It's 9:00. I call this meeting to order. And to begin, I'll ask Mr. Nathan James on our staff will call the role to establish a quorum. Mr. James. >> Mr. Collins. >> Yes. >> Mr. Holt, >> present.
Miss Harpool uh >> Victoria Harpool designate for Dr. Steven Gentile. >> Mr. Jensen here. >> Mrs. Cobb >> here. >> Mrs. Maxwell >> here. >> Mrs. McInturf >> here. >> Mr. Mullenhower
>> here. >> Ms. Sap >> here. >> Mr. Wells >> here. >> Mr. Chairman Eie >> here. >> Mr. Chairman, I'm pleased to say you have 100% attendance today. >> It's awesome. I declare then a quorum is present and we are duly convened.
TCA 496104 requires a moment of silence at every public school and I think it's only appropriate that we start our meetings with a moment of silence too to reflect to meditate and it's appropriate to pray silently about the decisions that we
make every day. So let's start the moment of silence. Thank you. This time I want to take a note on the appointment of honorable Kathy Cobb of the seventh congressional district. Miss Cobb has been appointed by Lieutenant Governor and Speaker of the Senate Randy
McN to fulfill the unexpired term of Marcia Johnson. Miss Cobb is a lifelong educator. She spent the majority of her career as a special ed teacher in the Clarksville McGomery school system, developing individ individualized education programs, providing
differentiated and small groupoup instruction and collaborating closely with families and fellow educators to support student growth and academic success. Throughout her career, Miss Cobb has taught in a variety of educational settings. Her work is focused on
advocating for students with special needs, fostering inclusive class classroom environments, and mentoring new teachers. She's also served as a special education department chairperson and has trained fellow educators on IEP development, compliance, and best
practices. In recognition of her dedication and impact, Miss Cobb has been named a building level teacher of the year on three occasions. She most recently served as president of Professional Educators of Tennessee, where she supported educators statewide through leadership development,
professional collaboration, and engagement on issues impacting public education. Her involvement with education focused organizations has included mentoring educators, contributing to statewide initiatives, and supporting efforts to strengthening teaching and learning
across Tennessee. Miss Cobb holds an education specialist degree in special education administration from Austin P State University and a bachelor of science degree in special ed and psychology from Western Kentucky University. We welcome you to the board
and give you the opportunity if you want to say any words. >> That really sounded impressive. I hope I can live up to all those accolades that you gave me. >> Thank you. At this time, I'd like to recognize Dr. Sarah Morrison to give a overview of our
workshop yesterday. >> Good morning. I'd be happy to. It's great to see so many faces in the audience today. Um we were really lucky to have several distinguished educators with us yesterday and again today. So I want to first mention the Bradley County Fellowship Group that's with us. Thank you for joining us. We're thrilled to
have you. And also some of our teacher advisory council members who were with us yesterday for discussion and lunch. I think are also with us today. So it's always an honor to have some of our most esteemed educators with us for these meetings. Uh yesterday we had a very full agenda as usual for our workshop. We started with the educator advisory
team and standards recommendation committee leads for English language arts standards. That's a key responsibility that the state board has which is overseeing the review process for the core four academic areas. So right now we are coming to the conclusion of the English language arts standards review and we had a really interesting and comprehensive
presentation about the the revised standards that are coming before our board today on first reading. So that was quite instructive and exciting as a former high school English teacher to hear. We also heard from our friends at Tara the Tennessee Education Research Alliance. I think I got that right. Uh
Dr. Amy Owen who used to actually be on the state board staff and her colleague um Dr. Benstead. and we heard about the latest survey results that Tara at Vanderbilt puts out around what educators are thinking about various topics um that come before them in the classroom and in the school. So that was
also very instructive and just a a key partnership that the board has with Tara. We also heard from our colleagues at the Department of Education on two subjects. We heard about the high school and beyond plans and some of the updates and the exciting things that are happening there to support students across the state, particularly in terms of the
advising that we know all students need as they're thinking about their future steps after high school. We heard from Marian Derski and members of her team about the TISA process and how the shifts that have been made and the the studentbased funding formula are affecting schools in in really good ways and also some of the opportunities we
have to continue to study that. Along with that, we heard from um educator and um various staff members from Bradford County and Rutherford County. >> Bedford, I'm sorry, I have my notes wrong. That was Bedford. Warren, sorry to miss it. That's his home home district, but we heard from those
districts about the ways that they're experiencing TISA changes and what that means and where they still have funding needs that that often go unressed. So, that was very helpful to the board as well. So, it was a full day. If you were not with us, I encourage you to go back and watch some of the workshop yesterday because that's often where a lot of the really deeper discussion occurs ahead of
our meeting days like today. So with that, I'll turn it back over to you, chairman. >> Thank you. Any other comments from our board members on the workshop yesterday? >> It was an excellent workshop. I always am amazed at how valuable those are for uh us getting to learn more about what's
going on across the state of Tennessee. So I encourage uh people to go back and watch the video. I think was good. I want to remind uh presenters to identify themselves by their title and position for the record when presenting. Also remind presenters that the use of
acronyms or jargon should be explained when used so that all Tennessans can readily understand the subjects being discussed regardless of their individual background. With that, we'll get into our agenda. Our first agenda items are our public comments. I will recognize members of the public
for public comments. Each commenter will be recognized for a maximum of three minutes. We'll ask you to come to the podium for your comment. Our first commenter is Zeb Bulah who's an educator like to talk to us.
Good morning and to everybody, but I especially want to thank the board members for um allowing me to attend the meeting and um is so looking forward to speaking to you. I wrote it down. I think I should just read it. But I apologize first of
all with my application that you would recognize my California license and let me have an apprenticeship license to teach here in my hometown Nashville, Tennessee. Now I lived in California for several years. I had moved from there back here
to my hometown in Nashville in mid December 2019. So, in filling out the application to Tin Compass, the Ten Compass website, I misplaced that thought of my 30-day suspension. I wasn't even living in the
state of California. When I received the letter that they would be meeting in June of 2020, I responded quickly and that left my mind. It was
didn't have any intentions of returning to the state, but if I would have remembered it, we wouldn't probably wouldn't be talking about it right now. So, please forgive me. I unintentionally marked no on my application in June 2025. I had
completely forgotten responding to a letter four years earlier to the commission of California when they were meeting in June 2021. I left my home in San Diego and moved back to my hometown here in Nashville in mid December of 2019.
So I'm very much in disappointed myself. It didn't have an impact on me because I wasn't there. And even though I responded, it was still four years to pass. So, I guess that's my reason for it not being
on the application. >> Thank you again for allowing me to come. >> Thank you. >> Good morning to everybody else. >> Thank you, Mr. Bill. >> All right. Next uh on organization administration school rules 0520102.31
Miss Lillian Hajes on behalf of student led prayer incorporated apologize this is my father's old Bible good morning board members. >> One, >> I'm honored to be here and I uh my name
is Lillian Hodes. I'm the founder of student led prayer. I'm a professional school teacher and our mission is to inspire students to pray um in public schools under the protection of the first amendment. I asked the Holy Spirit, what should I say? What what should I say? And I have no words of my
own uh to say to you, but I can say that the Holy Spirit gave me uh this to read to you. And I will only strictly read the word of God. And this comes from St. Luke 16 uh chapter 19. There was a certain rich man which was
clothed in purple and fine linen and far sumptiously every day. And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus which was laid at his gate full of sores and desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's table. Moreover, the dogs came and licked his
sores. And it came to pass that the beggar died and was carried by the angels into Abraham's bosom. The rich man also died and was buried. And in hell he lift up his eyes being in torments and see Abraham a far off and
Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, "Father Abraham, have mercy on me. And send Lazarus that he may dip the tip of his finger in water and cool my tongue, for I am tormented in this flame." But Abraham said,"Son, remember
thou in thou lifetime received good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things, but now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this, between us and you, there is a great gulf fixed, so that they which would pass from hence is to you cannot,
neither can they pass to us, that they would come from thence." Then he said,"I pray thee, therefore, Father, that thou would send him to my father's house, for I have five brethren, that he may testify unto them, lest they also come
into this place of torment." Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses and the prophets. Let them hear them." And he said, "Nay, Father Abraham, but if one went unto them from the dead, they will
repent." And he said unto them, if they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded through one who rose from the dead. And my very last um verse is Revelation 21
and 8. But the fearful and the unbelieving and the abominable and murderers and whoreongers and all sorcerers and idolattors and all liars shall have their part in the lake of fire which burneth with fire and brimstone which is
the second death. Again, we are asking for the board to please incorporate into the organization administration of schools the 60 seconds of silent prayer. Thank you. >> Thank you, Miss Rogers.
Next, Amber Hajes. Hello. Good morning, board members. My name is Amber Hajes, and I'm a parent of a child at Tennessee public schools. I'm here today to advocate for the inclusion of a moment of silence at the beginning of each school day. This practice is not merely a formality. It provides students
and teachers with a vulnerable opportunity to center themselves, fostering an environment of respect and focus. Although state law mandates this moment of silence, many of our children are missing out on these benefits. We owe it to them to ensure they receive this crucial minute at the start of the
day. They have personally witnessed I have personally witnessed the positive impact of moments of reflection. My child participated at a prayer group at the school that began with just a few students and has grown to over 57 participants.
This grassroot movement illustrates how much how much our families value moments of reflection and prayer. It is a time for our schools to formalize this practice. I urge the board to recognize and implement the moment of silence in the organization of administration of
schools section not just as a written policy but as a genuine practice that is actually actively oh excuse me that is actively upheld with the administrators and teachers being held accountable. This formal acknowledgement will ensure
consistency across all public schools and emphasize the importance of creating a respectful and focused learning environment. Let us work together to support the children's needs to reflection and preparation each day. And just like how we started the day off
with our moment of silence here, I think what I'm saying is basically I would like for that to be mandated at schools as well. Although it is part of the policy, I would just love for teachers to have respect so the children can have respect for it as well so they can get their day started and understand the
importance of that moment of silence. Thank you all so much. >> Thank you, Miss Ariana Rose. I pray for all the people here to learn about God. And I pray for all my friends and the teachers
to learn and I pray for all my friends and families to learn about God. Jesus name. Amen. Thank you, Miss Rose. Next up is graduation requirements rule
0520103.06, Mr. Matthew Harrison. Thank you, Chairman Eie, and members of the board for allowing me to come before you today again. Uh while you've heard me speak in the past on this issue repeatedly, uh I come before you today with some new information. Uh rather
than presenting you with facts about why world language education is important, as I did in my first speech, or providing living examples of former students who have benefited greatly from world language education in their personal and professional endeavors, as I did in my second speech, uh today I
come to you with a compromise. Uh this semester in my doctoral program, our professor asked us to research an educational policy and naturally I selected world language education as my topic. I'll spare you the lengthy case study. Uh but I would like to share with you the results of that policy analysis.
Um while Mr. E's proposal notes that only 11 states require world language in order to graduate from high school, an analysis of each individual state's Department of Education's graduation requirements reveals a very different number. In fact, uh most states have multiple graduation pathways for
students, at least one of which almost always requires world language. Uh I've prepared a series of documents for you today which are coming around now. Uh digital copies have also been shared with Missupe. Uh the first document provides a report of nearby states and their multiple graduation pathways for
students. The second document includes an explanation of a new partnership between Ballad Health, our local healthcare provider in East Tennessee, and the Niswonger Foundation, an online organization serving the state of Tennessee to bring specialized world
language courses to students in the Ballad Health Academy program. Because there's a shortage of employees who can communicate with the large Hispanic population that exists in our area, valid asked their students to receive specialized instruction in healthcare Spanish 1 and 2 as opposed to general
Spanish 1 and two so that their students who will graduate as nursing professionals at the same time as they graduate from high school can also immediately begin serving the large Hispanic population in our region. The third document in your folder contains a list of other potential CTE courses that
also connect to world language education and are aligned to the new CTE CTE career clusters. Taking all this information into consideration, my proposal, the fourth document in your folder is for Tennessee to create various graduation pathways like that of
Virginia, Georgia, South Carolina, and many other surrounding states, which includes three distinct pathways for students. Number one, a scholarly advanced diploma is a designed for students who are universitybound which require a minimum of two credits of world language. Number two, a vocational
or technical diploma requiring students to complete a course in a specialized world language such as Spanish for healthcare professionals for students interested in nursing. And number three, a standard diploma for non-olbound non nonct students. Rather than simply eliminating or reducing the world
language graduation requirement, I want to see our state get more creative in their thinking, I want to see Tennessee be a leader in world language education rather than simply removing the requirement, regressing backwards, and diluting the value of a Tennessee education. Thank you very much.
