we all know by research those are the careers those are the critical time for the kids to learn literacy. So with what I'm hearing you say is that um you wouldn't object to
revoting on the AP seminar, the Spanish 4, and the AP lit and composition um the new course and the two major revisions, but it's the literacy K, literacy grade 1, writing only, literacy uh grade 2, writing only, literacy 3, and literacy
grade four. Um, so if not approved tonight, what would happen is it would revert to what we did last year, which I'm Does it have more of that unit of study? More Lucy Caukins and less science and reading.
>> It will be the unreed. >> Correct. >> May I please make a statement? >> Yes. >> Thank you. Um, I just need to say that I feel like we are really stepping on um the toes of our educators who we want them to work on curriculum on a very
regular daily basis. This is work that they do that they take very seriously that they put at the forefront. They're not only in front of our students, but they're trying to give us um the best curriculum that they can. Um this is their job that they're doing on a very regular basis. I'm not quite sure where
we're coming from. um where is it indicated that they're not doing what they're supposed to be doing that the children are not succeeding the way that they're supposed to succeed um units of study by Lucy Pawkins is one it it's one facet of the literacy program there is
no perfect right way to teach literacy you need to pull from all different resources all different times and what you want is an engaged faculty that is looking at the curriculum on a consistent basis and making adjustments and improvements as they go along. We are literally saying that we are not
allowing our teachers to do their job. >> So I think what we're trying to say and probably the timing is not the most ideal um is that as board members part of our function is to focus on curriculum and instruction. And I think
uh we've been getting some limited data points on uh the topic and I think it's fair to say that both sides have not fulfilled perhaps to the fullest. It would be nice to get a little bit more input around the work that's being done
in the school. It's there's no lack of trust. It's just part of our uh you know roles and responsibilities, right? That's why we have ACI committee. That's why we want to oversee and want to feel confident and comfortable that the things that are happening at least that we're listening to the educators and
we're listening to what it is that we would like to see. You see how much we approve how much financing goes into this. I think we need to have a little bit more give and take. You know, I I'm I'm I'm okay retracting my vote here. I understand the school is starting
tomorrow, but we need to do a better job. And to your point, uh, Ting, this is not going to be a rubbing rubber stamp anymore, right? We're going to be much more focused on the expectations of our school districts and results, right? I don't want to know how it's done. I
just would like to see the outputs and outcomes and what's expected from the changes that the district is going to go and implement. >> And has there been evidence that our district is failing in terms of what we're providing our students? That's the piece that I don't quite understand in terms of questions have been asked at
ACI. Questions have been answered at ACI. And again, we have time and time again the the results of our students and the way that they're performing in class and the way that they're performing from kindergarten all the way through 12th grade. So, I'm just not clear in terms of where the board
doesn't um have trust in the performance of our students based on what they're being taught. Now, if there are individual, you know, questions and comments that individual families or parents have about their student and their learning in the in the classroom, that needs to be addressed on that level
with the student and the teacher and the parent. But on a board level, I'm not quite understanding where um where where the district is saying that we are not well performed. >> Yeah, I guess I'm not saying we're not. All I'm saying is that I'd like to have
more information shared with me and not to just have an expectation that I'm going to say yes without some some information, some insight. Right? I have limited access to ACI. So when I come in here, I say yes to things I don't know I'm saying yes to, right? So perhaps we
need to do a better job as well communicating what it is that we're changing in the school, how it's going to impact the district and what more importantly what result we're expecting. Right? We've been talking about this for a few years now that we want to be resultbased
>> type of board and not just at high level test scores but just in these discussions as we are learning about different aspects of curriculum of policy. what results do we expect by implementing a policy or by making a change into uh our curriculum, right?
Just a high level understanding, right? Like Fiona just walked up and described exactly what's going to be changing and what the students can expect. I would appreciate if I could have that level of information. So when I say yes to AP Seminar, I at least I I understand what
the school is looking to deliver with that. That's my perception. It's we have very few functions on the board, right? Curriculum is one of them. So, I would like to have a better understanding on the functions that I'm accountable for.
