Ready, ready, go. This study session of the Independent School District 535 School Board is called to order at 6:02 p.m. on Tuesday, August 12th, 2025 in room 137 of the Edison building. The board acknowledges this site and all RPS sites
are situated on the ancestral land of the Dakota people and we honor the Dakota nations and the sacred land of all indigenous peoples. Present at this meeting are school board members. Superintendent Kent Pquel, a non- voting exeicio member and assistant school board clerk, Miss Anne Kramer.
Miss Kramer, will you please call the role? >> Director >> here. Director >> here. >> Director McLolin >> here. here. >> Nathan >> here. >> Director White >> here. >> Vice Chairman >> here. >> At this time, we offer the opportunity to say the pledge of
>> allegiance. I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.
Item 2.1 is approval of the agenda. Are there any changes to the agenda? >> Move approval. >> Second. >> It has been moved and seconded to approve the agenda. All those in favor say I. I. Any opposed? The agenda has been approved. The agenda and documents
for this meeting are available online at rochesterchools.orgsimly. Our focus topic is the new strategic plan. Superintendent Pic. >> Thank you, Chair Nathan. Um, and board members, we will not be conducting this uh entire and in fact not even the
majority of this study session from your dis up here. We'll be getting up and moving out to be breaking into groups uh as we have done in previous study sessions. But we thought it would be easiest to start here partly so we could have the room arranged in a way that will facilitate those groups. Um, but
also so that I can uh set the stage a little bit. But before I do that, I actually want to uh introduce a person who we're going to get to know well over the next number of months. Spencer Sherman works with the educational consulting firm Education First. As
board members are aware, we received a generous grant from Mayo Clinic to facilitate the development of our next strategic plan. We had 10 organizations nationally apply to do uh that work um helping us analyze data, engage stakeholders, prioritize
um the options that we have and put together a great plan. Education first uh was ranked highest and received that RFP and as it happens Spencer has recently locate relocated to Rochester. So it's a bonus to have him in proximity
though he travels all the time. So, let me just before I actually uh kind of frame where we are, give Spencer a chance just to introduce himself uh personally. Wow, even the mic appearing perfectly. And then um after Spencer's had a chance to do that, I'll um kind of
come back and frame some of the things we're going to be looking at tonight. >> Everybody, feel official with a microphone now. Um thanks for having me. So, uh my name is Spencer. Uh and like Kent said, I just moved here just a little less than a year ago. Um I've been education my whole life. So, I
started off as a classroom teacher in New Orleans public schools. I taught high school science, became a school administrator. Uh, then I moved to the Rhode Island Department of Education where I started off um running our CTE programs. I became the state CT director and became the chief for innovation for
the department of ed in Rhode Island where I was all of our data accountability work as well as all of our adult education, college pathways, and middle school work. U then I moved to California, did some work there for made a half billion dollar career pathways initiative that I was involved
with and then um since then I'm sort of bouncing around did some work in Indiana on high school um new graduation requirements and then joined education first and have been traveling all over the country and I'm really excited to be able to do work like actually in the community where where I live. Um so very excited uh to be here. Thank you so
much. >> Thank you Spencer. And so before we actually bring up the PowerPoint, and I know there's a point at which I'm also going to um uh keep talking a bit before we get you all doing all the talking along with members of our cabinet. Um I want to just share the psychology that
our chair and vice chair and I agreed to for this evening's kickoff. Because when we talked about how you start the development of a new strategic plan, we considered beginning this process with actually an overview of the process that we proposed to use and the working
groups and the surveys and the timelines and deliverables. And we decided that that was not a very exciting way to begin really envisioning the next leg of the work in Rochester public schools, though that work is well underway and in fact you will see it soon. So, we chose
not to start with the process we're going to use to get from where we are today to a new strategic plan that'll move our system forward. The other option we considered to kick off this process is a look backward at where we've been over the last three years, what we've accomplished, where we
haven't achieved our objectives, uh the lessons that we've learned, and that also is in the works. We have pulled together uh reflections and information on all 15 building blocks in our current strategic plan and you and the community
will also be receiving that backwardlooking assessment of where we've been. But precisely because that's inherently a backward-looking exercise. We also chose not to begin the process there. And so instead, what we wanted to do with you as our governing board and
our senior leadership of our district is have essentially a structured brainstorm where we can take a look at some issues of importance that have come through some work that I'll describe in a moment that I did during the previous school year, but also what's already in your own minds as the leaders of this
district and the things that you really want to see be part of this process. And so tonight really is that forward-looking discussion where our main hope is to check the pulse of the board members and our senior leaders for the issues you really feel urgently need
to be a part of this strategic planning process. What gets you excited? Maybe what keeps you up at night? um and a loose prioritization of those things so that we can actually bring back to you a proposal for the full process that we're confident addresses at least the big
things that are on your minds. I want to thank Denise Moody who you all know is our director of policy and innovation. Denise will be playing a key role in the development of this strategic plan as she did with our 2022 2025 strategic plan and so she'll be joining in the uh
activities uh tonight and uh will be helping to guide us forward through the process. So I don't know if I don't have the clicker or if now is the best. I think >> I could be your clicker. >> Can you click? Thank you. Um there we there we go. I don't know if you Spencer
want to cover any of these these objectives. because I know my part's coming up in a in a moment but then I can move it forward. >> Sure. So I think like the big goal here like um Kent mentioned is let's talk trying to understand where we need to dive deeper. So get guidance from you
all what are the top priority areas that we should um in our different groups and me from education first dive deeper into and then once we do that get some feedback and guidance on those top priorities like what could we do more? We'll spend the bulk of today the sort of interactive exercise really nailing
down which there's a lot of things that are very important. What's the most important from your perspective at board members? >> Okay, that's me. I also I'll name education first national group. I have a colleague named Joe who's based out of um Colorado
who will be helping with another strand of the work. >> Do you want me to talk through this K or do you want to take this? Um I can unless you you want to jump into it. >> Um as we have begun the early work of uh developing the strategic plan, one of
the things that we learned the last time around is that not only do we need to bound what actually goes in the strategic plan itself, we need to bound what we include in the strategic planning process. So not just what we ultimately put in our plan that will
guide our work over the next three or four years, but what we consider through the plan. And so uh especially for financial reasons that board members are well aware of if we are utopian in our vision for what we want to do, we're
actually really setting ourselves up to be on a treadmill and not make progress. And so we've suggested that there are at least five criteria that we should use to select both the issues we're going to study through the strategic planning process and then ultimately the ones we
include in the strategic plan which just so you have a general sense of timeline. I'm now going to recommend you approve in late April. And so we are going to take enough time to do this well but not so much time that we go into the next school year without a great strategic
plan. So, as you can see on the slide there, there are five of them. The first, you are about a month from approving a new uh mission, vision, and values for the school district. And so, making sure that everything that goes in our next strategic plan aligns with that mission, vision, and values, I think, is
one critical criteria. The second is transformative impact. That a strategic plan is not uh an everyday work plan. that it should be those priorities that really have the potential to fundamentally change uh things for kids
and accelerate their path to uh become thriving young adults. And so these should be things that have at least the potential to make that type of an impact. The third is feasibility that we should not uh include in our planning process or ultimately in our strategic
plan things that we know are far beyond our means to implement or implement. as well. The fourth is that they're systemwide in scope. As you know, you have approved a very different approach to school improvement that is going to be rolling out over the next year through our school continuous
improvement plan process or skip process. And those are things that happen at the school level. And so what should go in a Rochester public school strategic plan are things that are of systemwide importance. And then finally, these are not things that we really could get done in a year if we put our
nose to the grindstone. they're things that are three or fouryear endeavors uh as were the building blocks of our current strategic plan. So those are five of the criteria that we're suggesting we will use keeping in our heads tonight as we're prioritizing some of the issues and that ultimately uh