>> Thank you, David Mercer. Good morning. My name is David Mercer and I'm a high school student who has studied multiple foreign languages over the past two years, an athlete and a Latino. I'd like to begin with a personal experience that showed me the
true value of learning a foreign language. Not long ago, I was sitting in a dentist office when a woman walked in visibly anxious and struggling to communicate. She didn't speak any English, and no one around her could assist, but I could. Because at this point, I'd been studying Spanish for just over a few months. I was able to
help her schedule an appointment for her son. That simple exchange might not seem like much to you, but for her, it made all the difference. In that moment, I realized foreign language isn't just about speaking words. It's about building bridges where there would be otherwise walls. That's why I believe foreign language
education must remain a requirement in Tennessee schools. When I first began learning Spanish, I was excited, but also intimidated. It felt unfamiliar and at times overwhelming. But as I continued, something changed. Not only did I grow more confident, I began to view the world through a broader, more
empathetic lens. Learning Spanish and now also French has expanded my understanding of different cultures, perspectives, and people. It has helped me connect more deeply with others and with myself. Today, I'm proud to say I'm on track to fluency in Spanish, and this journey has inspired
something even greater in me, a desire to explore my own roots. One day, I hope to travel to Puerto Rico to find and connect with family I've never met. Even more, I'm now considering a future in international relations, perhaps as a foreign affairs diplomat. Because I've seen firsthand how language can transform not just conversation, but
lives. But here's the issue. If we remove foreign language as a graduation requirement, many students may never be exposed to these opportunities. Without that initial push, they may never discover the global perspective that language learning offers. They may never find their voice in another tongue or the confidence and empathy that comes
with it. As a Latino who grew up being disconnected from his heritage, I can confidently say that foreign language education is not a luxury. It is a necessity in an increasingly connected and diverse world. It cultivates communication, deepens cultural understanding, and opens doors to future
careers, travel, and personal growth. Let us not limit our students to a single language or perspective. Let us equip them to engage with the world, not just as observers, but as participants. Furthermore, if we limit our students to only a singular introductory course, they may not reach the level they want,
nor gain the confidence of a foreign tongue. As I said before, at first it can be very intimidating. So therefore, giving that extra push to a second course could allow students the confidence with continuing to learn with their friends until they're ready to continue. Not to mention, without that
second course, students may never know about the opportunity for the advanced learning and the opportunity to test out of foreign languages in college, which also allows them to save money and be more equipped to expedite their post-secary learning. These, among many other reasons, are why I think world language department across Tennessee is
so important and should stay as a requirement in Tennessee schools. Thank you, esteemed members of the state board. >> Thank you, Parson Shake. Good morning board and staff. My name is Carson Shake. I'm a STEM focused high
school student who once believed world language as an unnecessary graduation requirement. Yet, upon learning Spanish, I seem to have proved myself wrong. I would say we are all aware of the current and rapid technological advancements taking effect in the world, especially translation technology. Tools like these can be accessed in many ways
and can even be quick and accurate. Yet, they cannot capture the effort, passion, and care behind real communication. Having competed in VEX Robotics for 5 years, I have seen this firsthand in tournaments that consist of various backgrounds, including Asian and European teams. Language is an art. It
uses expression to connect cultures and demographics just the same as a painting would. Truthfully, technology has been quickly advancing in terms of art. For example, if you were to ask AI, or in some words, artificial intelligence, to make a painting, it would spew out something undeniably impressive if the
meaning of an expression comes from the organism behind it. If I were to tell each and every one of you, I love you, it would be polite, sure, but I can almost guarantee it would not mean the same to you as if a close relative would have said it. That is the irreplaceable connection we need in our lives. We
cannot expand, we cannot invite, and we cannot grow as a country without expression. We need the arts. We need language and as far as I'm concerned, one singular credit does not pay the bill. I myself did not discover the wonders of knowing a language and how it connects people until taking Spanish too. I actually have taken four Spanish
classes, all honors, and by the second class, my knowledge of tenses within the language tripled, giving me a strong foundation to work off of leading into the real world. I believe this foundation is crucial for long-term memory, one many students will not reach without being required to. So therefore,
in order to optimize potential within students whilst promoting the arts which are evident to be essential in communication, I further stress my proposal that one credit is not enough. So I ask each and every one of you please keep the two credit requirements so every child has the opportunity to strengthen their
knowledge beyond waste of potential and discover this beautiful bridge of community like I did. I trust in you to make the right decision. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Rebecca Brewer. Good morning and thank you for the opportunity to address you today. My
name is Rebecca and I'm a student who has studied Spanish for several years. I appreciate the continued recognition of world languages within graduation requirements. The willingness to preserve them in any capacity reflects an understanding of their value. However, I am here today to respectfully express that limiting this requirement
to only the introductory level does not serve our students well. When I completed my first level of Spanish, I had learned vocabulary and grammar. Sure, I could pass assessments and I could complete assignments successfully, but I could not yet communicate. I hesitated when I spoke. I translated in
my head. I avoided taking risks and I understood Spanish academically but not practically. At that stage, I had information but not proficiency. It was only through continued study that that would change. In the next level, I began to think in another language
rather than translate. I learned to listen with understanding and with and respond with confidence. I developed the ability to communicate naturally and respectfully across cultures. That transformation did not and would not have occurred in an introductory course. It occurred because my education did not
stop at the basics. This reflects a fundamental reality of language learning. It is cumulative. Each level strengthens the last and each stage prepares students for the next. When students are required to stop after only one level, that process is interrupted. We must ask ourselves, what
are we truly giving students in that case? Are we preparing them to communicate in a global society or are we providing a brief exposure that's going to fade with time? Are we equipping them with lasting skills or are we offering them surface level familiarity? In practical terms, many students who
complete only the introductory level leave remembering isolated vocabulary and basic phrases but lacking the confidence or competence to apply them. Is that the outcome we are willing to accept? For many students, especially those without access to travel or immersion opportunities, the classroom is their only gateway to other languages
and cultures. When we limit instruction to the most basic level, we limit their access to that world. In my own life, continued study of Spanish led to international experiences, leadership opportunities, service, and meaningful personal growth. It would shape my confidence, my academic interests, and
my future career goals. None of those outcomes would have been possible if my learning had ended at the introductory level. When we require only one level of world language, we send a message, whether intended or not. We tell students that surface level knowledge is enough, that sustained effort is unnecessary, and that mastery is
optional. I do not believe that message reflects the standards we hold for education in this state or at least we shouldn't. Our responsibility is not to meet the minimum requirement. Our responsibility is to prepare students for meaningful participation in an increasingly interconnected world. Two levels of world language instruction
provide communication and competence. They build confidence as well and they produce measurable outcomes. Reducing requirements may appear flexible in the short term but in the long term it weakens programs and restricts student potential. I respectfully urge you to continue requiring multiple levels of
world language study. Thank you. >> Thank you, >> Lexi Rodriguez. Hello, my name is Lexi Rodriguez Alvidres and before my second world language class, I hesitated to say my
name correctly. Growing up in a predominantly English-speaking area, I felt a disconnect from my heritage. After all, despite having bilingual parents, I lacked the tools to truly communicate with my own grandparents. It was only through the requirement of these classes that I gained the
confidence to call them, tell them I love them, and move beyond a few broken sentences in their native language. My experience highlights a vital truth. World language requirements are not a bureaucratic hurdle, but a bridge to identity and family. As a three sport
varsity athlete, a language peer tutor, and a ran scholar, I see firsthand how this requirement provides a necessary structure for success that students might otherwise overlook. It ensures that all students have access to this critical advantage, not only those who
have the extra time or resource to choose it. Research from the National Center for Education Statistics states that by strengthening the brain's executive function and hens enhancing memory, problem solving, and concentration, language learning provides a cognitive foundation that
supports all other areas of study. Beyond the personal and cognitive benefits, maintaining this requirement is essential for closing the opportunity gap that exists in our Tennessee economy. Bilingual individuals enjoy 35% more job opportunities and significant
salary premiums. Yet removing the language mandates would deny many students, particularly those in underresourced areas, the chance to develop these competitive skills. Furthermore, because many universities require at least 2 years of language study for admission, eliminating this
standard would create a new barrier to higher education. Some may argue that removing the secondyear requirement provides more choice. However, Tennessee's current waiver system already allows students with parent permission to focus on other electives. The choice already exists.
Lowering the standard for everyone doesn't add choice. It simply removes a proven academic foundation for the students who need it most. Language programs are often the first to be dismantled when requirements are loosened, which not only weakens a state's economic competitiveness, but
also diminishes the cultural empathy students need to navigate a multicultural world with respect. Ultimately, world language classes teach us fun the fundamental importance of valuing our own cultures while embracing those of others, starting with the
simple dignified act of saying a peer's name correctly. These courses provide well doumented cognitive, professional, and social advantages that prepare us for the world beyond the classroom. Therefore, I urge you to not take away
our classes, our advantages, or our names. Thank you. >> Thank you, David Lester. >> Hello. Um, thank you to the board for giving me the opportunity to speak with you. My name is Mave Lester and I have
been learning Latin for 5 years. Having studied a dead language, I can attest to the fact that the value of learning a language does not solely lie in the ability of students to speak with others or have direct interactions with it in daily life. Learning a foreign language
helps students to embrace and be curious about cultures different than their own with an open mind and empathy. It unites people across the globe and encourages intellectual growth. Reducing the language requirement from two years to one diminishes these benefits and is a
step in the wrong direction for bettering education in Tennessee. After my freshman year Latin class, I could conjugate verbs and translate simple passages. But by the end of my sophomore year, I was reading Virgil's Anid and Caesar's debellog.
Only in my second year was I able to feel more connected to the world and was I given a chance to connect with the language. A chance that every student should have. On a larger scale, the US is dramatically behind in language education compared to European
countries, mostly due to the optionality of foreign languages and reduced language requirements. One way Tennessee can support its students is by encouraging them to explore subjects like a foreign language that they wouldn't have considered on their own. Additionally, most colleges
in the US encourage or require at least two years of a language and many look for three or four years when deciding which students to accept. Reducing the requirement will put many Tennessans at a disadvantage when pursuing higher education. As it is the responsibility of our
public school systems to set students up for success and higher education and in the real world, having sufficient language requirements is essential. Thank you. >> Thank you. Before we bring up our last uh speaker, our policy does allow 10
speakers uh at our board meetings. I will also acknowledge that if this passes on first reading, we will have a rulemaking hearing and there's no limit to the number of speakers that can come to the rulemaking hearing. Our last speaker will be Errol Bman.
Good morning. My name is Errol Bman. I'm a junior at Humefog Academic Magnet High School. And today I'm here to speak on the importance of the two-year world language graduation requirement and how lowering this requirement to one year is severely inadequate. My first ever world
language class was honors French 1, which I took my freshman year of high school. During this class, I learned very basic language use and structure. My honors French one course was a novice level class. By the end, all I could do was conjugate a few verbs, introduce myself, and talk in very little detail
about myself. Definitely not enough to communicate with fluency and precision. However, in my second year of French, we dug deeper into foundations and culture. By the end, I could elaborate on my thoughts, express my opinions, and talk about others, and so much more. That second
year solidified my appreciation for the culture, love for the language, and dedication to continue. There are so many high schoolers that who just need to make it through the first two years to see what the language and culture can do for them. Only taking one year of any world
language will limit the potential of every student in a Tennessee high school when it comes to world language learning and it hurts their future education. Two years in a language show students all they can do and all they will be able to do if they can continue. For example, I have been accepted into the sister
cities of Nashville exchange program on a scholarship to con France. During this exchange, I'm able to stay with the host family, go to a French high school, and fully immerse myself in the language and the culture. However, to even apply to this program, students must complete a
minimum of 2 years of world language. It is also incredibly important to note that taking world language is so much more than just learning another language. It is what fosters a broader worldview in students and helps them gain cultural empathy and connectedness.
and what is most important now, global awareness. Not to mention, students who wish to take a more technical path in high school already have the option to fill out a waiver and have themselves exempt from this requirement. The only issue people have with this waiver is the part where students have to sign so
they understand they cannot go to college if they choose to opt out of the two years. There is no need to jeopardize world language programs and the jobs of world language teachers across the state when we can just change the wording in this waiver. Learning a world language for a sustained amount of time is the perfect foundation for a
well-rounded student, a more cultured person. Please give high schoolers the opportunity to see what world language will do for them. Please keep this 2-year world language requirement as a key part of our education. It prepares us to compete in the local, national, and global economy and makes us better
citizens of Tennessee. Thank you. >> Thank you. I want to thank all of our speakers today. I think it's really critical. Uh the engagement is important. Uh we do listen to students, we listen to parents, we listen to
teachers, and particularly our eight-year-old student who came today. I think that's takes quite a quite a bit of courage to come and speak before this crowd. I think when I was eight years old, I would have never able to do it. So, thank you for all coming.
I appreciate all the other comments. Uh I feel that we will have a very healthy discussion later today and I have no idea how the vote will go but uh I think we will have a good discussion. Thank you for your input. >> Uh next are >> Can I say something real quick? So
>> I'm sending a note right now to the team to get rid of that language and figure out how we can fix it. Okay. >> Yeah. In the waiver >> consent items. Uh item number two, adoption agenda, minutes for 20 November 21st and school board training advisory
committee. Is there any objection to approving those consent items? If no objection, then they are approved as are. Next are our report items. First report item are state board of education member reports. This is an opportunity
where the state board members get to tell what they've done since their last board meeting and kind of give an overview and show the engagement that we have too. So, any reports from our board members? >> Yeah. Go ahead, Vice Chair Cobins. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. um had the
opportunity at the end of January to attend the superintendent study council um in the Memphis area and um had a great conversation with those superintendent um have about five pages
of notes that I'll be sharing with our staff on um questions around policy um going through the legislature um some school letter grades perspectives um the um uh essentially vouchers
conversation and how that's impacting their enrollment um and a host of other topics. So uh that was a great discussion. also uh had the privilege of attending um
in January and in February, early February opportunity to go with staff to uh talk to uh the House Education Committee and the Senate Education Committee about the accountability hearings process. Um we
also talked to the Democratic um the state Democratic caucus about um the hearings process and a range of other topics with staff and received a great training from staff on the accountability hearings process with
some um very interesting simulation exercises uh with Mr. James and Mr. Derline um along with the other committee members. So, it was a great um past couple of months and busy start to the year.
>> Thank you. Others, Miss Maxwell. Oh, go ahead, >> Nathan. You want to second recognition? >> Oh, okay. Miss Maxwell first, then the set. >> Thank you, Chairman Eie. Um I had the opportunity December 5th to attend the
annual excellence in education celebration in Nashville where we um the state department recognized our 202526 principal of the year for the state Deanna Jones uh Bailey Station Collarville Collarville schools. Also
the Tennessee 2526 supervisor of the year Diana Wood uh prek instructional supervisor for K4 from Putnham County. uh Brooke Amos and Sarah Brown and their teams did a fabulous job recognizing these very worthy educators and I
appreciate the invitation. Also in December and February, I was able to attend uh superintendent study councils for the upper Cumberland. Those were very informative listening to their uh concerns and needs and also I had the great pleasure of attending several
things with uh fellow board members regarding the accountability hearings that are upcoming. Thank you. >> That's it. >> Thank you. Okay. So since our last board meeting with the help of the wonderful Ally Reid I have created a program
called Student Member Connect. As the name suggests, this organization allows local student board members to connect um local student board members from all across the state to share their thoughts that affect education as well as what is going on throughout their districts. So,
so far we have held two meetings with a total of 12 participants. At the first meeting, students shared their input on the proposal to change the world language requirement and at the second meeting they shared their thoughts on AI and education. We have scheduled meetings for every month until my term
concludes. And from there, I plan to leave a framework and recommendations for the next student board member. >> Thank Yeah. Right. >> I think you I think you set a great bar for future student board members. That's that's great.
>> Other comments? Oh, go ahead. out one thing. >> I left out one thing. Earlier this week, went to Houston uh to observe the Houston Independent School District and their destination transformation summit that they host each year where uh
school leaders from across the country come to learn about um the approach that they've taken to um institute accountability and uh increase student outcomes. So, it was a great um 36-hour experience and learned a lot visiting
classrooms to see uh how they have no no F schools um in the entire district of 297 schools. Any other comments? I'll mention some things that I've done.
Um I presented to the Clinton Rotary uh about basically the function of state board and our roles and some current topics uh AI and world language are some of those also to the Oracle class. Oracle stands for Oakidge Institute for
Continued Learning. Presented to them and then uh we did meet with the Bradley County fellows this past week and sortly basically uh talk to them about state board roles and current topics. Uh participated in superintendent study
councils. Uh Miss Reed and I went down to Dayton for the Southeast Council and then I do attend regularly the East Council meetings. One thing I did do and I encourage all board members to do is I went back and at the end of the year I calculated the number of days we get
reimbursed. Our big expense, our big pay is a reimbursement for travel if we travel more than 50 miles away from home. So I counted up the number of days last year that I spent away from Oakidge, more than 50 miles away, which doesn't include the superintendent study
council meetings in Knoxville. 74 days I was away from home for that. And I imagine that many board members here likewise spend tens and tens of days. So it's kind of eye openening to think about what we do and what we do for our students. And and we do it for a passion
because we have that passion. Any other comments? If none and we'll move on to the next item, report item, accountability hearings report. Miss Ellie Reid. Good morning. Alli Reid, chief of strategy for the state board. In
accordance with state law and state board rules, the state board's hearing committee will begin its first year of public hearings this March. And the report item on today's agenda includes that full schedule as well as details for providing public comment. Passed as part of the TISA act, the state board
may call for a public hearing. any LEA with schools that earned a D or an F on the report card or a charter school and its authorizer with a D or an F on the report card. And using that authority, the state board approved rules last year to narrow that criteria, which now
requires an LEA with at least one school that over the last two consecutive years dropped from a D to an F or had two Fs on the department's report card, as well as a charter school in its authorizer uh that similarly dropped from a D to an F
or earned two Fs. Our hearings will take place in this boardroom here in Nashville the week of March 23rd. Based on the 2223 and 2425 report card outcomes, our hearing committee will hold a total of 18 public hearings on
behalf of 44 F-rated schools in Tennessee. This is including hearings for four virtual schools and three charter schools. The hearings are scheduled to last between 60 and 75 minutes each and will be an opportunity to discuss the LEA or the charter
school's response to its recent academic outcomes, their use of additional funding through TISA, and the various inputs and decisions impacting student performance. As you may remember, our team started developing our hearing process back in
2022 after the TISA act was passed and have since spent countless hours engaging with legislators, district leaders, the department, educators, and community members in its development. Our hearing committee has a large responsibility ahead of them and will
bring a wealth of knowledge and experience to these public conversations. We're going to learn a lot through this first round of the process and I personally just want to take a moment to staff to thank our staff and members and all the various stakeholders for engaging with us in
this in the last three years. The hearings will be livereamed and open to the public and we will have opportunity for both in person and written public comments. It's also important to emphasize that the only corrective action that the board can take following
these hearings is to recommend that the department require the development and implementation of a corrective action plan or to conduct an audit and investigation. The state board will not be taking any further corrective action against these schools or districts. Really, our greatest opportunity is to
have a transparent conversation about how districts and charter leader decisions are impacting student performance at our lowest performing schools. The hearings are also open to all of you state board members in addition to our committee to attend and sit with the committee though only the
hearing committee itself may vote on any proposed corrective action. And following the hearings, the board will be provided with a report summarizing the committee's proposed corrective action and the board will vote at its May board meeting to recommend those actions for the department to impose. So
I'll pause and happy to answer any questions. >> You might want to say who the committee is made up of. >> Sure. Um, so serving this year on the committee, we have Mr. Daryl Cobbins. He will serve as our chair for the committee, Mr. Bob Eie, and Dr. Ana
Maxwell. Any questions for Miss Reed? It will be a learning process for sure. And again, our purpose is to be beneficial uh not punitive. We want to learn what we can do to bring those F schools up to
higher grades. >> Any comments, Mr. Chairman? >> Yes, sir. I would just add um thank you to our our staff. um Miss Reed, um executive director, and um everyone who's been involved, Mr. James, uh Mr.