>> I also want to give you back college um college preparedness. I don't think it's just measured solely by SAT, ACT or AP exams, but by the entire educational journey, our student experience here throughout the K12. It's kind of lines
with what I talked at the Jun's meeting, right? We would we judge the school play by we can't judge the school play only by watching the dress rehearsal of the lead actor. It may look good from one angle, but we're missing the whole assembly technical proof and the full
performance. So we've seen a lot of summative information shared at the last uh business meeting but uh the whole at least from the six ACI meetings that I participate in I keep asking about what the growth model looks like what the
formative assessment looks like. I I don't I don't see that data. Maybe Michelle you served on the committee much longer than me. Have you seen that longitudal data in the past? Uh so specifically about the college placement um you know we've had presentations here
that have shared our students get into you know most if not all of the schools that they apply to. Um we've had students at the podium saying how wellprepared they were through you know going through our I mean I I just don't understand where you're getting your data in terms of what we're not what
we're not achieving and how we're not moving forward. That's the piece that I just can't reconcile. I understand wanting more information and I think we have to ask more questions. That's certainly our duty, but I I see no connection to where we're failing and why we are just assuming that we're
failing or that we're not doing what we're supposed to be doing. That really is upsetting to me because um you know, our role as a board is also to protect and to trust the teachers that we have hired in these positions to do their job. Um and I I just don't see evidence
of teachers not doing the best work that they could possibly do. Um, no one is confusing anyone. >> Well, I think the sleeping go tonight really reflecting our different perspective. It can be rooted in our different beliefs, educational
philosophy and approaches to understand the student needs. But I believe we are all here with a shared purpose to support the success and well-being of our student. >> Absolutely. When I click on this um uh seminar AP seminar, it gives me the
details about what the course is about. But it would be interesting to know uh why we are introducing this one. What has is there any uh colleges take this? which colleges take this AP course and
give credit to kids and how many school districts have used this and what are the you know the field for that you know it would be good to see that then it tells us oh my god this is a great AP course >> AP seminar is a very popular course
throughout the country >> very popular >> extremely >> and it was presented at ECI >> extremely >> okay >> um if the board would allow I can make a motion to um reopen public session and allow the director of curriculum to speak if she wants to speak
>> and anyone else >> and and anyone anyone else. >> Sure. >> So, you need to make a motion, a second, and a vote. >> Right. At this time, I uh entertain a motion to reopen public session. >> Second. >> Probably move a second. Any questions?
All those roll call, please. >> Dr. Wang, >> yes. >> Stally, >> yes. left your hand. >> Yes. >> Mr. Todd. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Public session is now reopen. >> Let me see if I can create some um more
confidence in what we're asking you to approve tonight. So, several years ago, as you have noted, um there were studies and questions that came out about the Lucy Popkins units of study. So at that time we've dug into many things. So first of all you look at your own
student achievement. Where are our students placing our our students achieving what they need to what they need to achieve. We found areas that we wanted to improve. I can't even call them areas of weakness. They were not places that our children were not overwhelmingly successful but places where we could have growth. We
supplemented our curriculum by adding heerty into our prim our primary grades which is a phmic awareness um and more and a stronger phonics program. We've also instituted um across grades K4 the really great reading company which is um
a very explicit science of reading phonics program and those are revisions that have been done in previous years. So if you go back to curriculum approvals in the 2022 and 23 school year and the 2324 school year, those are the
revisions that were made because yes, we absolutely take um research seriously and we look at what is our best practice for our students. When we say that we have a resource that we keep in the the um units of when you're looking at the atlas and you're looking at the programs
that are the units that are presented for you and we keep a resource in there, it's because teachers are going to that for major themes of writing or major themes of reading, but it's not the strategies that are put in place in the classroom. Teachers still create those.
And so the option would be to remove, which some districts did, sweeping removals of units of study and replace them with curriculum that is hundreds of thousands of dollars. And our data doesn't support that fiscal choice. So what our data supports was that our
teachers would go to work to revise the curriculum and to make sure that the curriculum is not just here is a package material and we're going to teach it page by page, but that it's taught in a way that aligns to the outcomes identified by the state of New Jersey.
That's what curriculum work is. And so our teachers worked with their um K4 literacy our K4 literacy and social studies supervisor, Dr. for Amy Monaco um to make sure that they were prepared to go into curriculum writing. They consulted with experts. They consulted
with me and they worked to revise the curriculum. And so we have we look forward to being able to put this new curriculum in place so that our students can get a different and upgraded educational experience for this school year. So, it's just at this point to not
believe that your literacy specialists in the school district and I and I I know that that is the word that I'm using. This has been put in place so that we can be ready for September. And this is the past practice. We bring major revisions to you. Um, this is what we're doing tonight. And, you know, I
hope that you'll reconsider your vote for 2.6. I can stay if I need to stay. Okay. >> Thank you. At this time, I'll entertain. >> Any other >> any other questions? Uh, comments from the public
hearing that >> public comments are now closed. At this time, I'll entertain a motion for 2.6. >> Somebody make the motion 2.6 >> to reinstate the 2.6 for the approval.