need to play a really really practical role in selecting the priorities that will go in the strategic plan. They're not rigid and hard and fast, but I would suggest if we have an idea for the strategic plan that doesn't meet one of those, we should think hard as to whether it really belongs in the
strategic planning process. So, now this brings me to the last kind of uh piece of the talking that I'm going to be doing and then Spencer's going to get us up and moving into some tables. Um, the one thing I'll say is I am by design not going to be in one of the small groups that we are going to
form in a few moments so that you can call me over to provide additional information on the options that I'm going to walk you through right now because we know we haven't given you a lot of background and information. Some of these issues will be well very familiar to you. Um, others of them may
be fairly new to some of you as board members. So, where did these issues come from? um as I shared with you in writing a number of months ago in the winter and spring of last year, I had a meeting in every one of our schools and programs and then since that time with many of
the leaders in our central office and took very detailed notes on those conversations and then stepped back and tried to say what are the limited number of big issues that came out of those conversations and my own thinking and
analysis, but especially what was on the minds of diverse groups of staff in our schools and in the central office. And I really tried hard uh to keep it to 10. Partly because 10 is a nice round number, but also because for us at this
early stage in the process to go beyond 10 initial issues uh would be potentially overwhelming. Um there was much that I heard about that is not on this list of 10 and we won't let that fall off. But for this initial
conversation uh we agreed that it made sense to probe those 10 issues that I heard about. So to frame the exercise that Spencer's going to be moving us through for the rest of the meeting, I want to just touch on those 10. You have a brief one-s sentence description of
each. Um, and I want to move through and you can see uh what Spencer's uh suggesting is um there's going to be a moment here for questions of clarification that you think apply to the full group and I certainly will ask my colleagues uh and the cabinet and Denise to jump in and help answer some
of those questions if they're ones that I can't um answer directly. So, let me walk you through the 10 issues that grew out of the work that um I did last year to begin thinking about this process. So the first which was very much on
people's minds precisely because you were considering approval of the new school improvement planning process was implementation of the skip 2.0 process. That was something that principles, teachers, school improvement team folks
were very focused on last spring as uh we were designing it. And there's a really strong sense that I encountered at elementary, middle, and high school that we got to make this work. That many of us in education have lived with strategic plan or school improvement
plans that uh if they get done at all, they get done in a fairly half-hearted way and may be submitted to the district office, sometimes not even until October or November, and then they never get looked at or utilized. And that's not an overly cynical description of school
improvement planning in many places. And I think that uh what you approved last spring in our new skip process has the potential to be very very different to allow our schools and empower our schools to do unique things that meet the needs of their kids but within
district-wide standards and expectations. People are nervous about some of the structures in that process. a school improvement team that will not be making the decision on the budget and staffing for our schools, but that will have visibility and be able to provide
principles with insight, but a school improvement team that will vote on priorities for their schools and especially a process that uses data in a much more intentional way. I was pleased that a number of board members were able to be with us last week for the professional development on the new five
essentials survey. And as you could tell from the conversations, they were um very engaged and energized and concerned because that instrument is going to uh help us identify areas for growth in all of our schools. So implementing the skip
2.0 0 process through our new strategic plan was one of the top issues that I heard about and making sure that it is appropriately supported and resourced um through the development of the new strategic plan. So skip 2.0 was number one.
Number two, again it's not surprising because I was having these meetings when you the board was approving the first and second items. Um the board's mindsets, behaviors, and steps for student success also came up repeatedly.
I think there was a lot of enthusiasm for defining a broader set of competencies and experiences that we want all kids to develop from early childhood through uh the young adults we serve at our rail program. But there was a lot of confusion about how are you
going to do that? Is it all going to be work of the counselors? Is it all going to be um something that uh we just leave to kids to figure out using our Zello software? Um and no, everyone knew that that would not uh bring those competencies to life. And that the goal
is to make them embedded in our classes, in our family engagement work, even in our community partnerships. And so the second issue that I heard about was how do we take those mindsets, behaviors and steps for success and make them uh clear
and actionable and truly integrated into our work such that when for instance a teacher is introducing a new lesson, they're also introducing one of those mindsets or behaviors that is on the list that you approved last uh spring.
Um and as uh director Mclofflin helped us discover when I miscounted the number uh during the meeting, there's a lot of those steps and so it's an ambitious agenda and so uh people are very much uh suggesting that should be a focus of the strategic plan. In the language that is
being used in a lot of school districts around the country that would be described as a social emotional learning strategy. I think the way we're characterizing it in some ways uh goes beyond that to say it really does affect the academic agenda as well. We want kids to be developing those mindsets and
behaviors while they're learning math and science and things like that. So that was number two, the mindsets, behaviors, and steps for success. Number three, uh came up with surprising frequency from our elementary schools to our high school uh alternative learning
center. Um what is the impact of AI going to be on um our kids? The first I heard about, not surprisingly, again, these conversations were were uh with staff, was um about student use of AI.
Um, of course, issues of plagiarism, issues of students really doing the heavy lifting in the work, but that quickly turned into when I would ask, well, how are you using it? Now, we have uh staff using it for lesson planning, it planning, using it for um uh
reviewing student work, using it for providing feedback. It's very individualized. We have some instances of people using it to actually provide instruction. And then we had some administrators using it for operational purposes. It's, you know, it helps me put together my school newsletter. And
so there was a lot of uh interest and discussion in saying what's the district's strategy with artificial intelligence um going forward. And as I think board members are aware, that's not something that at least from the central office level we have yet articulated much of a strategy for. But
it was definitely on people's minds last spring as we had those conversations. Next, and this was very specific to um our elementary schools with a few exceptions of people who recognize the importance for this as a district as a
whole. As board members are aware, there are a subset of six schools in Rochester, formerly known as choice schools, now called district-wide option schools, that with some exceptions do not have the s attendance areas like our
neighborhood schools do because they previously received transportation service across the entire community. And the logic of that was that they had educational focuses that were not ones that would potentially be viable within
just one attendance boundary like the Spanish immersion program where you might have said, "Could you get fill a school with kids who wanted to learn in Spanish?" In order to move to our new start times, as board members are very well aware, we had to cut the citywide transportation for those six schools
because we could never have gotten to the new start times if we were still driving kids from up by Oronokco to get to Willow Creek, which we did have. Um, so that decision was made and John and the transportation team uh did some pretty quick and uh complex work to
create a hub structure that provides slightly larger transportation service to those schools than an a neighborhood school, but not significantly larger. And so schools that have historically had long waiting lists for the most part now have none. The majority of those
families that were attending those schools have continued to either, if they receive busing, keep their kids there in those schools or self-transport them there. But there's clear awareness that that structure absent citywide
transportation needs revisiting. Um, what is the purpose and focus of those schools? Should they have attendance boundaries or should they continue to be uh unique in our system receiving citywide or regional transportation and
what are the educational focus uh focuses uh that if those schools continue to exist um they should have the way I've worded this is they should continue to exist that they have a valuable place in our system this is my perspective they provide an opportunity
for choices beyond a neighborhood structure but that we do need to take a look at the reasons they exist and the supports that they receive. So that's uh another issue that came up uh in of course those schools very prominently
but also a number of other our other neighborhood schools where they know that some of the uh students who live in their attendance boundaries uh are going to those uh other schools within RPS. So the future of DWOOS's is a simple way to summarize that uh issue that came up.