Derline, um this has been a journey to get us to this point. Um just going back to when this was uh handed to us as a duty. Uh a lot of work has gone into it uh seen and unseen to get us a process in place that is uh
fair, transparent, open to the public and ultimately yielding the um accountability and setting the expectations that we have uh for school districts across the state. Uh we did have a a conversation prior to our House
Education Committee presentation with a legislator who wanted to make sure that we um understood the intent of the legislature in placing this responsibility into our hands and that we take it seriously and that we um make
sure that school leaders across the state take it seriously. So, we look forward to that process and look forward to reporting back to you at our next board meeting. Thank you. Any other questions? >> Thank you, M. Reed. >> Thanks.
>> Next item, local education agency compliance report. Mr. Skyler Travis. >> Mr. Chairman. My name is Skyler Travis, associate counsel with the Tennessee Department of Education. Pursuant to the state board's approval
of local education agencies or LEA's rule 052012.01, the department is tasked with submitting to the state board an annual report on LEA compliance. The corresponding slide deck presentation for this item outlines the background of LEA compliance
reporting and the LEA approval classifications for the 202526 school year. Eleas are classified as approved, conditionally approved, or nonapproved based on their compliance with state law and state board rules and regulations.
Early each school year, ELEAs receive a compliance letter listing their classification based on their compliance in the previous school year. As such, the classifications presented today are based on state level compliance data from the 202425 school year. The
department requires eleas to develop and implement corrective action plans specific to any identified areas of non-compliance. A district is only classified as non-approved if it refuses to complete a corrective action plan. Depending on the areas of identified
non-compliance, corrective action plans may include submitting materials that document resolved compliance or remonitoring by the department to ensure the ELEA's come into compliance. It should be noted that non-compliance is identified at a single point in time.
Corrective actions identified within these corrective action plans are contingent on the specific area and severity of non-compliance. Uh this results in various levels of difficulty in bringing eleas back into compliance. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you may have
about this item. >> Any questions? I noticed uh three districts were non-compliant for length of school day. H how how is that? I mean, what's going on there? >> Yeah, thank you, Mr. Chairman. the sort
of like I um mentioned a second ago the compliance is taken sort of at a single point in time. So when this report and when this data was um you know the deadline for this data came in three school districts for example had not submitted an approved calendar at that
point in time. So after uh even though they are marked as conditionally approved for that maybe level of non-compliance they did come into compliance later by submitting a calendar that was later approved. So that's a little misleading. It, you know, kind of leads one to think of, oh,
they're only going five hours a day or something like that. >> Yes. Thank you for the comment. >> Other questions or comments? >> Thank you, Mr. Travis. >> Thank you. >> Next item.
>> Yes. >> Fiscal accountability standards report. Uh, Miss Mary Derski. >> Good morning. My name is Mary Anderski and I'm the chief financial officer for the Department of Education. State Board of Education rule
0520-01-02-.133 3C requires the Department of Education to verify that funds generated in the state's K12 education form funding formula are being budgeted for eligible expenses inclusive of any legal
requirements that restrict fund usage. It further requires that the commissioner shall advise the state board of all LEAs which fail to meet these minimum standards by January 15th of each year. Since we submitted the cover sheet to
you by the January 15th deadline, we have received an update from the Department of Children's Services. I can now report that there were no LEAs that failed to meet the minimum standards for the 202425 school year. As there are no findings to
report, the cover sheet will serve to provide the required notice to the state board. This item is forformational purposes only and no action is required on the part of the state board. I'm happy to take any questions.
>> Thank you, Mr. Durkski. Any questions? >> Seeing none. Thank you. >> Thank you. Next item is annual alternative education report for the school year 2024 2025. Scott interview. All right. Good morning board. Um
my name is Scott. I'm senior director for IDEIDA and non-traditional education programs. I'm in the division of federal programs and oversight at the department. TCA 4963404 establishes an advisory council to advise, assist, and consult on
alternative education. Upon request, the advisory council makes a report to the governor, the education committee of the Senate, either education committee of the House of Representatives, or the commissioner of education on the state of alternative education in Tennessee.
This item supports the state board's strategic focus on engagement and accountability outlined in the master plan by providing information regarding the state of alternative education in Tennessee. This item is forformational purposes only. No action is required and
at this time I'd be happy to answer any questions. >> Any questions? >> No questions. Thank you. >> Thank you all. We now move into the consent items on teacher lure actions.
First item are the lure discipline settlement approvals. There's a consent item. Is there a motion to accept uh the settlement approvals as approved? And then we'll have a roll call vote if there's a motion in a second. >> So move second.
>> Mr. Wells moves. Vice chair common seconds. Is there any questions for our members board? If not, I'll ask Mr. James to call the role. >> Mr. Cumins. >> Hi. >> Mr. Holt. >> Hi. >> Mr. Jensen.
>> Hi. >> Miss Cobb. >> I. >> Ms. Max. Mrs. Maxwell. >> Hi. >> Mrs. McInturf. Mr. Mullenhower. >> Hi. >> M. Sap. >> I. >> Mr. Wells. Mr. Chairman Eie.
>> Hi. Mr. Chairman, you have 10 eyes. >> That motion passes. Next are the automatic teacher lure actions, revocation, permanent revocations, and prohibitions. Is there a motion to accept those as presented to us?
>> So move. >> Vice Chair Commons moves. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Jensen seconds. Is there any questions or comments? If none Mr. James, please call the role. >> Mr. Cobbins. Hi.
>> Mr. Holt. >> Hi. >> Mr. Jensen. >> Mrs. Cobb. >> I. >> Mrs. Maxwell. >> I >> Mrs. McITUF. >> Mr. Mullenhower. >> Hi. >> Miss Samp Mr. Wills. >> I >> Mr. Chairman Eie.
>> I. >> If 10 I sir. >> Motion passes. Next are the teacher lure discipline actions. There are seven of those. Is there any request to move pull any of those out? Mr. Jordan Pollower. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. I'd like to
request that we remove uh 4C2, Mr. Zebula for brief discussion. >> Okay, I request to move Mr. Bullah out. Are there any others that we want to pull out? If not, let's go ahead and vote on the other six if that's okay.
Do I have a motion to accept uh the teacher license or discipline actions for all those items except for Mr. Bullah? Is there a motion? >> So moves. >> Mr. Mullenar moves. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Mr. Wells seconds. Any further discussion on those six?
If not, Mr. James, you want to call the order for those six? >> Yes, sir. Mr. Cobin. >> Hi. >> Mr. Hold. >> Hi. >> Mr. Jensen. >> Hi. >> Mrs. Cob. Mrs. Maxwell, >> Mrs. Mcadderf, >> hi. >> Mr. Mullenower,
Miss Sap, Mr. Wells, >> Mr. Chairman, AB, >> I, sir. >> That motion passes. Hey, we'll pull out Mr. Bulah. Uh, Mr. Mullenower, did you want to uh have some comments? >> Thank you.
>> Is is your microphone on? I'm not sure. >> There you go. It's working. Okay. um part partly out of respect for the fact that Mr. that Mr. Boua showed up today. I would just like to ask our team one question I hope what are his options if his application is denied today.
>> Alex Anderson, Associate Council, State Board of Education. Uh yes. So if we move forward with the recommendation as is to deny his application, he can apply again this afternoon. Uh there's no prohibition or terms that he has to complete to apply again before we will
reconsider it. It is merely just a formality to get through um this morning. >> Thank you, Alex. And if he were to apply and correctly fill out that application, would today's vote or his past practices of not completing the application
correctly have an influence on your acceptance or denial of this new application? >> Provided the the the facts that you laid out that he does appropriately appropriately fill out the the form. Um, I have not seen anything in the file
that we received from California that would preclude us from giving him a license. >> Thank you, >> Mr. H. Uh, one more question along those lines. How long would it take um assuming that he were to if if we were to deny the application um today and he
were to resubmit, then how long would it take before he could obtain approval of the new submission, assuming it's otherwise satisfactory? uh approximately if we stick to our standard review of those things, we we usually review those applications at the beginning of every month. So assuming
that he would applies this afternoon, next week we will start reviewing the applications from February and he would be reviewed at that time. So a matter of three four working days >> until re review or until potential approval assuming it's otherwise worthy
of approval. >> Yeah, my apologies. So once we approve or clear uh a review, it goes to the department and and their system will either I can't speak to how fast their their system processes things, but it is usually a pretty quick turnaround in our
experience. >> I guess a matter of days or weeks, days. >> Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Melan. Thank you, sir. Um I I'll I intend to um vote to approve the denial
of the application. And Mr. Bill, assuming you're in the crowd here, um I'd like to explain briefly why we respect the fact that you're here today. We respect the fact that you've come and you've explained your situation. Uh we also have to be mindful of the fact that
if we were to uh hear uh review and and and second guessess the work that our staff does in uh making sure that applications are appropriately and correctly submitted. Uh we can find ourselves spending a lot of time in this room talking about which boxes have been
checked and unchecked. And I think it's important for us to speak to our board members here. I would argue that it's important for us to back up our team in enforcing that the applications are correctly submitted. Uh it sounds like from the conversation today and thank you Mr. Holt for your follow- on convers
uh questions. It sounds like um there would be uh a clear path for uh Mr. Bua to resubmit the application and to have that reviewed on a timely basis. Uh so I think we can um accommodate is what sounds like a simple error and at the
same time uh back up our team and enforce the importance of applications being correctly submitted uh for review. Thank you. >> I like that logic, Mr. Miller. >> Any other questions or comments?
So then uh we have Mr. Boua in front of us. Is there a motion to accept uh the recommendation of our legal staff for at this point in time? >> So moved. >> Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Motion by Mr. Mullen. Second by Vice Chair Cobins.
Any further discussion? >> Another Mr. James, you want to call the role? >> Mr. Cobbins. >> I. >> Mr. Hold. >> I. >> Mr. Jensen. >> Mrs. Cobb. >> I. >> Mrs. Maxwell. >> I. >> Mrs. Mcadderf. >> I. >> Mr. Mullenower. I
>> Miss Sant >> I >> Mr. Wells >> I >> Mr. Mr. Chairman Eie >> I >> I sir >> motion passes I'll move into our items on first reading
first item is standards for school admin that right school >> right yep standard for school administer childcare programs 052012011 Good morning. My name is Misty Moody. I am the assistant commissioner of early
learning um with the department of education. Um I'm here to present to you the standards for school administered child care uh rules 0520-12-01. Tennessee code annotated 491101 through 1109 requires the state board of education to promulgate rules for all
school administered childcare programs. School administered child care programs are child care programs run by public or private schools that provide child care to children ages six weeks to five years as well as programs that provide before and after care for school-aged children
in g grades K through 12. The standards for school administered child care have had minor revisions in recent years, but the most recent full revision was 2018. This item proposes a comprehensive update to the rules to better align with changes in statute and current best
practices and to address questions from program directors and teachers. Some changes are, but not limited to reclassifying the rule as a rule to the state board rather than under the rules of the commissioner to align with
Tennessee code annotated 491 302A. Updating requirements for ratios and group sizes for specific populations. updating requirements for physical activity and those for staff training and further revisions to streamline the rule and move reporting and recordkeeping recommendations to
Tennessee Department of Education created guidance documents. The department has gathered both internal and external stakeholder feedback on these revisions, including input from the department's childcare advisory council. In addition, the state board will hold a public rulemaking hearing between first and final reading of this
item to solicit additional public feedback. TCA 49120212, excuse me, requires that the department prepare a fiscal analysis of any policy, rule, or regulation proposed to the state board of education. This item has
no fiscal impact on an LEA. This item supports the state board's strategic focus on teachers and leaders outlined in the master plan to ensure all young children have access to highquality environments, highquality adults and teachers, and highquality instruction. The Tennessee Department of
Education recommends acceptance of this item on first reading. The state board staff concurs with this recommendation. And with that, I will take any questions that you have. Chairman, >> thank you. We have a recommendation for standards for school administered child care program rules 05201201
on first reading. Is there a motion to accept that recommendation? >> So move. >> Vice chair comments moves. Is there a second? Second. >> Mr. Jensen seconds. Are there any questions, comments? No questions or comments. All in favor
then accepting on first reading standards for school administer childcare program rules signify by saying I. I opposed. Motion carries. Next item, repeal standards for school administer child care program rules
05201201. Chairman and members of board. I am Misty Moody, the assistant commissioner of early learning for Tennessee Department of Education and um I am now bringing you the repeal for standards for school administered childcare programs rule 0520-12-01.
PCA 491302 I2A requires the state board of education to promulgate rules establishing standards for the child care programs enumerated in statute at TCA 491302I1. The rules establishing these standards
are currently but inadvertently classified as rules of the Tennessee Department of Education rather than the rules of the state board of education. Accordingly, these rules repeal I'm sorry. Accordingly, this item repeals chapter 0520-12-01
so that the chapter may properly be refiled as the state board of education rule as chapter 0520-08-01. State board staff will hold a rulemaking hearing to collect public feedback between first and final reading. This item supports the state board's
strategic focus on engagement and accountability outlined in the master plan by updating its rules and policies to align with state law and policy. The state board recommends acceptance of this item on first reading. Tennessee start of ed staff concurs with this recommendation and I'll take any
questions you might have. Chairman, >> we have a recommendation for repealing standards for school administered child care program rules 05201201. Is there a motion to accept this? So move. >> Vice chair comments moves. Is there a second? >> Second.
>> Mr. Holt seconds it. Are there any questions? >> No questions. All in favor then for repealing standards for school administered child care program rules 05201201. Signify by saying I. >> I.
>> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Next item. School and student health services rules 0520113. That's Lori Paisley. >> Good morning. I'm Lori Paisley, assistant commissioner of the division of coordinated school health at the
department. Chapter 346 of the public acts of 2025, now codified at TCA495016005, authorizes and encourages each school in a local education agency and public charter school to keep a bronco dilator rescue inhaler in the school so that a
bronco dilator rescue inhaler may be administered to a student believed to be having asthma symptoms or in respiratory distress in emergency situations. This item presents revisions within the existing rules and creates a new rule to
develop clinical protocols regarding the administration of a stock bronco dilator rescue inhaler at a public school. State board staff will hold a rulemaking hearing to collect public feedback between first and final reading. The
Department of Education recommends acceptance on this item on first reading and the state board staff concurs with this recommendation. Happy to answer any questions. >> We have a recommendation for school and student health services rules 0520113.
Is there a motion to accept? >> Miss Maxwell moves. Is there a second? >> Miss Cloud seconds. Are there any questions? >> Mr. Chairman, >> Mr. Mullenower. >> Thank you. M >> do I defer to someone?
>> No. M you first then Mr. Holt. >> Um just a quick question. Uh to my knowledge, no one on this board has a uh a medical background. I certainly do not. Uh what resources will the team be relying on as this prepares for second reading?
>> Will the state board team rely on >> state board or department? What are the resources that we're bringing to bear to make sure that the decisions and the articulation of the policy or the rule in this case uh is is um medically informed? I appreciate you answering
that question because I'm very happy to make you all aware, if you're not already, that we are very fortunate at the department to have our state school nurse consultant, Amanda Johnson. She is an RN and she is on uh in my division and on one of my teams. I actually asked
her to be here with me today because I wanted y'all to know about her and her work supporting schools and districts, but she was unable to be. but her background as an RN and working for us at the department. Also, we have a very strong partnership in coordinated school health with Tennessee Department of
Health and they have multiple pediatricians on their staff. However, we have a direct relationship with one that serves in a role that can support this from a pediatrician background. So, we will be using those resources, but I think for the rulemaking hearing to
prepare, we can use them and our work and the health services component of coordinated school health to prepare for that. But I look forward to getting some good public feedback on this at the rule making hearing. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome, >> Mr. Chairman.
>> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, and you may have just answered this, but I see in the code section um, that led to this rule that we're supposed to be in consultation with the Department of Health in developing the rule. So, I assume that that you all are handling that. That's with the Tennessee Department of Health both in the the
draft we have now and in the rule making process. >> Absolutely. We worked with Rachel Sup and I reminded Rachel that we have someone at the Department of Health so she doesn't have to worry about that and we took care of that for this rule. >> Wonderful. Um, and then I saw in the
language for the rule, it says that each school um is authorized to adopt a procedure to to maintain these inhalers. Um, and that sort of jumped out at me because it just it seemed like sort of a bare minimal level of language that they
they may have um an inhaler. And I looked at the the authorizing code section in the Tennessee code and it says that each school is encouraged to keep an inhaler and I didn't see the authorized language in the code section. So I wasn't sure if there was a reason
for the discrepancy. Maybe we don't feel it's our place to encourage, but if the general assembly has already said that, I wondered if maybe our language should mirror what they have said. >> I might defer to Rachel on that since I am not an attorney. Oh, it's my fault.
>> There we go. Sorry about that. Um, that's a great question. Usually, uh, in in rule, we we try to use more concrete terms than something like encouraged. We would translate that into legal language, I suppose, as authorized. So, it's it's optional, but it's not
required. Um there might be some reasons why a district might choose not to uh stock these bronco dilator rescue inhalers. Um but we can certainly put encourage in. I don't think there would be any harm in in mirroring uh the statute. So we can make that change if
if that's what the board recommends. >> Thank you. I I do feel like it's probably appropriate. I mean, language used in the code section, I would argue, is also legal language. And and so I think that mirroring it is probably um at least would be my preference. Um so
as not to suggest that we're sort of taking a step back from what the code is is suggesting. Um and then I had a question about um in section so it's 0063 B which includes the what the protocols
shall include as a minimum. Um so number three under that is is state and federal law and it just wasn't clear to me like what that the protocol is supposed to include state and federal law. I wasn't sure what we were getting
at with that. I want to make sure I'm I'm looking at the correct part where you're looking. Can you repeat the citation? >> Yes. So, I'm I'm looking at the red line. So, it's the the new language is in the 0520-1-13-.06
administration of a stock bronco dilator rescue inhaler. Um, and then sub three under that development of protocols. And then sub B under that protocol shall include at a minimum. And then three under that is applicable state and federal law.
>> Sure thing. That's meant to refer to uh confidentiality and privacy laws regarding student education records. Um so what steps uh do districts need to take to document and report on the administration in a manner that uh
complies with students rights under FURPA and state student confidentiality laws. >> That's helpful. So I guess my suggestion would be that we we clarify that language to say something along the lines of um
you know en ensuring that um the protocol complies with those uh confidentiality rules and specifying that as much as we can like with furpa >> we can we can certainly make that more specific. Thank you. >> Thank you
>> Mr. Chairman. Mr. Jensen uh I like Mr. Molina have no medical training or background, but I do ask a question and maybe it's in the statute. I'm not sure, but that we clarify is there training
that's going to at the school level, who's going to be qualified, who probably more importantly, who's going to make the decision uh at that level. And I don't need an answer right now. It's just, you know, it's the use of an EpiPen or whatever it
might be that somebody at the school level's got to make a informed decision likely in a stressful situation. So, I just would like some clarity around that as we move forward with this. Miss
Paisley, you want to address that or >> I would love to. Thank you, Chairman Eie. One thing that's important to note is every school district has an RN supervising the school nurses that they have. But I want to make you aware of something that maybe you're not aware of. Not every school has a school nurse.
And so when you don't have a full-time school nurse in a school, you have to train someone, as you said, that is qualified to do that. But the lead nurse, the district school nursing supervisor who is an RN can do that training for the person that's
identified at the school. And also our school districts have a consulting physician that signs off on protocols and they dependent on their relationship with that consulting physician may bring him or her in to do training >> and I appreciate that. It's just you're
you might have an emergency situation. Uh it's just making sure that we're asking people in the school uh that don't necessarily have qualifications. Maybe they've been trained. Maybe what if that person's out
that day or I I I just it concerns me that somebody's making a perhaps even emergency medical decision if somebody's having trouble breathing. I I don't need an answer today. just a concern that that uh causes me a little
pause. >> Mr. P, >> I would just add um I appreciate the concern. We did um add language to the rule. It's on the last page outlining the training and competency requirements in order for school personnel to um be
qualified to administer in an emergency. So, we certainly want to make sure everyone has appropriate training. Um, and any amendments that, you know, need to be made to the language, we're happy to discuss if you feel it's strong enough. >> Miss McInder. >> And every school has a first responder
team that is thoroughly trained and they run drills in the fall and in the and in the spring. So, they I mean, it's not just any teacher can administer. So, that they're they're very trained and uh the nurses and the staff at the district level also help with those drills. Thank you.
>> Good question, discussion. Mr. Hul, >> just one quick followup. So, I mean, as I read the the the statute says that we are supposed to develop um rules, we shall promulgate rules to develop clinical protocols for administering the
inhaler. Um and I read our rule as saying that districts have to develop protocols and those shall include certain minimums, including training. Um and and I wonder if if maybe Yeah, I I don't know who should be developing the actual protocols for like who is
qualified to do it. What sort of training exactly needs to be performed before those people can administer um the inhalers? If that should be us or if that should be districts or if we should have some sort of, you know, form protocol that that gives using the expertise that the Department of Health
and and Department of Ed have. um just so we're not just sort of telling districts, you know, you need to have a protocol and it needs to have training, but like these are what the experts at least at the state level say is an example of the type of training and it should be the the first responders um
who you know in the g unless you have some reason on a district-by- district basis to do something else like this is what we think a a good protocol would be instead of just saying it needs to have training um and and people identified who can be the ones to administer. So, it's just a an idea to Mr. Jensen's
point on, you know, do we use the expertise that that exists at the state level to maybe suggest a type of protocol? >> I will just add um Miss Hazley and her team does a lot of work with districts with school nurses on the ground
regarding implementation of these rules and they have a whole plethora of guidance documents. They have a whole coordinated school health uh I'm probably going to get the title wrong. guidelines for healthcare in a school setting. >> guidelines for healthcare in the school setting. Um so our our rule is really
meant to be the framework. Uh but there is a great deal more detail that goes into communicating with school districts about what this should look like on the ground. I hope that helps. >> Any other questions?
>> Mr. Chairman, may I just follow up with what was shared with Mr. Jensen about the one thing I want to add is a lot of our school nurses just in reply to what you said you're actually talking about real life situations that happen in schools and the majority of
the time they may call 911 even if they use the bronco dilator rescue inhaler they may still call 911 because they're going to do exactly as you said you know they want to take care of an emergency situation but some of
this covers students that don't that have not been diagnosed with asthma and our students that are diagnosed with asthma may bring their inhaler to school and that's covered but a lot of this addresses students that are having a reaction that they've never been diagnosed with asthma. So the stock
bronco dilator is there but to try to speak for school nurses. They're very nervous doing that for a student that hasn't been diagnosed by a medical doctor and so they would more than likely call 911. My my expertise on this matter extends
to my daughter is a school nurse. >> So I just know some of the things that she talks about and >> it it's serious matter. >> Absolutely. >> And you've got children that are exposed, diabetics. I mean all of those
things and it's a lot of responsibility and again I'm just raising issues that that for for questions before we approve this finally. >> Thank you. Any other questions? We have a recommendation and a motion in
a second for school and student health services rules 0520113. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Thanks, Miss Basler. >> Thank you. >> Next is education preparation clinical rule 0520410.
Miss Jennifer Nelson. No, it's not Jennifer Nelson. Miss Christy Brown. >> I'm presenting for Miss General Nelson. Christy Brown, chief academic officer of the Tennessee Department of Education. And I'm bringing the revision to the
educator preparation clinical experience rule. The Tennessee State Board of Education Educator Preparation Clinical Experiences Rule 0520-02-04 outlines the educator preparation requirements in Tennessee and approval of educator preparation providers and
specialty area programs. Currently, state board of education rule 0520-02-04 uh-10, I guess that's section 7, states that clinical practice sites may include Tennessee public schools, including public charter schools and Tennessee
state special schools and category 1, two, or three non-public schools. Additionally, the rule states the category four and five schools shall not be used as placement sites. These categories are defined in state board rule 0520-0702 to better align with the birth through
kindergarten endorsement. This item proposes to allow the following programs which are subject to monitoring by the Tennessee Department of Education to serve as clinical practice sites provided that they meet the highest level of quality set forth by the Tennessee Department of Education
or the Tennessee Department of Human Services. I'm going to name them now. Public school administered early childhood programs, programs operated by private schools under TCA 49-6301 C3 I or 49-6 3001 C3
uh subsection 3. Um, and Rachel, you can I feel like I need assistance on my subsection part there, but I'll keep going. CH child care provided by church affiliated schools are defined by TCA49- uh 50-0801A
state approved monastery school programs and child care providing federally regulated programs including title one preschools and all school administered head start and even start programs. This item also proposes changes to delineate school-based clinical mentor
requirements between public and non-public settings. The school board staff will conduct a rulemaking hearing between first and final reading to collect public feedback. With that, we have a recommendation on educator preparation clinical
experiences 0520410. Is there a motion to accept? >> Miss McInfurf moves. Is there a second? Miss Cobb seconds. Is there any questions, Miss Brown? No questions. We have a motion, a second
for education preparation clinical rule 0520410. All in favor signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Uh I suggest we take a 10-minute break. >> It is uh 10:28. We'll reconvene at
10:40. How's that? Well, >> shut your back off. Okay. One minute. One minute. Thank you. >> It's not cold this morning. >> We're on district and school improvement planning policy 21101. Miss Ginger
Leech. Want to hit your guy with a couple >> reconvene. >> Not ginger leachch. >> Good morning. Taylor Reed, senior director of educator lensure for the department. Tennessee State Board of
Education. Educator lensure policy 5.502 outlines general lensure requirements including application and duration of licenses, professional development points, and endorsements. This item revises the endorsement section by adding equivalent post-secary educator endorsements to
align with existing middle and secondary grades core academic and world languages endorsements which ensures that qualifying candidates can obtain the appropriate post-secondary license and endorsement. The department of education recommends acceptance of this item on first reading. The SPE staff concurs
with this recommendation. >> We have a recommendation for district and school improvement planning policy 21101. Is there a move motion to accept? >> Miss Maxwell moves. Is there a second? Miss McInurf second. Any discussion
>> right here? >> Oh yes, Miss McInurf. Thank you. I just once again I continue to brag on you, but you I mean your department has we were asking about how long it would take for the department to process licenses and I mean there was a teacher that had sent an email and she got a reply within
hours and then another one the next day. So I just like it's just amazing. So thank you all you all are doing. >> Thank you so much. >> Any other comments or questions? We have a motion in a second to approve district and school improvement planning
policy 21101. All in favor signify by saying I. I opposed. Motion carries. Now I assume you're going to do the next one too. >> No sir, we were I believe on F educator lure 5502. >> Yeah, educator license policy 5.
>> We do just >> we had one for Ginger Leech. I thought you were replacing Ginger Leech. >> I'm so sorry. That's >> all right. District and school improvement planning policy. Yes, we skipped over
>> 21101. Oh, I'm sorry. >> Good morning. I'm Jinger Leech, assistant commissioner of district and leadership support with the Tennessee Department of Education, and I'm presenting the revisions to the district and school improvement planning policy 2.101, 101
Chapter 1 0005 of the public acts of 2024 amended TCA 49-6 49-613 to require the transition of district and school planning from an annual approval by the Tennessee Department of Education to approval once every 3
years. District and school improvement planning policy 2.101 101 details the requirements for the planning process, including completing a needs assessment, aligning goals and strategies to identified needs, aligning school plans to that of the respective district, and
providing responses to federal and state identified areas of focus. This item presents the following revisions. It transitions the planning process to approval every three years and requires the three requires three-year goals with
annual targets and long range strategies to define the theories of action for reaching each goal. It transition transitions action steps from mandatory to only required when identified as necessary by the Tennessee Department of Education and re removes
many previously included federally or state identified areas of focus that will now be captured in other methods for districts. It also aligns the TISA accountability report requirements so that we can align the planning and the TISA accountability uh report components
which is a natural fit and an opportunity to streamline district requirements and is in response to district feedback. The Tennessee Department of Education recommends acceptance of this item on first reading and the state board of education staff concur with this recommendation.
>> We have a recommendation on district and school improvement planning policy 21101. Is there a motion to accept? >> Mr. Jensen moves. Is there a second? >> Second. >> Vice Chair Common second. So, are there any questions for Miss Leech?
No questions. All in favor then for accepting district and school improvement planning policy 21101 from first readings. Signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Next item. Michael Derline, uniform
grading policy. >> Good morning. Michael Derline, deputy executive director of policy and research with the state board. This is the uniform grading policy 3301 which builds on the uniform grading system rule and establishes the
statewide uniform grading scale to be used by eleas for students enrolled in grades 9 through 12 for the purposes of application of post-secary financial assistance administered by the Tennessee Student Assistance Corporation. This item revises the percentage points
used to calculate semester average grades for dual enrollment courses, shifting from four percentage points to five. Uh, this policy should have been updated following approval of the uniform grading system rule during the board's quarterly meeting in May of 2024. I take responsibility for that.