>> Is there a second? >> Second. It's been properly moved and seconded to reinstate 2.6. Any questions on the motion? >> Roll call, please. Mr. Kelly, >> I have a question first, just because there is a lot of back and forth. Are we
going to vote on 2.6 as is with all the items? >> The question is, are we voting 2.6 >> in its entirety? >> Yes. >> Okay. I just wanted a clear record. Thank you, Dr. W. >> Yes. >> Mr. Stall, >> yes. Swag. >> Yes.
>> Black Journigan. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Thank you. Motion carries. >> Thank you. >> Any other closing discussion from the board? >> Sorry. I just wanted to piggyback on Miss Borland's um comments, which is to
say that this is not a Montgomery pra uh district practice. This is a practice that I know of, you know, across the country um in terms of having literacy specialists and in terms of having teachers come together and revise curriculum um on a very regular basis. I just wanted to make that clear. Thanks.
>> And I have a suggestion. So um maybe in the future to avoid discussions and moments of you know intense uncertainty uh maybe it would be a good idea to have ACI session in August so all those
questions can be answered during the committee meeting and also if there are any curriculum changes maybe it would be really good even for the public to have our uh director of curriculum uh come and do the presentation and
inform the public of what is changing. That will give you peace of mind. Give us peace of mind. >> Can I ask for a clarification on the 2.5? Um what information are you looking for from um as it is addressing our
disproportionality that we have with the state of New Jersey? So that would be the longitudinal data from previous years demonstrate the impact of this in implementation. For example, student academic and behavior outcomes early indicators of student growth.
That's very broad. I mean this is a company who's doing professional development for our staff in order for us to fulfill our disproportionality with the state of New Jersey. I can follow up with you via emails like what specific data we're looking that will be
helpful. Okay. And for Joanna's point about the timeline I hope the curriculum approval can follow in the in the uh NJSBA's guideline in the future can possible happen in May. So then we have ACI committee where parents can react on
that. I don't know if too much push but again we hope we can have have a chance to talk about that not just directly come here and vote and without much details. >> All right. Any other items? >> Um I do have a uh discussion around for
the appeal letter that the faculty sent. So again back to that is uh we have about uh 20 higher education faculty members um they sent the board the email they share some concerns about the math
and science curriculum. So talking about the science, I just want to continue what they they say in the in their letter. They say we cannot stimultaneously claim students strong in math while removing the very structures that develop those strengths. This
contradicts suggested policy misalignment that deserves closer opportunity. These faculties also raised concerns about the science offerings. Physics 1 is not offered as an algebra-based course based on the program of studies description which reduces rigor for students planning to
pursue STEM majors where calculusbased physics is the standard. They also know the district refusals to offer biology in grade nine despite strong student demand as probably example of the poor resource planning. Um as for IPALS
that's the integrated science offered at grade nine here they say the continued use of the IPAL courses also programmatic feedback from students and faculty like suggest it does not deliver the depths of coherence needed to inspire or prepare future scientist in
fact when appels was first instituted four years ago teachers were never given the guidance how it differed from the previous year's physics class and simply reought the pass material under a new banner that shows disconnect and communication gap between the board and
teachers and it also put teachers in a similar bind. Most powerfully they say they state we should be cultivating scientific curiosity not uh not rationing it saying we don't have enough teachers is an excuse not a strategy I
hope hardly agree with them these are not minor adjustment I think they back our student preparedness for college and beyond college preparedness as I mentioned is not just solely me uh measured by SAT or AP exams but again
it's the entire entire educational journey they experienced throughout the school here and again I move I look forward um to continue work at the ACI committee with our schools and uh can come with some
curriculum reflect both our student potentials and high standards we owe them. >> Thank you. >> Any other items? At this time, I'll entertain a motion to adjurnn.
So move a >> second. >> Been properly moved and second. Any questions on the motion? >> All those in favor said I. I. All say right. Sentence. >> Thank you all and have a great evening. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.