Now as those discussions were happening about the DWOOS's there was a really important additional companion conversation and it particular in particular happened in our neighborhood schools which was we're special too. We have fantastic programming too. We think
we are unique and doing amazing thing kids for two for amazing things for kids too. And so that led to this uh uh initiative that is described on the screen that really is about helping make sure our neighborhood schools, elementary schools are offering families
an educational program that meets those famil family's needs and expectations and that frankly is going to be appealing enough to enable them to have uh a stable and diverse student enrollment. Um, one of the interesting things as I've learned a bit about the
history of the district-wide option schools in Rochester, formerly choice schools, I think I'm oversimplifying, but I think it's fair to say those schools really were created without a strategy for the neighborhood schools, making the neighborhood schools an
equally highquality, positive, viable option for families. Um uh it used to say on our website since I've been in Rochester that the most innovative uh schools were just the district-wide option schools. And you can not be surprised that rubs the wrong people in
our neighborhood schools the wrong way. And so the goal of this initiative would be to say how can we ensure that all of those schools are offering programs and have cultures that are um equally exciting and um viable as those that we
know for years have resulted in waiting lists for the district-wide option schools. So those two that I just covered really are a twofer. It's saying what is going to be the future and focus of our district-wide option schools and how do we ensure that our neighborhood schools are offering equally appealing
and exciting programming uh to their students and families. Next, moving up the grade levels. This is one I heard about in all of our middle schools. And you can see there's two big ideas in this statement. Through this initiative, RPS would revise course
offerings in middle school to provide students with more elective classes and other options to explore their interests while also identifying and implementing thoughtful ways to hold middle school students accountable for mastering the knowledge, skills, and habits they need to succeed in high school before they
enter 9th grade. I heard a lot about the absence of uh choice and interest in middle school, including people uh really regretting the days when middle school students used to be uh engaged in what we might call uh in old school
language more vocational technical exploration or sometimes called hands-on learning. Um but then we also heard about a subsets of our middle school students who uh are not held back from high school if they haven't demonstrated the knowledge and skills to succeed
there that do move on. And this is a difficult reality. It's not at all unique to Rochester. I'm also not recommending we do hold kids back. The research is pretty clear holding back a second grader doesn't work and holding back an eighth grader really doesn't work. But how do we face the fact that it is possible to progress through
middle school without having developed the knowledge and skills you need to succeed in high school and then to go on to nth grade? And as board members heard in your last board meeting and the discussion of nth grade on track, we're going to be putting in place a lot of new supports and structures to help students succeed in nth grade. This
initiative would ask us to go upstream and say, what do we do to strengthen student engagement in our middle schools and also really hold students accountable for demonstrating that they're ready to go on to high school. Next, and I know we're in the second
half here, this is a lot. Strengthening and increasing curricular pathways through high school. And through this effort, we would develop curricular pathways in our high schools that reflect students authentic interests and aspirations and that are likely to prepare them for success in the economy and society in which they'll live their
lives. This effort would include investigation of strategies for increasing and improving student participation in both dual credit classes that offer both high school and post-secary credit and career and technical education programs that prepare students for work in the trades
and other fields that offer strong wages and opportunities in Rochester's workforce. In short, this effort is about what we teach in our high schools and thinking creatively about what kids need to know and be able to do uh in the real world after high school and how can
we create pathways through high school that put more of our kids uh on that path to thrive. So you can see uh the last three components of this have a elementary school focus with the emphasis on the DWOOS's and our neighborhood schools, a middle school
focus with an emphasis on choice and accountability, and a high school focus with an emphasis on pathways that lead to good outcomes after high school. multi-tiered systems of support in mathematics came up repeatedly in the
conversations I had last uh spring in particular in our elementary schools even as the staff were nearing an end of the year in which they had invested really heavily in uh our new reading curriculum and knowing that the next year the year we're about to start they
will be implementing a new science curriculum and still saying what about math um and understanding that as we've discovered in literacy and as you're going to hear about uh next Tuesday at the board meeting from Mona Perkins and her team, we are getting clearer and
better at intervening with kids who are struggling with reading. We need the same kind of strategy with mathematics. And so that was a theme that came up repeatedly. Um, I think we've all had the assumption that math was the next focus for our work in MTSS, but we
actually haven't named that uh reality. And that would be the possibility we'd be considering through this strategic plan. Enhancing the process of identifying students for and delivering special education services. This is an issue
that was passionately discussed by a limited number of our staff, but passionately by those staff. One in five students in Rochester public schools now has an individualized education plan. That's 20%. Um I remember when I started
my career uh 12 or 13% was generally considered uh a pretty significant number. That's what we had when I was in St. Paul schools. Now Rochester is not unique in that regard. uh we're a little bit higher percentage than some model districts and there's some there's no
exact way to know why that is. Sometimes people think that because we're in the home of the Mayo Clinic and kids come for medical treatment that might be uh some factor. Um in some of our early childhood programs which are seeking to serve a targeted population, we have 30% of kids with an IEP. This is uh
happening all over the country. And so this is an initiative, should we choose to include it in our strategic plan, that would need to be very carefully crafted because we have the responsibility and the desire to serve every student who has a disability. And
yet we also know that we need to be sure we are not identifying kids who really just didn't get solid instruction as kids with disabilities. And we want to get better at providing those interventions that uh make sure we don't uh need to have students identified for
special education services for whom that is not uh the best fit. Um, I would say as I tried to write this statement into a simple statement to inform the discussion uh tonight, this is the one I'm least satisfied with because I think
uh naming the challenge of one in five kids receiving special education services, which as this board knows are uh mandated but underfunded is different than articulating a path forward. And so the language that's there, we would evaluate and as needed revise the
process for identifying students with disabilities and the delivery model that we use to deliver special education services to further strengthen both the educational effectiveness and the cost effectiveness of those services um is in my view not very satisfying. Um, I will
say as board members are aware, um, the state of Minnesota is also right now not very clearly articulating its path with thinking through the future of special education services. Uh, in the last legislative session, the the state
literally passed a law that simply says you have to cut 250 million or it's all just coming off the formula. There was no prioritization, no direction. But the urgency of containing the cost of those services led the legislature and the governor to pass a law that simply says
hundreds of millions must be cut with no prioritization, no strategy articulated. And I think that's because it's simply impossible to balance the budgets that schools, districts, and the state face if we don't grapple uh with this issue of the number of our students who are
receiving those services and the potential that that will grow extensively in the future. And I think we are really at the last one. We are. This was an issue I heard about in our high schools. And it was something that was limited to the high schools, but it
was one that I uh felt because of the concerns was important to include. When a student does not have enough credits to graduate from high school on time, there is an authorized process used in uh every school district I'm aware of
that usually is called credit recovery, which is an intensive opportunity to make up credits in order to either graduate on time or graduate um subsequent to on time but get your high school diploma. This is clearly a critical service. You clearly need to be
able to provide this to kids. there's a lot of anxiety about the degree to which it reflects authentic learning or is it just getting the kid through uh a proxy for that learning. We use a particular uh web-based software platform called
Ingenuity, but there are other ways to do it. And there was um uh a fairly widespread sense of unease at the quality of learning those students are completing when they're finishing their high school credential through credit recovery. So I felt that I needed to
include that issue on this as well. As I said at the outset and madam chair, this is a lot of me uh talking and thankfully that will not be the rest of the evening. um we're not expecting and we know we haven't given you nearly enough information on these to be making formal