So, I apologize. Uh, but there is no practical implication of this change since the rule supersedes the policy. With that, happy to take any questions you may have. We have a recommendation for uniform grading policy 31 3301. Is there a motion to accept?
>> Second. Wales moves. Mr. Mullen an hour seconds. Are there any questions for Mr. Derline? No questions. We have a motion and a second for uniform grading policy 3.301. All in favor signify by saying I. I.
Opposed. Motion carries. Thank you, Mr. Derland. Next is approved high school courses policy 3205. Miss Brianna Summers. >> Good afternoon, Chair Eevee and members. My name is Brianna Summers. I'm the director of policy and academics at the
Tennessee State Board of Education. Before you, I have the approved high school policy 3.205 on first reading. This policy identifies high school courses that are available for credit in Tennessee schools. Graduation requirements and substitutions are among our most
frequent questions that we get from counselors, schools, and districts on how students take courses and how to graduate. As we were working through the revisions from first reading with the graduation permission and substitutions policy, we realized that a couple other
policies are impacted and we could be clear across the board. Both cross referencing policies so that if a counselor picks up one, they'll know to look at the others. um as well as just generally updating courses since we were opening the policy in partnership with um schools, districts, and the
department of education feedback. With that, I'm happy to answer any questions that you have. >> We have a recommendation for approved high school policies courses policy 3205. Is there a motion to accept?
>> Miss Maxwell moves. Is there a second? Mr. Wales seconds. Are there any questions for Miss Simmers? No questions. All in favor then for accepting approved high school courses policy 3205 signify by saying I. I
opposed. Motion carries. Next item 202930 Tennessee English Language Arts ELA standards. Miss Brianna Summers. >> It's me again, Brianna Summers, director of policy and academics. Uh before you I have the standards we've been working on
across 2024 to 2026 on first reading. As you heard yesterday, the state board of education is charged to review our ELA standards every eight years. Um, and this legislatively directed process and prioritizes collaboration and transparency
including two public feedback surveys, three committee meetings. Um, that's looking at each and every standards contribution to students learning. As part of this item, you received an executive summary that highlights the changes and the leadership team of
educators from K12 and postsecary presented to you yesterday in more detail about those edits. Um, TCA 491312 directs the state board of education members to adopt, reject, or make technical non-substantive edits to these
standards. After these standards uh are approved on final reading at the will of this body, uh we will pass those off to the department, the textbook commission, schools, and districts to do the implementation work. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you have.
>> We have a recommendation for 2029 30 Tennessee English language arts ELA standards. Is there a motion to accept those standards? So move. Vice chair comments moves. Is there a second? Miss Magurf seconds. Are there questions?
I've got a couple. First, let me say that uh yesterday's workshop I thought was excellent. >> Very helpful. Uh shows the um thorough process that this board goes through and the state goes through and the uh
educator teams go through and developing these standards. And I think that gives us confidence in what we're doing. Uh couple of questions though that uh actually asked yesterday but I want to bring out here. Uh summary made some specific recommendations outside the bands of the committee such as writing
assessments and additional instructional time for literacy and what will be done with these recommendations that are outside the bounds of the standards. >> I appreciate the question for context for members and the public. the various committees that work on these standards. Their, you know, sandbox, if you will,
is the 113 pages of the standards themselves. But as I mentioned, we can't do this work alone. The executive summary makes a couple different recommendations to the state broadly as well as districts and schools. Uh, we sent um the impacted recommendations to the Department of Education, assistant
commissioner uh Christy Wall and her team who has been invaluable as well as Dr. David Leair who um attended our meetings and was extremely collaborative. So, we're grateful for that work and they've been open to all the recommendations. In fact, Dr. Lar came and, you know, spoke to them directly on the spot with very little notice um to come to our meeting in a
full suit um and over across town. So, uh we sent those recommendations ahead of time and are in in close collaboration to to work on those and we'll be sure to send the full list from all three committees at the conclusion after the once these standards are passed on final reading at the will of
this body. Further, um we look forward to doing outreach with districts and schools. um so that they're aware of the recommendations of those committees as well. >> Thank you. And one other comment, um the committee talks about by using these new
standards, they feel pretty confident that we'll be on the path to raise from the 50 percentile up to the top 10 percentile. And uh after hearing what they had to say and the reasons why they were saying that what they've done changed, it gives me a lot of confidence
that uh what they're doing is what we will be doing is moving in the right direction and hopefully we'll get to that top 10 percentile. So >> absolutely they're the hardest working folks in show business. >> Yeah. >> Any other questions or comments on the standards?
If none, all in favor for 2029 2030 Tennessee English language arts standards signify by saying I. I opposed. Motion carries. And again, thank you, Miss Summers, for your leadership on this. I mean, I know it hasn't been without a lot of effort and time, but it shows. Thank you.
>> Thank you. >> Next item is graduation requirements rule 052010306. And now, as I will be presenting the item, I'm going to relinquish the chair to Vice Chair Cobins. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, graduation
requirements rule0520-01-3-06. Uh, you're recognized. >> Thank you, sir. As you know, this rule outlines the graduation requirements for students in Tennessee. You may recall that last May I requested a study be done on the world language
requirements. We put together a staff uh state board staff convened a work a world language working group and then came back and discussed those in August and then during the n November 2025 quarterly workshop I presented a revised
approach based on that stakeholder feedback. Specifically, uh this rule revision reduces the required required credits in world language from two to one for students graduating after the 202526
school year. Increases the elective credits by adding a new quote additional elective credit that's separate but complimentary to the existing electric focus elective focus credits. It allows a student to take an additional elective either in their area
of focus or in another area of interest. It adds language encouraging the use of high school and beyond plans and dual enrollment. When selecting and scheduling students for elective courses, it removes the requirement that students take two credits of world language, they
must be in the same language. It adds world language as an area a student can earn credits in in the purpose of elective focus area. And it adds language directing the department to develop guidance to support districts developing waiverss for world language
and the fine arts. Item has no fiscal impact. It does support our overall master plan and the mission of the state board in providing each individual student with options to improve outcomes and prepare for post-secondary success.
Specifically, the item supports the state state board strategic focus area of post-secary and career that all students are prepared for success in high school and also an engagement accountability. The state board will annually identify its rules and policies for review and
update based on changes in laws or opportunities to improve outcomes. State board staff does recommend approval of this item on first reading. So for discussion, we need a motion and a second. Mr. Chair, and I will move to
accept the world language proposal as presented. >> Thank you. Uh, it's been moved. Is there a second? >> Second. And then I also would request a roll call vote, please. >> Okay. Thank you.
Uh, it's been moved and properly second. Um, are there any questions? >> Yes, sir. >> Yeah. uh since through the emails we've received, I think it continues to show a lot of misunderstanding what my motion proposes. And for that reason, I'd like
to spend some time and provide uh more detail and also from my perspective of why I think this is the right motion and the right actions for us as a state board. I'll first give a little bit of personal background so people understand where
I'm coming from. I sit on a world mission board for global community fellowship. My daughter is a uh veterary missionary. She goes worldwide to various places. My
son-in-law has dual citizenship, US and Mexican citizenship. And my four of my six grandchildren are being raised in a bilingual environment. So I have no biases against foreign languages.
I look at what's important for each individual student. That's my focus. Let me reiterate, I'm not recommending the removal removal of world language from our schools, only modifying our graduation requirements to provide more
options to the students. Our mission is prepare students for post-secary success. I think we can all agree how we define post-secondary success today is different than it was 15 or 25 years ago.
We now offer CTE students classes where students can have industry credentials when they leave high school. We offer work-based learning now where students can spend up to a half a day out in the working environment. We offer dual enrollment where students
can get a head start in the colleges or university track. We have established a middle college program where students can achieve an AS degree two two weeks before they get their high school diploma. What great opportunities we're now providing our
students that we did not provide 15 or 20 years ago. We must be willing to recognize that changes come and we must change our requirements consistent with those and we'll continue to present opportunities for our education process. So that's
what this proposal is about. It's all about what is best for each individual student. Every student should have the opportunity to take what's best for them. We should not require them to take
courses that is not in their best interest. This proposal requires every world langu requires world language courses opportunities each district to offer world language courses. One of the things that we
looked at a year ago a concern that I had people said is if we do away with the two credits some of the districts may not offer world language courses. I believe every student design has should have the opportunity to take a world language course if they want to and if
that's the best for them and this proposal keeps that. 26 states right now do not require world language or graduation requirements. Of the other 247
provided as an option. So, as we look and I really appreciate the engagement we've had of our students. I've probably gotten at least a hundred emails from students, maybe more than that.
You represent onetenth of 1% of the million students that we represent across this state. So, we have to look at what's best for all students. We had a convers I had a conversation with Chelsea Crawford from Tennessee K
and in doing that I looked up their mission purpose and their mission purpose said one size doesn't necessarily fit all. In other words, as we look for each individual student what is best for
them. For many of you world language is what's best and that's what you want to do. That's what we heard today. But for others, there are other opportunities that may be better for them.
As I say, work-based learning, STEM, CTE. As I look at the challenges that we have to fill the jobs that we have to fill in this state in the future, just in
Oakidge alone in the last year and a half, 8 billion dollars worth of investments have come in. One of those companies that's coming in is Arano. It's a French company. I looked at the requirements that they're looking for.
They're not looking for people who have French. They're looking for people who have STEM. They're looking for welders. They're looking for business management people. So, why shouldn't the students, if that's best for them, have the opportunity to take those courses as
they move forward? We talk about competition. We talk about worldwide competition. Tennessee, I think we're in more in competition with the states that are around us. That's where we have to we're gonna we
can't fill all the jobs whether it's AI in the west or whether it's nuclear in the east with just with internally we have to look around and look at the competition because those states are pulling from us. In fact, Excel and Ed
did a study of the seven states that best prepare their students for postsecary success. That's our mission postsecary success. of those seven, Alabama, Georgia, two states that we clearly compete with for people, Florida,
Indiana, Iowa, Pennsylvania, and Colorado. Of those seven states, four of them do not have world language as a requirement of graduation, and the other three provide as an option. Again,
one size does not fit all. As we look at innovative school models, yesterday our commissioner talked about that. We talked about high school and beyond plans of working with our counselors to define what is best for each individual
student for their path to success. Again, for those of you here who and for students, world language may be absolutely best for you, but it may not be best for everyone. So why should we set a requirement when we have the
option to provide the others? Some people say and we heard today well you have the the waiver they can just take a waiver. I hope all members of this board read the letter from Dr. M Mike Winstead that he put in there and he talked about
that. Why should we talk about a separate diploma? Why is one diploma higher than another? because a student decides that they want to take a welding class or they want to take a music theory class or something like that as a and have to get a waiver
to do that. Why is their diploma any different than the diploma of the person that takes world language if that's best for them? Talk about entrance into the colleges and universities. When I reported last time, I said it was
I thought it was 25% of colleges and universities only 25% require uh foreign language for admission. I was wrong. It's only 12%. And it's declining every year.
Again, if you work with your high school and beyond plans, if you work with your counselors, if you work with your parents, shouldn't that student and the parents have the choice, the options of what's best for them as opposed to us requiring them to take course that may
not be best for them. So this proposal increases electus for students so they can take another course in another STEM course or maybe they're in a STEM focus area and they want to
take a music theory class or they want to take a business management class or something like that that's going to help them. That's what this proposal does. We talk about shortage of teachers. The one area that we have the biggest shortage on right now percentage-wise is
world language. We have students in Morgan County. They've tried for six months to hire a world language teacher. In at York a Institute, they've tried for three years to hire a
world language teacher. Morgan County had to hire one out of Coffee County and they are being presented. uh they are getting the class asynchronously online. Jamestown York a Institute they have to
take a class with like videotapes or something like that. Is that what's best for those students? When at York a Institute, if the governor's budget passes, administration budget passes, it will be the only school in the country
that has true farm to table all the way from growing the crops to the the animals, the turkeys, whatever it is, preparing those, cooking those, and taking to table.
They spend over half a day in the in the farm area there. Why should we require them to sit into in a world language class if it's not best for them having to do it by videotape or something like that if that's not best for them? So
there options. What is the best option we have for our students? That's what this is all about. Again, what we want to do with this board's responsibility is to look at all million students. How can we best meet the needs
of those million students? For our graduation permissions and substitution policy that we're going to be voting on here final, it says, "Our purpose is centering an individual student's postsecary and career interest in the selection process to promote
meaningful coursework that leads to life sustaining post-secary and career pathways." That's what this change does. It doesn't keep people from taking world language classes. It promotes it. It adds it as a focus area,
but it provides the opportunity for each one of our students to follow the career path that they're looking for. >> Thank you. Other comments, Miss Magin Turf, >> I think this is the first time I haven't been able to do a member report of a
conference or a meeting I've been to, but I have spent some time reading emails and I know we only had 10 speak today. So, I wanted to make sure that we summarized all the emails that were sent to us. So, thank you for all your work on that. Um, so first of all, I have
been asked and some have assumed that the only individuals opposed to reducing the world language credit requirements would be world language teachers themselves. At first, that assumption may seem reasonable. It's natural to expect those most closely connected to a program to advocate for it. However, as
I read not only the words within the emails, but also considered who was writing them, a very different picture emerged. Of the more than 75 emails reviewed, only 12 were from world language teachers. Several others came from educators in different fields, including a librarian, a history
teacher, and a math teacher, who thoughtfully noted that her own discipline can feel like learning another language. The remaining correspondents represented a wide cross-section of stakeholders, high school and college students, parents, grandparents, health care professionals, including an OT, uh, several RNs and a
medical doctor, business leaders, higher education faculty, school district leaders, and community members. Most strikingly out of this entire collection of responses, only two expressed support for reducing that requirement, while every other written comment strongly supported maintaining the current two
credit expectation. This overwhelming imbalance makes clear that concern about the proposed reduction is not confined to a single professional group, but instead reflects a broad communitywide commitment to preserving meaningful opportunities for students. I want to summarize the arguments that were most
addressed in the emails for public record. College and career readiness. Respondents emphasized that two years of language study remain a common expectation for admission to four-year colleges and universities, including the University of Tennessee. Reducing that
requirement would create barriers for students. Multilingual skills are increasing increasingly valued across industries such as health care, education, business, and public service. A business leader noted, "I had no choice but to learn Spanish. My business, my career, and my employees
depended on it. It has broken barriers with other people and open an entire world of possibilities. Also, I heard a lot about academic and cognitive benefits like several students already mentioned today. Educators and community members highlighted research showing that language study strengthens
literacy, problem solving, memory, and critical thinking. Sustained exposure supports broader academic success, including reading comprehension, standardized test performance, and persistence and advanced coursework. Uh, language learners foster empathy, curiosity, and the ability to navigate
multicultural communities. Students and adults shared experiences using language skills to assess assist customers, communicate with patients, and collaborate with co-workers. One registered nurse reflected, "I have been able to communicate with Spanish-speaking patients and families
and develop relationships not only uh that are not possible using virtual translators." Um, several students talked about uh how public schools often provide the only structured opportunity for language learning. Reducing the requirement would create disparities,
particularly for rural students or those with limited resources. One stakeholder explained, "Without a clear statewide requirement, access to language education would vary would vary wildly by district, diminishing opportunities for thousands of students." Educators and administrators warned that
lowering the requirement would shrink enrollment leading to program cuts and staffing losses. Rebuilding programs is difficult once reduced. Stakeholders emphasize that teacher shortages should be addressed through recruitment and support, not lowered expectations. Many respondents share how language
coursework shaped careers, enabled study abroad, strengthened family connections, and provided real world benefits from workplace communication to translation support and enhanced cultural understanding. One student came up with a solution uh that would not only allow more flexibility but also keep the two
language credits. I'm just going to read what she wrote. If the goal is to create more room in students schedules, I strongly urge the board to consider removing the career focus requirement instead. Unlike world language, career focus has little bearing on post-secary
opportunities. Colleges and universities routinely ask about foreign language coursework and admissions and scholarship decisions, but they do not ask whether a student completed a specific career focused track. In my own experience, from the author, the career focus requirement limited my ability to
explore new interests. During my senior year, I was a 4.3 GPA honor student with 48 college credit hours already completed. I wanted to explore cosmetology courses through CTE but because I could not complete the full three credit sequence um I was not
allowed to pursue that pathway. The structure was too rigid to let me try something new even as a high achieving student had already exceeded academic expectations. Career exploration should be flexible and accessible not an all or nothing track that prevents students from trying potential interests.