you know governance decisions on them and that's not what we're proposing or where we are in the process but we did want to begin this development of a new strategic plan with this overview of these big issues and then also through the exercise Spencer is now going to engage you in give you the chance to add
to these uh issues if there are other things that are on your mind. So, with that, I'll turn it back. And I see there maybe there's a space here for questions, but if people are uh don't have them now, as I said, I'm not going to join a group so that I can join you
in uh the group Spencer's going to put us in if that's helpful. >> Does that work members? So I I had a question about something you said at the beginning which was um not to focus on process
but also we are supposed to not have pie in the sky things that we can't do and I struggle with separating those two things like we might think this is great but we you know who's going to think about the implementation do we bring our
pie in the sky ideas to you and then you decide if it can be implementmented to what extent if at all or do you want us to consider some of that um as part of our governance role? I mean it gets a little squishy. >> Yeah, thank you Madam Chair. I I
actually Thank you, Director Workman. I am committed to bring to you as you vote on this strategic plan the most realistic and honest assessments of our capacity that we possibly can. in retrospect and I'm super proud of the strategic plan that we are still
implementing and there's so much good that has um happened but the single biggest thing that I think we did not do adequately well in that planning process was the one you're asking about which is consider our realistic capacity
financial human time wise so I think director workman in saying don't we're not bringing you process tonight I literally was meaning the process of developing the strategic plan. How many working groups are we going to have? Are we going to do surveys? Are we going to do focus groups? We will bring you all
of that in the weeks ahead. Um, so we're kind of suggesting we put that in the parking lot to get you to hear your ideas on the content. I would keep capacity in the back of my mind throughout this discussion tonight. and that if we find ourselves, myself
included, uh proposing efforts that just go far beyond what we know we can realistically achieve, I don't think that means we we smother them tonight and we stop talking about them. But I think we should be realistic about um that issue. But we will be bringing to
you high level but detailed assessments of our capacity and plans for implementation for all the priorities that make it into this strategic plan. And the way that should work in practice is as you know every year we've developed an implementation plan for the
school year for the last three years. This strategic plan should outline each of those annual priorities in the plan. So for instance as we talk about let's assume multi-tered implementing MTSS and mathematics becomes a priority of this
plan in the plan it would say year one that involves adopting a new curriculum year two that involves this professional development year three that involves this these you know family engagement with mathematics so that the plan this time around will actually have much more
implementation in the plan than our current plan um has had. We've added the implementation as we've been going, but I think we now are at a point where we have the the ability and the the necessity to think about our capacity in the plan itself. Does that
>> start to director? >> Um I've been thinking about this initiative about special education since you provided us with a preview of this. Um would you anticipate that MDE the department of education is going to
provide direction on this topic as well? >> I think MDE is and will provide direction on aspects of special education best practice. I would be thrilled but I think it's unlikely that the state will provide
much guidance on the tough issue of how we meet those needs. against the other priorities that are also equally urgently required. Um, I think the the best good faith effort that in my career the state has made
toward that end has been the work that happened in the 2023 legislative session to buy down the cross subsidy that to pay the dollars pay half of the unfunded requirement for special ed. That said, and as you all know, I'm not a special education educator by training or
lensure, but I uh uh spend a lot of time with them and talk to them. Minnesota's requirements for special education services are significantly above many other states and there's been no uh uh movement to reconsider that. I don't have the sophistication to say that
there should be. But that would be one thing that would have to happen at the state level if we were going to say if we can't afford our aspirations, we have to actually uh think hard about what those aspirations. And I've had longtime special education directors tell me, who
I respect a lot, um that it's time for Minnesota to take uh a hard look at some of those expectations that we have. But that would be the kind of thing, Director Mclofflin, that really would require state leadership. Um, the reason I mentioned the state task force, which
we have two people in the room who've applied to be on, and I hope they're selected on special ed, is it was not written as a task force to reform, improve, or enhance special education services. It was written as a way to cut 250 million. It was >> how to pay for it. >> How to pay like how to yeah, how to
reduce the cost, like you know, full stop. So, I think that's probably where our state leadership is going to lie in the near future. But, as I said, I'd be thrilled uh to prove wrong about that. We do get guidance and in fact we are actively receiving guidance from MDE on things like our child find process the
process that we have in place in our schools to identify students who should be assessed for special education services. So I don't mean to suggest that the department of education has nothing to offer us at all. But I think on the core issue that I was hearing about last spring of how do we provide these services with the resources that
we have um I'm not really expecting the state to come in in the near term and and have a lot of leadership for us. >> Thank you. >> Dr. Whitehorn, just real quick, since we're working on the new mission values
statement here, how where are we with that process and as we're going through and our responses to um to these considerations. uh do we have you know I don't you know what I mean we
want it to all be connected right so with these pointed questions we can say something not that it may be off brand but you know since we're trying to do that how do we prevent that does that make sense or are we just going to use our current mission
>> no uh thank you director and I love that you're thinking about that we are going to be sharing an updated version of that with you in I think two weeks Amy at board members are going get it. We have received a lot of community input on the last draft over the summer. That's led to some significant uh revisions. Um and
we'll be sharing that with you and then you are scheduled to vote on that in September. So, we're very close to the new mission vision values. Now, of course, if the board wants to take more time to do more revisions, but we've heard your feedback on the previous drafts. So, it's coming. is coming soon and we will definitely have that if the
if the calendar holds true. You will have approved that just as our strategic planning process really gets underway. And so in the charge to every working group that would be in the process is reviewing the board's approved mission,
vision and values and saying are we moving toward that vision and it would be an explicit task for every part of this process that we would have. Um, so it's kind of a chicken and the egg issue, but we're close and it's going to be available really soon. So yeah, my hope is that you will have a different
mission statement, maybe even if we can do it cheaply, put on that wall with some stickers that Mamsu Kudson has told me look pretty good. >> So So I guess my big question is how can this impact that process, right? Because it seems like the processes should be
working like this, but they're not. So how how does that work? I think that they're they're aligned in that they've been a lot of the same people contributing. I think the best way to to achieve that, Director Whitehorn, is for as we get in the September board
meetings to reviewing and approving the new mission, vision, and values. If you see ways that you want to be sure we consider that in the design of the strategic plan, let's make that explicit and let's really say this value I really want to see brought out in the work that we're doing through the strategic plan.
And then I think we can continually hold ourselves accountable for going back to that mission, vision, and values. Um, we thought about postponing this discussion until after that was done, but we all know what happens once the school year is underway, and it's just in the rush.
So, we wanted to at least have a discussion of the board this summer about the strategic plan that gets us uh thinking about what's next. And then your next big decision will be that mission, vision, values, and also a brand identity. We have a new logo and
um some new uh visuals that I'm pretty personally excited about. We'll see what you think of them soon. >> I guess another chicken and egg question are our performance measures. um the outcomes that we've approved as a
board and has been guiding the skip process um you know seem to reflect the work of what we should be doing no matter what our strategic plan is. Should we be keeping those in mind in terms of those are the outcomes we want to continue to work toward in the 2030
plan or will we be thinking about different performance measures measuring the effectiveness of the next strategic plan? Uh well let me just say chair Nathan that's exactly the kind of feedback we want from you tonight. Like I think we should be thinking about these performance measures or like
director Whitehorn we need to be thinking about mission vision values. Like that's why we want to have this discussion with you. So what's on your minds? My personal response to it is absolutely. Um I think there are a few measures that are not included in the performance measures in the skip process
that we probably want to add to a strategic plan. One that I think it was director Cook if I remember right but I might be wrong. Enrollment. Should enrollment be a performance measure at the system level um in our new strategic plan? Like what is our market share?
What percentage of families who live within our district choose to send their kids? So I think the answer in my view turn would be yes and it's the 10 performance measures you've approved for our schools and then what else do we need to guide the work at the system
level. If we have 33 like we had in our current strategic plan, we know what's going to happen. And so I don't want to go too far up, but I I think yes, there are some other measures that um would guide the pieces that are not part of the school improvement process.
>> Any other questions? Director Workman. >> Um, do you think that these 10 things are all doable in the strategic plan or are we going to rank them and say and if so, do you want us to do you have
a specific number you want us to cut them down to 10 down to nine or >> this is a great segue to the >> I mean I I always have to keep I always have to keep in mind what you said when everything is a priority, nothing's a priority, >> right? Um, no. I don't think they're all
doable. Well, for sure. Um, at in a strategic plan at the system level, it's really important. Does that mean we do nothing? No. But are they a major initiative in the system level? So, no, I don't think so. I don't have a number that I think is uh like a a cut off. And
yes, we do want you to rank them. Now, I want to be really clear. the ranking you're going to give us does not result in one of these 10 being voted off the island forever because we know that we heard about it from our educators. Um, and I think all 10 of these uh deserve
further consideration. But from you as our governing board and then our senior leadership, um, we want to begin this process with a sense of, yep, these things are a really big deal. These are the big ones that I'm thinking including things that may not be on this list that you want to add through the exercise
that we're going to be undertaking. So, yes, it's too many. Yes, we have to cut them down. No, I don't have an exact uh number for that. >> I think we can move on. Speaking of priorities. >> All right. All right. Well, that is an absolute
perfect layup. So, thank you. I know you're not a plant. That was exactly what we're trying to get to next, which is like what are those deer? What are those priorities? So, um, what I'll be moving us into, and like as I mentioned, I am a former high school teacher, so like I apologize ahead of time for like the teacheriness
of this nest activity, but hopefully it's really good way to sort of get you guys moving and dive deeper into some of the good questions that you guys are bringing up. So, what we're going to do next is we want to understand, you just heard here's the 10 possible issues, and again, this is not a final decision.
These are all very important, but how do we get them to tiers of importance from most important, second most important, third most important? There's no like unimportant. It's just most, second most, third most. And what we'd like you to do is you're going to do this independently.
You'll list them. You have some props. I'll explain how to use them in a second. Then you're going to need to be a high school science teacher. So like think like an amoeba. You're going to slowly merge with other groups. So you'll start by yourself, plan indiv individually. You'll find a partner. You'll discuss together what your
priorities are between the two of you and see if there's any differences and then which ones you collectively of the two of you ranked highest. Then merge again. You'll be in a group of four and group of four. How do you measure them? And merge one more time. Then you'll be half of us groups of eight. And then we'll have a whole group discussion. So
idea of the sort of like bubbling up method will give us a way to sort of like not try to put our thumb on the scale too much and get a lot of time for all of you to share what you're thinking. I'll also note we're hoping to like not lose the information each stage. So you'll use it on pieces of paper, but we'll collect those at the end just so we can reference them later
for notes because we obviously won't be able to be part of every single conversation. So if there's stuff that's important, please make sure you're writing it down so you can capture it later. So here's how this is going to work. So we have props. If you look somewhere on your desk, this applies both cabinet and board members. You
should have a sheet of paper, like a white sheet of paper. It look like this. So, um, you'll have each of those priorities that Kent went through with the same numbers or letters. We chose
letters are the numbers. You wouldn't think number one was the most important. A through J. Here's to remind you a list of what those parties were. And you're going to do it on this sheet of paper. And so this little gray thing here um is
what your sheet of paper should look like. So what you'll do here, write your name so we can follow you to any questions and list write highest priority. Put these little slips of paper and say your question director work roughly when fights in the thirds.
So 10 as you know five people. So like three or four per category would be ideal. No more than four per category. So There's three here. Any other notes you want to know here? Draw a line. Second highest priorities. Those draw a line. Third, draw a line.
Um, you can also, it says here, add additional issues. So, these are 10 that came from some previous conversations, but there's something else that you're really missing something. Feel free to add that in as one of your three to four for each category. Um, anything else you want to
add is comments, just put those on your paper as well. next to the category. You have a little piece of tape on your table, too. Just make them stick. We debated before, should these be post-it notes? Should these stickers just piece of paper with tape?
And I reiterate at the bottom here, those colorful boxes. Those are the criteria that K discussed at the beginning to keep in mind as so we I give you guys give up seven minutes or so just to really think on
your own and priorize around and then once you ready tape them before you go into partners before I do just any classroom style questions what we're doing here questions now this >> yes >> okay this is this is a a technical
question yes so can we use up an entire side with this first exercise or will we need it to >> great question one you'll this sheet is just for this first exercise you'll get a new sheet for the same so please use this whole page >> and at the end we'll collect all these of each stage. So we have a lot of data.
>> Yeah. And you know there's always one student. Um actually I read the packet and already generated this. >> I'm just saying you get an A.
>> Duly noted. >> Duly noted. >> Can I just make a quick process point? One. um uh in the first round we're going to ask board members to pair up with a cabinet member or Denise so that your first triad will be to to do that and we'll do that organically. The
second thing I do feel a need as I look at this starting to reiterate this is not Kent's list of 10. Um some of you know for the last 15 years I did research on education youth development and this was really basically
qualitative research and so the list of 10 was decided by two things how often people mentioned it or how intensively people mentioned it. So that's where this list comes from. These were structured meetings that Ann scheduled in all of our schools and programs and
and there was a protocol that we used and when I went back through all the data the this list of 10 comes from it came up a lot or it may have come up less often but it came up very intensively. So don't feel any uh like
need to uh think positively about any 10 because I'm sitting here in the room. This was my effort to reflect what's on the minds of our educators. >> Great. Any other questions? >> All right. If not, we take about seven minutes or so and I'll
miss anything. No. I think the idea is >> this is just for this exercise. They're going to collect. >> We're turning in our paperwork. explanation. It's really tough to Do you want us to rank them within each category?
>> Okay. >> One question I just got is a really good one. Do you need to rank each tier? That's optional. You don't need to, but most early add comments or notes you want to see if you need it on the front or on the back.
One, two, one. One more minute. Your final thoughts. All right. Thanks everyone. Um, all right. So now we get to see whether director barley is the only one who gets an A in this assignment or if you all get A's. Let's find out. So now we're going to pair up.
So for this next part, we're going to move into pairs. So you'll pair up with another person. And we would love it if there's one board member and one member of cabinet pairing up with each other. >> And Denise >> and Denise. And um what you'll do is
you'll have a new sheet of paper. These are over here. So see those chairs arranged. That's so migrate over there, partner up, migrate over there, and you'll do the exact same thing, except now you're trying to merge your two ideas. So, hold on to the paper you just
had to end, but you're doing that exact same paper, combining your two ideas. >> Do we take our tape? >> He'll be right over there. Bring the tape.
>> We need the tools. >> I feel like I need this. >> I don't know. These are two Well, because nobody wanted to agree to their thing. >> See, they put theirs together. >> It's really funny how much different.