Removing or restructuring career focus would open space in student schedules without eliminating a requirement that colleges value and that builds communication skills, cultural understanding, and real world readiness. Currently, in order to take CTE classes, you have to marry yourself to three
credits of the same career cluster. She is asking to eliminate that requirement and allow students to have more choice in their CTE decisions using these classes as true career exploration. As the representative for district 1, I have not only heard from my own district, but from Tennessans across the
state, and the message is consistent. Keep the two credit world language requirement. Even though I'm no longer the teacher representative, I will always stand as an advocate for those in the classroom. Our educators are in it every day. Their expertise, experience, and thoughtful perspective cannot and
should not be dismissed. The voices of students, parents, teachers, and community members alike all make it clear. sustaining this requirement matters for our students futures, our schools and our state. I know I don't have all of the opinions of our entire state, but the the sample that I have,
they continue to consistently say to keep our two credit world language. Thank you. >> Thank you. Additional comments, Mr. Mullen. Now, >> thank you. I just have a question. So, I I heard you um
demonstrate or uh repeat a number of arguments that have been made by people from all over the state. Do you agree with all the logic that they applied? >> I do. I wouldn't have added it if I hadn't. I agree. >> Mr. Jensen, um thank you for your
preparation and being here. U this was helpful. appreciate you giving it to us. I I did note in here a couple of things. I had a question. Is there any limitation on a student taking multiple years of a language
elective? There there's no limitation. Um it and it seems to me what we're discussing here maybe if I'm getting this properly is the maintenance of opportunity or requirement.
So there's no limitation and I hear the argument that it takes four semesters to get there. U I respect that. Uh, but I think about a, uh, a
young person that's fluent, for example, in Spanish, uh, that's in a CTE course, they've elected to go that way. they want to go that way and saying you've got to take two semesters or two years of a of a
language that and then I look in the documents you prepared and in some of the states there appears to be a university track and and so my question would be is it either or or can it be
both and that where the students there's no limitation as understand it so is the two-year re two years of a language requirement essential to the to the exposure
uh uh of a language. Uh, I've had a number of language classes and uh, fluency um, is a challenge and I appreciate what you're saying and I I don't disagree
with it, but what concerns me is that are we going to mandate a requirement that is already available as an option? And I, you know, that's what I'm struggling with, uh, is that we do have
students, uh, you go into my district out in Milin or Paris or out there and you'll you'll have uh, 65% of the kids, 50% of the kids have elected a CTE track. And I
just I struggle a little bit with saying those kids have got to have four semesters of language in order to graduate. I think it's we really that's really in my mind the question if if in fact somebody's in that high school and
they still want to do four semesters there's no limitation as understand it. So that that's my thoughts on it. Just for clarification, does two credits equal four semesters? >> It depends on whether you're on a block schedule or you're on a traditional
schedule. Okay. >> Uh traditional schedules I think requirements. >> Yeah. I I think uh part of the confusion has to do whether you're on a block scheduling or a uh traditional schedule. And you know some of the mis
misunderstanding too people say that you can get all these credits etc. Again that totally depends on what the district is set up on and and in a block scheduling I think two credits is one year but on a traditional schedule two credits is two years.
>> Mr. Mullen now. >> Thank you Mr. Chairman. Um I I'll start with um I think repeating a few things but it's worth repeating. Um thank you for those of you who are here today on this topic. Thank you for coming. Uh we have gotten a lot of good comments um
arguing both sides of this issue. Um thank you Mr. chairman for leading the charge and for articulating uh your reasoning and I think um as was stated in our last not the workshop yesterday but the one previous um you know you've demonstrated your learn acronym I think
in an admirable way uh you've listened you've adjusted you've adapted um I know that at least from what I can gather there's different opinions uh uh of members of this board and uh to be very clear uh this is a topic where I think reasonable minds can disagree and um and
we see that kind of playing out today. So, I'm proud of all involved for having meaningful discourse about this. I would like to I think in some senses deconstruct some of the arguments that have been made or to try to bring some clarity. Um I do agree with our chairman
that this is a topic that has um been a bit fraught with confusion I think. Uh, and I assume that I'll assume that none of that's intentional, that it's just misunderstandings of terms and and how these things work. But, uh, I'll start with a very basic one. Um,
I don't I I don't I've not heard anybody yet say that there's no value in foreign language. Maybe that person exists and they just haven't sent us an email yet. Um, but I have not heard that argument put forth. My own view is I think there is value in learning foreign language.
Uh however to our chair's point uh that value is realized differently in in different instances and depending on who that person is. Now I've heard the counterargument which I think is at first it caught my eye. The counter argument is well if we're going to do do away with foreign language what about some of these other requirements that we
have and you know maybe there's some conversation to be had there. U but I'll give just a couple of examples of why I think that that argument doesn't hold a lot of weight. Um, not everybody's going to go to Portugal and not everybody's going to go to France and not everybody's going to go to Mexico and name any other country out there. Um, we
can accept that. I think we can agree on that. U, however, if you live in the United States, if you live in Tennessee specifically, I think we can posture that you're going to have to use math. If you're going to go to the grocery store and buy a can of Coke and you've only got a certain number of dollars, you got to figure out, can I buy that
can of Coke? Uh, you've got to figure out how to budget, you know, personal finance, which is also a requirement for graduation. Um, people need to know how to balance a checkbook. They need to know at least some basics about personal finance. Personally, I wish we had more personal finance requirements. I think it would do our state well. Uh, world
history or America or history just in general. We live in a society with human beings where history has demonstrated both the mistakes and the lessons that we've learned over time. I just give these examples of those are all current graduation requirements that I think are
absolutely meaningful for every single person who breathes oxygen in the state of Tennessee. Uh and again, I would say that not everybody that breathes oxygen in the state of Tennessee is going to travel to Portugal, France, name the country. So there there's not in in my mind there's not a connection between
deciding to no longer require a foreign language and kind of opening Pandora's box and saying well we're just not going to require any of these other things that are out there because I think many of the at least many of the items that we are going to currently hold on to as graduation requirements do impact the lives of people every single day in the
state. Uh, another point that I think is worth making is, and this is again another one that caught my eye, that if we don't require this, then is this going to somehow create a an economic disincentive to having that resource available to students in schools? In other words, if we're not
going to require foreign language, uh, are we going to have situations where students just don't have access because the decisions made that that no foreign language uh, courses are going to be offered? Uh, that is a possibility. um you know it doesn't strike me as particularly compelling. But I think the
bigger point here is if I'm a student and I want to learn Spanish um that might work because Spanish is, you know, most commonly taught in our system. But if I want to learn Portuguese and there's not a teacher
available in my school to teach Portuguese, then are if we again if we kind of go open Pandora's box and we start following this line of logic, does this mean that we need to start teaching every single language that's taught in the world in every single school just to make sure that no kid or child who wants
to learn a foreign language, their specific foreign language uh h you know you know isn't found isn't found left out. So again, on on the face, the argument kind of makes sense, but then when you start to think about, well, if we follow that through to its full
conclusion, uh we we find ourselves in some in some um in some positions that are difficult to defend. In other words, um, you know, if we're going to commit to teaching Spanish, are we then because we
just want to make sure that a foreign lang that that every student who wants to learn foreign languages uh is able to do so in their in their particular school, at what point do we draw do we draw the line and say, "Well, we're not going to teach every single language in every single school." Uh, I think another example of um something that we
just have to keep in mind, and our our chair pointed this out, uh, and this is not to discount those who've made the investment to be here by any means. I'm not saying that at all. Um, it would make sense that when we're talking about a specific topic like foreign language that people who have
found that to be a meaningful part of their education or a meaningful part of their life period would be the ones who most passionately come forward. I would expect that to be the case and I'm grateful for that. Um, but we have to also recognize that there there's a um there's a vocal minority that we
appreciate, but it's we shouldn't take the the volume of conversation as being representative of the number of people's whose interests are elsewhere and who therefore didn't show up today. you know, the the the young man or young
woman who's learning welding and whose passion is welding or whose passion is uh uh you know, construction or whose passion is any number of other things, you know, they're probably not here today. They're probably not voicing their opinion today because they're probably not even aware that this is a topic being discussed because it's not
their passion. If we were removing welding uh options from schools, I expect that our conversation today would be predominantly uh with with people whose passion is is welding. Now, and last last comment, um
you know, I I you know, the argument of well, there's a waiver in place again on its face, that kind of makes sense. However, when we look at how the waiver is being, let's call it demonstrated out in the
world, it's a disaster. Uh it's inconsistent. It's factually inaccurate. It's been shown to be factually inaccurate in certain uh examples, recent examples. So I I don't think that we can just accept that the existence of a waiver alone is the equivalent of
making it very clear to everyone that not that they have to take it or that they don't have to take it, but that they have the choice to choose whether or not to do so for themselves. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Mr. I'm sorry, Miss S.
>> Thank you. So, um I would like to start by thanking Mr. Eie for further sharing your um background and like elaborating on that. And I would also like to encourage Tennessee students to um consider that as well whenever they're voicing their
opinions. Um, in my student member connect program, I have pursued um, students' opinions and I've also received several emails just receiving um, their opinions more unprompted. I
would also like ten to recommend that Tennessee students um, consider the um, proposal that um, Miss McInturf reiterated from the student who emailed her. Um but from what I have gathered um
for my pursuing students but also them pursuing me, I've written a little um reflection. So because my role is to represent Tennessee's 1 million students, I've spoken with several students across the state and gathered their opinions. While many of them see the advantages of
taking another focus elective class, the overall opinion towards decreasing the world language requirement is a resounding no. Students value the knowledge they have gained from both taking from taking both credits. And many students have emphasized to me that
the second credit is what truly built that foundation. Diversity throughout our state and nation is inevitable and unavoidable. And most of the perspectives I've gathered don't see that it is fit to reduce the emphasis on exposure to that. I've also taken um
kind of a poll in my own school not just acting this or asking the students who were like like interested in student leadership but also the students who may not be originally considered or inclined to um reach out I guess and many of them
who are pursuing maybe a a um certification in healthcare or in welding also see the advantages of taking um both of the world language credits and so I just like to pass it along to our board the student
perspective cop >> yes I I want to thank all the students who presented this morning and I think the teacher who also presented very well spoken excellent presentations and I love languages myself I've traveled over 17 countries a world traveler and yes I
did stumble over a few especially Russian when I visited Russia But anyway, the love of language. I also want to to wonder could we and I heard Commissioner Reynolds this morning say that that language could be revisited and and uh revised. So I'm wondering if that could be an avenue that we we could
go as well. >> Yeah, just to respond real quick. So what I've after of course I got pinged by the team and and so it is a district level uh waiver. They're the ones that write it. So, we are actually Chrissy Brown has actually drafted a template so
that we can um do a a a more less negative waiver to demonstrate, you know, that kids can still um wave the world language requirement as needed um if that's really what they want to
pursue. So, yeah, we are we we will be issuing that soon. Miss Maxwell, >> thank you. So, um again, I appreciate all the comments um both obviously both sides of of this um question proposal
and uh first of all, the rule if that I'm reading says the credit requirement for fine arts or world language may be waved by the LEA's director of schools for students to expand and enhance the elective focus. Prior to waving the requirement of for fine arts or world
language, the students parents or guardian must agree to the waiver in writing. So to me, as I think about two students that I know from my district of the same family, uh one went on to college, completed her two years of
requirements, but also graduated with two industry credentials. this other child he uh the decision was made to wave where he could take two additional elective focus classes. So
I'm thinking, you know, I I see the points that each individual has made here regarding the waiver, even if it is a district decision. I feel very strongly that we should never tell a child in a waiver or
anywhere that they're not going to be able to do something. So, you know, to say in a waiver, you understand your child is not going to college, that that that's pretty strong. I mean, I would be really upset if somebody told me that, you know, and what right do we have to
tell students that and families that. So, I do think I I think that I appreciate Chairman Eie's uh passion for this. I think he he has brought to light a lot of things that we need to be talking about. um the high school and
beyond plan. I I think this has been a great recognition of the importance of that and how we need to be ensuring that that's being implemented for every student in the state of Tennessee. And I also have to plug uh Future Ready
Tennessee the platform. I mean, if we can ever get that off, can we only imagine the advising and the involvement and engagement that we would have in families? I I just think it would be one of the best things that we could do uh
for our students. And you know, I've heard from people uh probably some of similar people as you have received emails, but I've heard from superintendent also too that um approve of chairman EY's uh proposal, but I also
have sat in meetings where the vast number have said, we don't see this as a an issue that we need to be uh diving into because we can do a waiver. So, I just want to share my
thoughts uh again and I do appreciate again Chairman Eve's thoughts because I think it has brought to the board things that we need to really be taking a closer look at ensuring that our students are graduating. So, thank you chairman Eie for bringing this and um
thank you chairman Eie. >> Thank you, Miss Maxwell. Just a couple of comments. If if we're saying use the waiver and a student can just say I want to wave that course, why aren't we transparent? I mean,
basically that I I if if you say, well, they can wave the course and take whatever they want to, then let's be transparent about it and call it what it is and have it as an option as opposed to requiring someone. And again, if you
go back and you you look at uh Dr. Winstead's letter, I have to wave I have to ask for a waiver of this gives the connotation that my diploma is less than anybody else's diploma. And that's not
true. So, so why not be transparent then if you're going to say, "Well, it's not. It's all the same. They can just wave it." Be transparent about it and just make it as an option instead of doing it. The other point is I've heard that one comment if students
who have to be in the class aren't in the class and the students who are remaining in the class are the ones who want to be in there and that allows the teacher to take it even that much further. So a student, you know, if you if you don't make it a requirement, then
the ones that are in the class are going to be the ones that want to be in there. And it makes it better for the teachers. That's another process. >> Mr. Chair, >> Mr. Mullen. Now, >> um I'd like to respond to a couple things that Miss Maxwell said. Um first of all, you know, when you started
saying, I'm paraphrasing slightly here. Um you know, you you never want to tell a child that they can't do something that they want to do. You want to give them the option. Uh I we were agreeing up to that point and then I realized the the we hit a fork in the road. Um, I
believe it is both mathematically and and objectively correct to say that if we're going to require someone to take something like world language, we are by definition saying also you no longer have that time to then take
something else that you want to take. Uh so I would argue that by requiring world language we are in fact telling kids we're removing other options from them because they only have so many hours they only have so much time to invest in