It's really interesting. So, I guess we need to close the conversation. First, just like I really appreciate I know that was like a lot of talking and like forcing you to rank things, but I think that's part of this exercise is like all of these matter. All these further eval.
So here's our collectively from these final two groups. We've got all of your work over there. Two big questions for you collectively looking at where we landed. What are the top two priorities? And most importantly, this is you don't need don't know everything you currently need to know. So part of
the job the board they tell us to all the committees what other questions do we have the floories what questions further analysis that's fine you can take it >> well math is up there
>> and special education on credit recovery. That's three things. God is good. >> I don't think that theirs counts because they have five highest and you said no more than four. So I feel like you cannot be there combining. >> They're they're like conjoined.
>> I said that but we followed the rule. We don't. >> My team said that they were two separate points. >> You did say that >> and and I feel that disqualifies your answers. >> We made Stephanie separate them. She didn't want to separate. >> See, I said they were the same thing,
but they were like, "No, they're separate." >> Talk about why why they're separate or why you think they're not. >> Well, I think that I agree. So, my concern reason why. So, originally I had them at the bottom. Um, and I've said this 10,000 times now tonight, but I
feel that there's some there's going to be some issues with DWO and and empowering schools. Um, I think that it has the potential to create to further empower some elitism in our school district. Um, even right now with the DWOOS's being that we don't have access
for all students, the only students that can attend have transportation or um are willing to take those really long bus rides to get there creates a kind of a a small subset of kids that are able to attend. Um, and I think we can
potentially have the same issue with empowering schools is that we could end up in a position where we have schools that are extremely popular. Um, to director Cook's point that, you know, yes, that can still bring more kids in if they really like a school. Um, but
over time, it can also take away from other schools, right? So we can have schools that are super popular and everybody wants to attend and how how you know what will we do for this for the programs that aren't getting that
same attention, right? I get I get some concern and I think initially it could be fantastic. I just think in the long term for forecast with Rochester being transient with we having a lot of people in and out of our community and they're, you know, they're looking at snaps,
snapshots of what we are in our schools, we can inadvertently create this bottleneck of people wanting to go to just certain schools. >> I don't see it as a pie that has to be sliced up with neighborhood schools. I think they can all be excellent and outstanding and wonderful. I don't
think, you know, when you start thinking about it in terms of, well, is this school better than this school or we have this DWO and we know that DWOS are the schools, right? I mean, that's kind of been the mindset, but that um every
school, you know, every person should really want to Yeah, my neighborhood school is great and if they have different, you know, focuses depending I mean that was question I had earlier like if the if
the if the neighborhood is deciding or the parents are deciding what they want their school to look like they're you know kindergarteners move in and fifth graders move out and the neighborhoods change and and but that's more of an implementation issue in terms of how and how much freedom they get to do that
obviously core subjects and stuff would have to stay the same >> I I would I would I would suggest that we not go too far down this one issue because I think that we're on the cusp of some big conclusions about about the big plan, >> but and there's, as Spencer just said,
there's a lot of education that we have to do for ourselves and provide. There's three structural things that make those schools different. The reason they're not the same. One is curricular focuses. The the disruption schools by explicit
design have different educational programs from the neighborhood schools. That's a fact. The second is attendance boundaries. They do not have attendance areas with the exception of Longfellow to a limited degree that the neighborhood schools
have. That's a fact. And then transportation service. They receive a hub transportation service and no longer get citywide transportation service. Neighborhood schools do not. So they are fundamentally different and they're linked but distinct. And I think that we
in a productive way we've named this is going to be an incredibly complex uh issue. Um, and I would just suggest I just wanted to jump in with those three differences. Those are not just matters of perception. They're they're they're factual differences between our neighborhood schools and the six DWOs's.
And we're going to have to grapple with whether those are differences that should remain, be strengthened, or shift. Um, but th that's that's why I said they're not the same. Um, because those are some structural differences between the two types. Um, the one thing
I'll just say too in terms of uh it was interesting because Mona and I were um uh mourning the demise of the skip 2.0 process on our list there in a way. Um, but I understand why we need to think about where that
process, which is what is the school improvement process, fits in a systemwide strategic plan. And Justin, you were making this point. I think it's a really important one because we want them to be linked but maybe they are different. I mean maybe the systemwide priorities are things that are changing
at the central office level across and the skip work is really at the building level. Um in the end of the day there's only so many hours in the day and people who can do the work and dollars in the bank and that's why I thought it was interesting that you had it at the
highest. So that I just think it's a tension that we want to think through. I, as I shared with my group, having spent a lot of years looking at school district strategic plans and school improvement plans, many are completely divorced from each other. The district
plan is all this stuff and it's totally not linked to what's happening in the school improvements, which is nonsensical. Like when you don't have alignment between those things, you're you're not arrows are not pointing in the same direction. And so figuring out how we're going to link those school improvement plans with our system plan
change, I think it shows there's a tension in the fact that we ranked it differently. I'd like to what you guys were saying to I think first just like not to have answers but for you guys to give us the questions. So like what are the
questions coming up here questions and that's like that's a really good question bring this committee. The other thing I'll note is just areas of where it seems like there's some consensus and I really want folks area look at big divergence dots math instead
in the middle and credit card the bottom across the two but a huge diver literally the number one on this side is pathways and that's the bottom so I would love could just I look a few different again you have to do the answers here we don't need the final
decision pathways at the top the bottom I'd love to hear what's the thinking the divergent thinking behind these two groups that literally the opposite ends >> I can I can add something to the the group that put it at the top won't speak for everybody but one of the
um one of the things that I was uh considering as we're building this list is what are the what are the types of strategic priorities that I thought would get people excited about RPS and over time um you know lead to more
people wanting to enroll their kids in RPS and wanting them to have an opportunity to participate in things that you know they could get on a trajectory to have some uh particular experience at the high school level. And so that was kind of and maybe I painted
too much of that onto the description of um item G the um curricular pathways culminating in high school. Um, but that was I sort of ascribed a vision to that that I could I could see um driving more
interest in RPS in a really healthy, productive way and of course be good for kids. Um, and that was a big part of the reason that I thought it should be close to the top. >> Well, and we had it um at the bottom. I
and I think mainly that pathways term sort of was a seemed to signify that kids need to decide early on what they're going to do, who they're going to be, and then stick with that. Um, I think we agree that there are all kinds of
possibilities for kids to explore uh post-secary options and careers and to get and more of that better so that every kid sees themselves with a future. But the uh trying to get it structured so that
you know you're in eighth grade, you decide what you're going to do and some countries do this and then uh your entire high school experience is going to be wrapped around that. Um, but the the mindset thing though, if if we
really empower kids and staff and with the the ability to be engaged and stay engaged and be enthusiastic and question and um that's I think going to be a gamecher for so many of those. We won't
have as many kids in credit recovery. we will have our kids knowing that they have a future after high school whether or not they know what their job is going to be. So I think it's that whole kind of an Amy came up with a statement that didn't make the final draft but about what K through 12 schools should be and
it involves passion and and excitement and keeping that um thrill that kindergarten kindergarteners feel going throughout 13 years. I think in our group it was also a compromise between where we placed AI
and where we placed curricular pathways is that we had some people were very passionate that AI you know sort of an eat or be eaten um perspective in the next half decade um whereas we are already doing
making some progress in high school post-secary planning and pathways and there was a real concern about if we don't prioritize AI and don't have a strategy for it, it could affect everything else.
>> One quick point, I appreciate your point and obviously by design, as I've said a couple times, we did not frontload this with background material. The term curricular pathways is intentionally not career pathways such that I think what
you're describing the eighth grade you're choosing. >> Um the idea that came out of the discussions last spring more was does what kids learn in one class truly build to the next uh class in a coherent way.
Not necessarily to a career but in a way that high school feels like it's building towards something that is progressively challenging aggressively more in my area of passion. So it was it included some people who were talking about career path. We got
to bring that in bring the trades in >> but it also was people feeling like high school is kind of like a shopping like I take a little bit here a little bit here little bit here and it's not building whether within my English sequence or just in my thing. So as and I'm trying
to give voice to a bunch of meetings but it wasn't I think there would be a lot of concern with what you described as well. very narrow tight career pathways design for some kids that might be but it was a lot about the this high school big does it build up to a summitative I
heard again a lot of excitement kids do a major portfolio at the end of high school that really says this is all I've become and are we making that possible with the kind of opportunities we're giving and that that final demonstration
could be a a very preol kind of a thing or it could like I can fix this car or you know >> so >> so I want to give a a I guess a personal example of these pathways because I went to a vocational high school so the
process was a little different than what we currently do. Um so I got a AM penmanship always got a AM pmanship. So when we sat down and we um we were going over my plans for middle school and so forth, they said, "Well, Steph, you have
a very steady hand. Let's do a little calligraphy." Right? And then they saw that movement with my hand was good. Right? I didn't start out saying I wanted to go to cosmetology school or I wanted to, you know, level cakes, but
because what that allowed, what those pathways allowed, and I guess I looked at it linearly but circularly, right? So, it allows you to see yourself in different realms, right? I don't So, I didn't look at it as I'm picking construction and I got to stay in
construction. I looked at it like, oh, I tried, you know, office work and I'm really good at this little piece, but it would be better if I use this little piece over here. You know what I mean? Um, and and coming out of a vocational type of program, it gave me a lot of
that that circular ability. So, you know, many people know I've done a lot of different things, but to me it all feels the same, right? So, whether I'm driving a D5 and leveling a field or I'm leveling a cake, to me it's the same um it's the same. It takes the same
amount of precision, right? And it all started because you have a very steady hand and you can draw a straight line across a piece of paper. So, you know, that I guess I looked at it as that kind of pathway because it prepared me for the
for just not one train of thought, right? Even though I I I went into the cosmetology program and the typing program, leaving there, the the education allowed me to see all the other pathways, if that makes sense. So, I looked at it more as a circular motion
rather than I'm choosing a career and I got to stay with it. I looked at it more as this can allow a child to identify a skill set that they have that they may not be able to identify in a English room or a math room, right? You you have
a skill set that seems very mundane to you. I would have never thought that having a steady hand in pership would have led to these other things, calligraphy and and cutting hair, but this was identified through staff because they said your hand is very
steady. That's not something everyone can do, which took me to other paths. Does that make sense? >> So, I looked at it circularly, not not >> sure. So, I'm thinking of it um a little bit a little bit differently because
We want all of our students to have a plan for life after high school. Correct. And we get there by having more options for them. So curriculum pathways needs to open in order for them to figure out whatever that pathway is. We also spent a lot of money on Zello where
students starting from kindergarten are figuring out what they want to be in life or what they're good at currently. So for example, if we're starting to see at an early age that many of our students like um digital animation. By the time we get to high school, we
don't have enough computer science classes or the courses that can capture their interest. We're going to lose students like that. So, the way I look at is we have to expand our curricular offerings for our students. It's like they can fill in wherever that gap is
for them and then they can start that path for life after high school. We have to open our students. We don't lose so many students. So if we want to be the the district of choice, we want our students to have a
plan for life after high school, you cannot have to be a tough choice and those motivations can motivate kids to do better somewhere else. So you might really be having struggles somewhere else and I've said this
multiple times, arts and music saved my life because I wanted to be in c programs, I had to, you know, really try my best in other subjects so that I was eligible to do certain things with the clubs and things I wanted to be involved
with, right? Because they had, you know, criteria. You can't just be good in art and flunk everything else, you know? But because there was a focus there, it allowed a lot of kids to be able to say, I really like this group or this sport or whatever, so I'm going to press
through this hard math class or this hard science class. So yes, English is my thing, but I know I need this and I have to advance here in order to be able to advance there. Director Blackman, >> in my early thinking about this topic as
well, I also connect the curricular pathways or offerings or whatever we want to call them with the mindsets, behaviors, and steps because if you have the mindset that you can be successful in whatever you choose to do, then the curricular offerings are going to be
open to you and you'll be more successful at them. that I think that all ties together in my mind. >> And I think that's where my struggle with um putting AI in our middle section was because I I don't understand I think
enough of whether we're prioritizing AI because we're worried that it could get in our way or we're prioritizing because it could help us do these other things. And how like could we do these other things without out in prioritizing AI or
will AI get in the way of us doing it if we don't make it a priority and I just don't know enough about so maybe that's one of my questions is >> question >> yeah and I think one of the ways that I look at AI I mean there's so many different things about it and ways to look at it but I look at it from the
educational perspective of get rid of the things that I call like wrote and get kids to the more critical thinking aspect of their education that, you know, get them through the things that are easier so that they can >> Yeah. help them with the right things as well.
>> Right. >> Um and get them faster to their critical thinking and, you know, elementary, middle school, high school, wherever. I think we need to get them there. And I think that that's a tool that we can use in all kinds of ways to get them there.
Um, I also see it as a way not only for students but how staff can use it as well um to augment um how they're teaching our students. >> So I will also say one of the big struggles for my for me was that some of
these things are very specific and pointed and some of these things are very broad and and systemic. So it was hard for me to put them all on the same scale. Right? Some of these things are very important, but they will take time to be able to implement in a fashion
that they will be effective. Right? Some of these things like the credit recovery even though we ranked it low is very direct. Right? We're talking about one program. We're talking about the curriculum that it offers. This is not saying it will be shorter time but this is more
a quicker solve right than than some of these other programs that will take time to be embedded. Um I with the mindsets and behaviors and um and the skip my thought was that this has to be embedded in all of these other topics right like
nothing else will work effectively if without those the supports of those two things if that makes sense. So they are so important that I don't even think they belong on the list personally because they need to be embedded in the
programming in order for these other processes to work. So I don't know that it's a really fair list when we're talking about it's kind of a long-term short-term goal list, right? We kind of mix them all together. Some of this stuff takes time. Some of this stuff is
will take time but not as much time. you know, we're talking about some stuff that will take six months and some stuff that will take five years to see goals. >> Director Cook, um, while we're all together, I just wanted to react to something you said a moment ago, uh,
Chair Nathan, about AI, I I think in in the groups that I was part of, the idea of a of a strategic plan initiative around adopting a tech tool seemed like not a great um idea. if it's could
easily transform into you know adopting technology sort of for its own sake but I I think what is really important and should be done whether it's part of this plan or not is there there needs to be a framework for how to go about um using
AI both on the back end in the central office and as part of the educational program. Um I surely that that needs to happen. Um whether MSBA helps us with that or not. Um but in case that helps
clarify where some of the thinking on that came from. And I got a lot of director. >> Um I think something that came up in a couple of our group discussions that even though um special education is in the highest group and we seem to have
agreement about that, it seemed like there were a lot of questions about how effective can we be in changing how RPS does special education within the confines of the state statute and
funding. >> Yeah. I want to say and I want to leave maybe a space for Spencer with any as facilitator and thank you for last comments. Um I I actually the next step is for us to bring you a an overview of the process through which we're going to
develop this strategic plan. And in my view at least, this discussion tonight achieved its primary p purpose which was candidly to raise the tension with which you will look at that proposal because I respectfully Dr. Burkeman, there cannot be a space where
something like the skip process or the mindsets and behaviors is so important it's not in the plan. Though I take your point needs to be embedded because we face a $13 million deficit next year and 11 the next and 14 and the challenges we face. We must consider new initiatives
tied to things like the mindsets and behaviors and the skip 2.0 and I know you were underscoring the importance of those things. That's the decision that lies ahead of us. We have incredible aspirations for our kids and our system. And developing a plan that is truly
going to put us on the path to realize the potential we have here, which is extraordinary, is really going to require that kind of hard thinking. And I love the point of there are some high lever but relatively uh less heavy lifting things we could do
that need to be balanced against big complex multi-year things that we could do. Um, and the process that we will be a draft of which, uh, Kathy and Julie have already seen, um, that you'll see soon, the process is designed in a much
more informed way than this exercise tonight to help us make those choices to define what we mean by something like curricular pathways versus because we got to define our terms and then we have to do that uh, kind of homework. Um, so
I at least for me I'm both excited about the seriousness with which everyone grappled with these struck by the differences that existed across you know some of these things um and taking away
uh I think the board and the the senior staff's um uh shared recognition that this is a really exciting opportunity but it's going to be really hard. um to actually really decide what we really are going to be focused on in these next couple years.