their own education and and by by forcing them to do one we are by definition removing other options. The second thing that I would point to here and again this is just where you know for the attorneys in the room like one word matters. Uh you know my
understanding is that is that the districts may agree to the waiver. Uh it does not say that they have to agree to a waiver even if it's signed by the parent the child and whoever else. Uh am I misunderstanding the application of
the waiver concept? Is it a is it in fact at the option of the superintendence? I guess council >> I'm looking at the language in the rule and while it does say um that the credit requirement may be waved by the director
of schools um I can see how it can be unclear as whether that would be permissive or mandatory if the parent and student have both requested the waiver. So I can certainly uh envision a world where we want to clarify that and make it clear and I think we would have some discretion as to what that language
would look like. >> So So here again I would say this is the crux I think of the issue that our chairman was making a second ago. uh if if our superintendents have the option to tell the children no I'm not
going to grant that waiver because they firmly believe that world language is super important then uh the the concept of a waiver is not the equivalent of this board saying we're no longer going to require the two world languages is not the equivalent. Uh and at the same
time, if we say, well, the implication is that they're always going to approve the waiver requests, then we're just doing a bunch of paperwork. Uh let's make it clear. So, I I would say again, just another couple of examples here of where it's super important to understand
what are we actually talking about with great specificity. And this this idea that the waiver concept is the equivalent of what our chairman is trying to accomplish here today. It is not correct. And I think to Miss Maxwell's at least the first part of her statement
a few minutes ago, I believe I believe strongly um and I think many people do that part of helping children not only pursue what they want to pursue, but actually maintaining an interest in continuing to be in high school at all
is going to be led by capturing their interest. And in order and and in an effort to continue to capture their interest, let's give them the options to pursue the things that they want to pursue and not force them to take classes that they may not want to take in to the exclusion of the courses that
they would want to take. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> We got Mr. Holt. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, so I'm going to be brief. Um there are really two main motivating reasons for the vote that I'm going to make today. Um but before going into those,
just want to quickly say that I I echo everyone in thanking the students and everybody who showed up today. Um people who have emailed us. Um I think this is really an example of government working the way that that it should. And I'm really proud of our board um and of everyone who's been involved in this
effort. Um including uh Mr. Eie and and everyone else. I think everyone has had the best intentions which is what is best for students. Um and and that you know this has been a a great discussion of of what is best for students. So the two points that have been most
compelling to me are you know number one we have had this uh 2-year um requirement in our rules for some time now. And the question is should we decrease it? And I in order to do that,
I would need to believe that it that world languages were less important now than they have been in the past or or for some reason we had the wrong standard before. Um, and I don't think that's the case. I I think if anything, world languages are more important now than they have been in the past, that we
live in an increasingly interconnected world. Um, others have already spoken more eloquently about this than I'm going to. Um but that those not just the the technical competency of language but understanding of others sensitivity to cultures and and the fact that there are
different ways of life and and and and different ways of experiencing the world that that's more important now um and probably will continue to be. Um and then the second is the the information that we have been able to glean on what
students um themselves think is best. And you know the data points we have of the emails that Miss McInurf read through. Um and I'm I'm not convinced that that's only because they're you know like an interest group quote unquote that is more passionate about
the issue. I think that you know with a million students in the state of Tennessee um who are all being required sub subject to the waiver um uh to take these courses that if there were a lot of them who and I also think the word is out about this this is fairly well known
and publicized um that if there was a large ground swell of students who really didn't want to be in foreign languages and really want to take other courses that they are equally capable of reaching out to us and we just haven't heard from as many of those folks and I'm I'm really grateful for Miss App's work in in starting this um uh committee
and ability to get more formal student feedback from others and from the the data that you have gathered from that process so far as well and that and that was meaningful to me. Um so those are the two points that for me at least have been most compelling. I I think that on
the waiver um if if we do not approve the proposal that that there probably is some work that should be done on on setting what an appropriate standard is and I don't know who's um who has the authority the jurisdiction over that if that's this board or or others but um
you know that seems like that shouldn't just be a half-hazard process without any standard for whether a waiver should be granted or not but there should be some sort of guidance and some sort of oversight on how that's applied. Thank you, >> M. Megan, sir. >> I think the difference between just
making optional and having a waiver is with the waiver and I've experienced this in the past couple years with my own student or my own children when you go into the planning. They they they told me they said you can you can wave the fine art or you can wave the the
language, but it was the recommendation was to to go on with the the mainstream way of doing things. So it's almost as a parent, yes, I know that I had that ability, but the recommendation from those that were in the high school planning, the best thing would be to do the two languages. So that I think
that's the difference between making it optional and then make and having the waiver. But I do think that we do need to update the waiver and making sure that's more that's communicated better. >> So So based on that, my question is is why is it that and as a chair of the
board, I'm I'm going to support whatever decision we make. I want people to know that. But but why is it that we these 10 members of this board right now know what's best for those million students than to provide them the option to do
what they want to do without having to go through a waiver process. It still gives the opportunity for all those who want to take world language one year, two years, four years or whatever it is. But why is it that we as board members, the 10 of us, when 43 states in the
country have made this decision, you know, why is it that we know what's best for each one of those individual students? That's my question. >> Mr. Wills. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Um, so first
I'll echo what um Mr. Holt said about uh how this is a sign of good government. Um I've enjoyed the debate and I've learned a lot while we've done this. Um you know the part that I don't like about uh the good government is the fact that we can't talk about this ahead of
time. Um and and have uh really tried to learn each other's opinions uh uh ahead of time leading into this and I understand why that why that is the law. Um so Mr. Chairman, I will say first uh to you, I admire your dedication to this board.
Um I am usually uh ashamed that I can't uh meet your standard uh of how hard you work and um in your passion. Um so I've worked in and around state
government for uh going on 20 years uh my entire adult life. And there's been times that I've been on a side of an issue and tried to get a policy maker to agree with me and uh the policy maker would say, "I know you're on the right
side of this. That's what's best for the state, but my people don't want it." And that would be extremely frustrating for me to know that they chose that route. Conversely, I've been on the other side where um I tried to get a policy maker
to agree with me uh where their constituency uh was on my side and they chose to do what they thought was right for the state um rather than what their people wanted. Um so I feel like I'm in I'm in that um
right now and it's not an easy decision um at all. I'm not going to say which I think is right or wrong. Um, I think everyone's vote here, um, they have the best interests, um, at heart, for sure. Um,
but I think, um, for who I represent and who I have heard from, um, I will be voting no on this. Um, the people that I have talked to, I I do lean I don't like the language of the waiver at all. Um,
but I do lean that that is a safety mechanism uh to allow me to vote no. Um, I say it again, Mr. Chairman, I respect you so much uh and consider you one of my great friends and I hate to disagree with you on this. >> Further comment.
>> So, I have one question. Um, where is the department on this particular item? We don't have an official uh position. I don't have a vote on this board. So, um I would just say philosophically.
Personally, I've I I've never believed in pushing things that are going to eliminate opportunities for students regardless because we can say, "Well, a kid's going to go a CTE pathway. They don't need it." Well, again, who's that
to say that that is a determination that that's not at the some later date going to be an advantage to them? Um, and if you take that away from them, that limits that potentially limits their opportunity or even their vision
for who they could be later on. So, again, that is my personal opinion. I'm not a voting board member. um and we do not have a position because it is you all are the policym um folks. So, and we're going to fix the guidance
language for school districts. >> Thank you. So, um, so I've had a lot of conversation, um, about this item back in my district, uh, particularly with a group of superintendent just
roughly a month ago and, um, have read all the emails and, um, you know, thought a lot about this particular item. And one of the central questions
that I thought through in my mind was the why. So why do we have two credits? Well, I presume it is because
that is a standard or an expectation that we have that students come out with an appreciation of foreign culture, foreign people through the foreign
language. And that expectation in my mind is about citizenship. It's not necessarily about a job. It's not necessarily about
uh traveling to a foreign country, but it's more about understanding the other person and understanding the other person, whoever they are, wherever they come from.
foreign or domestic is of value as a human being um as a citizen. Where you work, where you live, how you raise your children, what you
teach them, what you bestow upon them in terms of values. And so I view this much more um dynamic than just learning a language and learning how to speak a language.
And so similarly as we applauded yesterday the English language arts standards review process which set forth a certain set of expectations that we expect from students across Tennessee which
is our charge to do in making decisions for the 1 million students across Tennessee. We applauded their that committee's uh commitment to raising the bar for Tennessee to put
us in a better place as a state. Um we also applauded their ability to clarify things that needed to be clarified as well as removing ambiguity from those
standards. And so I view this through that same lens that the expectation is there to produce students that go out to be good citizens and good human beings. And
um our charge as policy makers is to remove the ambiguity, provide clarity and the flexibility that exists today
can be fixed through policy. If we wanted to create a standard waiver that had to be utilized in a standard way across the state of Tennessee, we
have the power to do that. We don't have to take a faulty waiver and figure out how to make a faulty waiver better. We have that power. And so I submit that,
and I said this when we were um at our November board meeting, we can get to the same place that we're all trying to get to. The route that we take to get there seems to be what the
debate is about. So for parents to have and students to have the flexibility to say I want to opt out that exists today. We can fix it. We can make it right. We can make it
standardized and we can make it uh um rigid enough where it's not just a superintendent saying you can do it or you can't do it. So we have the ability
to through policy to repair those things and present students with the flexibility to go whatever direction they want to go and parents to sign off on that and that student goes forward with their academic success to pursue
whatever route they want to and those who want to pursue the foreign language experience still have that opportunity to do that. So, I leave that as um my opinion and perspective on this and
appreciate our chairman's leadership because all of these thoughts, opinions, perspectives have come about through this process that he has led and I applaud everyone for the diligence that they've applied and letting their voices
be heard. I'll say to the young people here today, you have um been exemplary in presenting your opinion and perspective. You're doing it now on this particular world language option. But don't let it
end there. You now have a skill. You now have an ability that can be applied in any issue that you see that needs to be addressed in your community and beyond. So, thank you for being here today and look forward to um the ultimate outcome
of this decision. Mr. Mau, >> thank you, Mr. Chair. That was uh well said. Um I'd like to respond to a couple comments, but first I want to put our legal counsel Rachel Sup on notice. I'm going to ask a question here in a second with respect to the extent to which we
can either in the future or even today move to require that a waiver uh is first of all standardized. Secondly, and and then to what extent can the waiver simply be an opt out option? In other
words, it's no longer at the discretion of a superintendent because we may have superintendents that never approve waiverss. Um, so I'd like to ask that question here in just a minute. Um, great comments. I agree with you that this is more than um a conversation
about jobs. I agree with you 100% that it's more than just a conversation about world travel and more than uh just um coming to know a language. Uh I agree with you also that a big piece of this is
richness of citizenship that goes beyond whatever life each of us are living. In other words, be beyond our own um experiences in our local uh area etc etc.
the the the heavy weight on the scale for me though and and I would suggest to everybody in this room as you look around there is a significant demographic of stakeholders that are subject to this conversation today that are I'm pretty sure are not represented at all in this current room
and that is the people who are trying to put food on the table. It is the approximately 15 14 15% of Tennessans that live at or below the poverty level. it is the approximately additional 30% of
households that are not technically below the poverty level but because of uh the number of children they may be trying to support etc etc are having a hard time making ends meet I don't believe that that stakeholder group is represented or represented well in this
population here so on the one hand I agree it's about citizenship but there are people who will be impacted by this decision today who desperately need to put food on their table and who desperately need that job. And I don't believe that forcing them,
unless they happen to even know that a waiver exists, forcing them to spend many, many, many hours in their high school career learning foreign languages when they could be applying that time to preparing themselves to put food on
their own table and to put food on the table for their own children. I I don't believe that um that we should remove that option from them today. Uh turning to Miss Sup, uh is there an
option to to what extent could we move today or in the future to uh either either require a standardization of that form or even go so far as to say if the form is filled out and the parents sign it and the student signs it, then it's simply an opt out and they don't have to
take the foreign language even if the superintendent disagrees. >> That's a great question. I think uh the consensus I imagine would be that regardless of whatever the outcome of the vote, it is language regarding the waiver that should be clarified for the
sake of students, parents and the directors who have to make these decisions. I imagine would like some clarity um as well. The current wording um says that the director of schools may wave the requirement to expand and
enhance the elective focus. I interpret that to mean um that unless they're denying it because they feel it would not uh expand or enhance the elective focus, there's really no other reason they
should be denying it. Um but I do think if a student is in one school district versus another, we want to make sure there's consistency in how how it's um responded to if they were were to submit a waiver request. And I think it's only
fair to to students and parents to have an understanding that when they submit this waiver request um what are the factors that the director of schools is going to consider in making the determination. And I think the more that we can standardize it at the state level to make it clear to directors what they
should be taking into consideration when making these decisions versus what they cannot be taking into consideration. Right? We don't want it to be just a person's personal feelings on the topic. um we want it to be for the purpose of expanding and enhancing the elective focus and outside of doing that uh it it
doesn't seem like it would be in compliance with the intent of that rule to be able to deny it for a subjective reason. So I do think we have the ability in rule to clarify what should be uh taken into consideration when a
waiver request comes in uh and what are the allowable bases for denying a waiver request and I think that would be for this board to determine you know what should a director of schools consider. I think if you want to you do have the
option to make it more of a an opt out where it removes the subjectivity. So, if you wanted to amend the rule to say if this is submitted and signed by the parent um and is being requested to expand and enhance the elective focus,
the director of schools has to grant it. So, I think we have a lot of flexibility um to discuss and shape what that would look like. And I I hope that answers it, but you can follow up. I'm happy to provide more clarity.