So >> I think there's one more piece is that nobody said absolutely take this off the list, >> right? >> That you know this came to us through conversations you had with our people in the district and and I've said this to a number of people is I want our work in
RPS to be about RPS. I don't want it to be about the latest fad in education or the you know the latest flavor of the month. Um, and I think I say this too, for the first time in a long time, we're doing something that's really about our own information, our
own data, and our own feedback. And so, I think our conversations validated that information that you brought to us because I mean, unless I'm wrong, I don't hear anybody saying, "Can we just take this off the list? I won't talk about anymore." And then is it a possibility since we
have the skip and the mindsets and the behavior, can some of these other concerns be embedded into those bigger programs, right? Because we when we came up with the processes, we didn't get into like what the specifics of each of
those steps were. So, could some of these items be one of the specific steps in one of these bigger programs? I don't know. Am I making sense? >> Yes. I think at minimum, Director White Horn, I can say that we will and should
explore them through the strategic planning process. We should investigate them. When we get to April, which is going to be my recommendation for when you vote on a new strategic plan because I think it should take place before you vote on and review a budget for the next year. We'll have to make some choices.
But yes, I think we can explore them and then we're going to have some hard choices to make this spring. You are ultimately with your votes on what the big priorities are. But I think that there's the room uh for sure to consider all of these things in a thoughtful way
um over the next number of months. I guess just to close first it's fantastic this conversation appreciate you guys going through this exercise versus just like how much people's oscillated between between groups even between the same person when they came back like five minutes later so I think
I think that's fine so over my science teacher metaphors like there's like rock but still he could become anything and then at certain points we're very much at the mol we're very much at the what could this questions right now we get for you not
answers. The second thing I just reiterate is that this is definitely the beginning part of the process. This is not the end of the process. There's no vote tonight. There's just questions. So I really encourage just whatever nuances that convers
to setting up this question. I really appreciate you guys. >> Thank you. Closing. >> Oh, thank you everybody. All right, we'll move on to our next item,
which is a monitoring item. The superintendent evaluation for 202425 leadership report part one. The Rochester School Board approved the following leadership component goal for 2024-25 for superintendent Pel on August 20th, 2024. Schoolboard members rate the
superintendent as effective or highly effective on at least 75% of the elements of the goals and standardsbased superintendent evaluation framework developed by the Minnesota School Boards Association and the Minnesota Association of School Administrators. During the close session on August 5th,
Superintendent Pel presented his self-evaluation of his performance on the leadership component goal during the 202425 school year. He highlighted major accomplishments that the school district achieved during the school year. The superintendent also presented his self-rating on each of the standards and
elements in the goals and standardsbased superintendent evaluation where he rated himself as either highly effective, effective, developing, or ineffective. Board members asked questions to clarify the information the superintendent provided regarding his self-ealuation.
At tonight's meeting, the board will hold a closed session to discuss part two of the superintendent evaluation. We will review the compiled results of the goals and standardsbased superintendent evaluation that we completed, discuss our responses to the superintendent self-evaluation, and reach consensus on
the superintendent's evaluation. And following the board's review, the superintendent will join the closed session to receive the results of his evaluation. At the August 19th meeting, um the board chair will read the summary of the superintendent's evaluation leadership component for the 202425
school year. Our next item is other business. Our ABCD. The current version of the ABCD is available in the agenda item for reference. And the upcoming agenda items for uh upcoming meetings August 19th. We
have the fastbridge data analysis and literacy plan update, the uh report part two of the superintendent evaluation, the back to school update, discussion of schoolboard committee assignments for the upcoming school year, superintendent goals for 2025-26 as a prep for action
along with the policy committee recommendations from July and approval of our schoolboard goals for 202526. For the September 9th meeting, we have a monitoring item, the MCA data review and initiatives update, the approval of the proposed school district property tax
payable in 2026. That's a prep for action item, as is resolutions for the MSBA legislative agenda, our board meeting schedule for 2026, and the approval of the superintendent goals for 202526. Are there any items board members would like to raise for consideration for
future meeting agenda? Hearing none, a reminder that we have uh board meetings starting at 5:30 again regularly on August 19th, September 9th, September 23rd, and October 7th. The next item on the agenda is a close
session for labor negotiations pursuant to Minnesota statutes section 1305, subdivision 3B, which allows the board to go into close session pursuant to labor negotiation strategy. The close session will be convened immediately following passage of the motion in the Edison building main floor conference
room. Pursuant to the law, I have cited. Will someone make a motion to go into close session? >> So move. >> Second. >> It has been moved and seconded to go into close session. All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? >> The board moves into close session at
8:29 p.m. Um, the board returned to the study session at 8:57 p.m. Clerk Marvin, will you please read the list of people present in the closed session? >> Yes.
Those present were Carl Bach Bachan, Jean Marvin, Justin Cook, Kathy Nathan, John Carlson, Don Barlo, Kent Pel, Julie Workman, Karen Mclofflin, and Stephanie Whitehorn. The next item on the agenda is a close session pursuant to Minnesota statute
section 13 DO5, subdivision 3B, which allows the board to go into close session to evaluate the performance of an individual who is subject to its authority. While in close session, the board will engage in a confidential discussion of the scheduled annual performance evaluation of superintendent Kent Pel. In addition, pursuant to
Minnesota statutes section 13 DO5, this board will summarize our conclusions regarding part two of the evaluation at the August 19th meeting. Pursuant to the law of cited, will someone make a motion to go into close session? So move second. >> It has been moved and seconded. All
those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? The board moves into close session at 8:58 I say >> somebody >> you convene the meeting at 9:05 and he came in at >> um
>> 9:27. >> That's correct. >> Okay. All right. Report is back in session at 9:58 p.m. Uh, clerk Marvin, would you like to read who was in the closed session? >> Those present in the closed session were
Kathy Nathan, Stephanie Whitehorn, Julie Workman, Karen Mclofflin, Gene Marvin, Justin Cook, and Don Barlo, and Superintendent Kent Pel joined at 9:37. >> Hearing no other business, this meeting is adjourned at 9:59 p.m.