>> Uh thank you. That that that thank you. That does answer my question. Um I'd like to think on that on I'd like to think on your response a little bit. So I'll seed the floor. >> Okay. Final comment from Mr. EB. >> One thing with regard to that waiver. Uh
the current rule thinks under certain circumstances which is very ambiguous and not defined. That's what got us into the problems that that we're into right now. The different definitions by each district. If we go with this, you know, I think
it's critical that that the options are provided to the students that they can take other courses and not have a diploma that has been decreased in value
than a standard diploma. >> Mr. Jensen >> uh just one comment on the somebody said we have two year or two whatever it is requirements that's got a history that somebody in
our place years ago whatever decided that's what it was going to be. They also put in the waiver. So while historically there's the two requirements there's also a waiver there. And I it seems to me that that is
a big question is how do we clarify that so that there's not confusion and probably more importantly that as we've said that people that feel beyond that that they there that they should be able to get out can do it without it becoming an issue. And how many school districts
do we have? Uh yeah. So in 127 districts that is interpreted at at that ground level in a way that is not consistent across the state. So I don't know if we can amend that at this moment but that
seems like after all this discussion that seems to be a good conclusion or could be a good conclusion. small. >> Um, from a from a um
I guess a technical perspective, Mr. James, uh, if if one were to want to propose to simply change the word from may to shall, is that something that we could procedurally do today? And how how would
that proposal be made? uh either in conjunction with the current motion or uh subsequent two. So um are you asking can you reconstruct this item into uh in other words strike all the language that's that's in there
and simply make it a change to the waiver to to reconstruct the waiver as not being an optional item. Right. So, you're talking about a motion to substitute um
for the proposal in front of us and to replace it with um with a motion to or I'm sorry, and replace that with with a change to the the rule uh which would
do nothing more than outline the specific criteria that a superintendent must must follow Is that right? >> I I'm envisioning that there there could be a few different ways that this could be done. Um uh one being we vote on this. Let's assume for just a moment that it doesn't prevail, that the motion
does not prevail. Uh you know, one option would be I could subsequently make a motion to change the language of the current uh rule from that term may to shall and then presumably leave it up to the department and the state board to work out the technicalities of the form
itself. I'm not sure that the board would have to vote on how that form is presented. Uh, another option might be to in fact attempt to amend the current motion. Um, I'm not sure which of those would be the easiest or most clear to all involved, but I'm just trying to
understand, but basically to the board, what I'm suggesting here is I I do respect everything that's been said here. I think it's been some some absolutely fantastic insight shared today. Uh I'm seeing potentially that there's a place where we could go here
that that arrives at where all of us are trying to swim, which is to say, hey, we're not going to change the the the world language requirement from two to one. But we are going to uh address this
waiver concept that has to Mr. Holt's uh point has been around for a very long time and the point that Mr. Jensen made has been around a very long time. We're going to uh both clarify and remove the potential for widely varying outcomes
across across districts and simply say if a child elects to opt out, here's the form to do it. uh the parent has to sign, child has to sign, who whatever the current requirements are, but it's no longer at the discretion of the superintendent for reasons that we don't
know to decide whether or not to grant it in one case and not grant it in the other. It's simply the ability for both a parent or a guardian and the child to elect to opt out. I I'm suggesting that that might be a path that we could take today that finds the right balance of all the
different conversations that we've been having. So, I'm asking you, Mr. James, technically, how might that be done? >> Well, there you go. >> Sorry, I've been trying to stay quiet. >> I must say I've never been more proud of our board than today. This is just the
ep epitome of thoughtful policym uh playing out. So, I hope people are paying attention. Y'all are wonderful. Um I think my opinion, I would defer to Mr. pay as our general counsel to suggest otherwise if I'm wrong but I think because of the item and the complexity of various places that would need to be edited to make what you just
suggested Mr. Mullenhau true we would want to bring it back in May on first reading but fails today I think it would be hard it's not as a matter of just changing one word there's a number of things in that red line that would need to be adjusted to bring to fruition what you described which I do think is often or what I'm hearing many members say but
Mr. Hey, please weigh in if you feel differently. I just think it would need to come back probably with a a revision on first reading. >> No, I do think um I would agree with Dr. Morrison. Um you know, certainly it can be changed from May to shall if that is the the will of the board, but um there
are, you know, other pieces of language that would have, you know, trickle down effects that we might want to look at too. And I think um if you all felt you needed to take more more time to think through what the language should look like um based on the discussion you've had today, you know, there would be no
harm in in bringing it back in May with language that addresses the waiver issue more clearly. >> And that makes sense. And I've not I've not studied all the language with this concept in mind to date. Um and so I do understand the wisdom of
making sure that we get it right. it may not be as simple as changing one word. Uh on the other hand, we have a lot of um recency around this conversation. You know, we're all informed today. We we've had great conversations. We've we've learned a lot. And uh you know, if we
bring this up again in a few months from now, we're going to have to regurgitate a lot of this to try to get where we're at. So, um another I guess question for either Mr. Pay or or Mr. James, from a procedural perspective, would it make sense then to simply pass a resolution today and ask staff to come back with
whatever changes are necessary in order to effectuate the following an opt out form? Would that be a procedural procedurally acceptable approach? M >> Mr. Chairman and members, I I would say like you your your technical question is could you could it happen that way?
Could you simply replace and while you technically could, it would cause a great number of other problems. It it might be easier for you as a member to ask the staff to simply come back with a proposal or to announce to the body
after the matter in front of us is is disposed of that that you intend to to bring some directory language on first reading of a future item. And the reason I say that is is that we have to consider also uh giving notice right to
to everyone. Now obviously it is contained within this rule um but but it would cause you know has the potential to cause some other problems if whereas what you could do as a member is is announce at the end or after however
this body disposes of the item before it that that's your intention as a member or that you make this request of the staff to put it together for you. >> Yeah. And again, I would go back to just recency, the relevancy of the topic in in recency of the topic, trying to carry that
forward to actionable results. I'm also trying to account for being wise and judicious with our staff's time because there's a lot of things going on. And I uh I would like to at least get a pulse. Is this board supportive of that concept? Because if we're not supportive of that concept, maybe it's not maybe it
doesn't make sense to have our staff work on this for months and then bring it back up again. Whereas, if if we can if we were to pass a resolution and say we are in support of the opt-in concept, we're not we're going to we're not in support of doing away with the two-year the two credit requirement, but we but
we are in favor of an opt-in form, then that would at least give our staff some direction and uh we wouldn't be potentially putting ourselves in a situation where we're just wasting a lot of time. >> But I would also defer this to Mr. Eie because this is I think subjective
>> you're missing a point, >> Commissioner. Yeah. So, I just want to make sure we're clear though. There's two issues here. So, the issue that the student was referring to and what I was trying to say is that every school district other than the May that's that's one issue, right? The other issue
is every school district has their own op form, opt-in, opt out forms, waiver forms. And so part of the problem that she raised was that um the form that they have to sign I guess in that district is very negative right so
that's another issue that we want to offer support to also help if we're going to create you know we can uh we can propose a template and then urge districts to adopt that template so that it isn't this negative if you don't take
two foreign languages you're doomed for life right um we can change that so that it's in a more positive. So I think it would also ensure that we are working together to make sure that this template also fits the need here. So that you know I I just wanted to make sure we
understood there is two different issues here. It's not just the may it's also the way some of these waivers are written at the local level that is also creating some confusion and consternation. >> Yeah David >> yeah but if we do what Mr. Mr. Mullen
are saying direct uh the districts through rule or policy that they shall uh accept the waiver then it then then it's not
the district's decision if we write the waiver in a form that says you know my student my I I request a waiver from this foreign language class for such in such a reason or something. And I I
would contend though that we need to think about the words that we use because I don't want to get into certain circumstances. And I I do want I don't want to get into a concept that it appears that the student's diploma is any less than the
diploma that they have like but I based on that I would withdraw my motion if this board would agree to those concepts and either doing it through a resolution now or whatever. The other concern I have is is that you know this was going
to go into effect next year. I hate to wait for another year, but there is a waiver process >> for students that they could use this year. As long as the districts understand our concept, our idea, our reason, they'd be more willing to take
that waiver process now as that make sense. >> Yes. So on that suggestion, Mr. chairman. Um since the matter is before the body, um we would have to get
consensus for it to be removed um from consideration. So, um I guess if you are in favor of the item being rescended
just by show hands does the body pass it to >> the motion being withdrawn to approve. Does the body >> consent >> consent to the motion for the motion to approve being withdrawn?
>> And I guess the only way you can do that is to for us to know is to for >> you say is there objection? >> Is there objection to the motion being >> procedural question? Um this my understanding is this was moved into the realm of a roll call vote. Do we need a
roll call in order to um withdraw the motion or can that be done >> as a single vote? >> Chissy wanted a roll call vote. >> U Mr. Mr. Vice Chairman of members the the posture of the body at this moment is that is that uh the motion to adopt
the um Mr. Mr. Chairman Eie would like to withdraw that since the matter has uh had some substantive debate in front of the body. It becomes it becomes the product of the body at that point in time and so by unanimous consent he he
can withdraw that and then it would uh it would simply not have had action taken on the item. Uh so the the question in front of the body is is there objection to with withdrawing that motion and then he can he can table it
at that point in time since it's his proposal. >> So is there objection? It appears there there is none hearing. >> Then then I request to table that motion and and request that we go back and look
specifically about how that waiver can be more generally written. And Mr. Mullenau had some good words and etc. I turn it over to you. I I would just ask um Chairman Eevee um would you consider or would you like to
uh to request that this body pass a resolution to uh direct staff to present uh a process and form by which there's an opt out option? >> Yes, I would move for that.
>> Okay. I'm told that a resolution is not before the body and it's not on the calendar or on the agenda. just >> but but we can ask we can ask >> the staff >> just like we asked before to have the meeting back in May. We can ask the staff
>> to develop a a resolution and uh that they would then bring back that we could vote on >> in deference to your initiative in this whole effort. I guess I would just turn it back to you and just ask how would you like to present that? Yeah, I would
like to have the resolution to say that the waiver uh that >> Hold on one second. Hold on one second. >> So, let's deal with the first motion to table the item. So, is there a second for that? >> Second. >> Okay. Do we need a roll call vote on
that? >> I have a question first. Does that mean like when we said table >> what >> parliamentary? >> Yes. >> Is that okay? >> Yes. >> Yes. What does that mean by tableabling? Does that mean we we can it'll be brought back up again or if it has
potential to get brought up? It >> could be. It doesn't have to be. >> The body could lift it from the table with a 2/3 motion if >> that's not like happened. >> It could be some future. >> Okay. So, we have a motion. We have a
second. Um, let's do a roll call vote on tableabling the item. May >> Excuse me. May I ask a clarifying question? >> Sure. >> Um, if the motion were voted on and voted down today, it could be brought again in the future as well, right?
>> So, I think as a practical matter, it doesn't have that >> the motion the motion should if this motion succeeds, we call the role and six of the 10 voting members vote yes. So a yes here is to table the item. Then
it's laid upon the table and to take it off the table in the future would take u I I believe it's a two-thirds majority to to take it off the table. Now that doesn't prevent the author uh from from bringing a substantially similar item at a future meeting. Okay.
But but that that item would be tabled. So >> Okay. Let's call the roll. >> Mr. Cobbins. I >> Mr. Holt. >> Hi, >> Mr. Jensen. >> Mrs. Cobb. >> I >> Mrs. Maxwell. >> Hi,
>> Mrs. McInturf. >> Mr. Mullenhower. >> Hi, >> Miss Sap. >> Mr. Wells, >> I >> Mr. Chairman, Eie, >> I >> 10 eyes, Mr. Chairman. >> All right. So, the item >> the matter is tabled. And so, now,
>> Mr. So now uh what I would like to do was this would this be done by a motion or just direct the staff to develop uh language that waiverss
shall be accepted by the superintendent and um what the requirements are you know signed by the by the student and signed by the parents. Um,
>> okay. That >> or guardians. >> Or guardians. Thank you. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. >> Right. >> Oh, and one other clause in that the diplomas that students who receive under those waiverss is no less than the
diploma that students who don't have the waivers receive. >> State again. Can you state again what you're asking the staff to do for the record? >> Sure. I'd like the staff to develop a U waiver language that then we would bring
the vote on. That would say that the waiverss shall be accepted by the superintendents and that the diplomas that students who receive those waiverss shall be of equal value
and no less than students who receive diplomas without the waiverss. Does that sound right? Okay. >> All right. If there's no objection, we'll presume consent.
All right. So, order. >> That was a good discussion. >> Yes. Well done. All right. >> The accountability hearings. >> Are we on the uh final readings? Where's my
>> We are letter >> final readings. >> Final reading. A >> final reading. A roll call vote. Organization administration of school rules. Oh, this is a good one, too. 052010231. Good afternoon, Mr. Chairman and members of the board. My name is Skyler Travis,
associate counsel with the Tennessee Department of Education. Miss Ballard sends her apologies that she was not able to be here to present this item on final reading. Before you today on final reading are revisions to the state board's organization and administration of schools rule 05201
02.31. The revisions to this rule were largely precipitated by the passage of chapter 235 of the public acts of 2025 which simplified language and procedures regarding the use of stockpile days by
districts. These those statutory changes and the corresponding changes to this rule did not change the allowable uses of stockpile days but removed some commissioner approval requirements while still ensuring that districts document their allowable use of stockpile days.
Additionally, the revisions removed detailed language in the rule that restated the same language found in statute regarding things like maximum class size. With these revisions, the rule will simply point to the appropriate section of the code. State board staff held a rulemaking
hearing between first and final reading and received one public comment. No revisions were made to the rule between first and final reading. The Department of Education recommends approval of this item on final reading. The state board of education staff concurs with this recommendation.
>> We have a recommendation for organization administration school rules 0520102.31. Is there a motion to accept? >> So move. >> Was that was that Mr. Wales? >> Jensen. >> Oh, you had your mouth and heard the
voiceless. Okay. Mr. Jensen moves and Mr. Wells seconds. Is there discussion? I do have a question going back to uh the public comment that we heard this morning would be applicable to this rule. Is that correct?
>> Yes, chairman. >> Okay. So, uh why would we not put it in rule? My understanding is it's already in law. Many things are in law we put in rule.
So the question is why why would that not be appropriate here in rule? >> Thank you for the question and certainly appreciate the comments that have been made earlier today as well. Uh in this instance uh a need to implement,
interpret, administer or fill in any procedural details regarding the period of silence or prayer that is currently mandated in TCA 496 104 was not identified and um after discussion we would not want to promulgate a rule that
solely restates the legislaturator's substantive mandate already found in statute. So the reason is the fact it's already in law then it doesn't also need to be in rule for the school systems to
implement as required by law. Correct. >> Correct. >> Okay. I just want to clarify that. Other questions or comments? No other questions or comments. We have a recommendation uh motion and a second
for organization administration school rules 0520 010231. This is a roll call vote. Mr. James, >> Mr. Cobbins, >> hi >> Mr. Hold. >> Hi. >> Mr. Jensen. >> Hi. >> Mrs. Gob. >> Hi. >> Mrs. Maxwell. >> Hi.
>> Mrs. McInturf. >> Hi. >> Mr. Mullenhower. >> Hi. >> Ms. Sap. >> Hi. >> Mr. Wills. >> Hi. >> Mr. Chairman Eie. >> Hi. >> Mr. Mr. Chairman, you have 10 eyes. >> Motion passes. >> Thank you. >> Next is coordinated school health policy
4204, Miss Lori Paisley. >> Good afternoon. I am Lori Paisley, assistant commissioner of the division of coordinated school health at the department. Coordinated school health program policy 4.204 204 sets forth the minimum requirements for school districts to use in developing their own
guidelines and procedures for addressing the health needs of their students to improve student opportunities for academic achievement. This item updates language within the policy to align with statutory requirements and language
found in TCA 4910003 as well as to reflect the current practices and needs of school districts and to enhance student health as identified by our content experts for each of the eight coordinated school health components.
There have been no changing changes since first reading. The department recommends approval of this item on final reading and the state board staff concurs with this recommendation. >> We have a recommendation for coordinated school health policy 4204. Is there a
motion for acceptance? So move. >> Vice chair comments moves. Is there a second? Second. >> Miss Maxwell. Miss Maxwell second. Any discussion? All in favor then for accepting coordinated school health policy 4204 as
presented signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Next item, health education standards, Tennessee lifetime wellness standards. Miss Paisley again. >> Thank you. Chapter 224 of the public acts of 2025 now codified in TCA
4961304. amended TCA 4961304A to require family life curriculum to provide instruction and evidence regarding the positive personal and societal outcomes associated with the
success sequence defined as a method by which a person completes the following in sequence obtains a high school diploma enters the workforce or pursues a post-secary degree or credential enters into marriage age and has
children. Public chapter 224 takes effect on July 1st, 2026 and applies to the 2026 2027 school year and each school year thereafter. This item proposes a new standard for the 2026
2027 school year to ensure that students are instructed on a success sequence in accordance with public chapter 224. Additionally, chapter 164 of the public acts of 2025, now codified in TCA
4961304, also amended TCA 4961304A to require family life curriculum to educate students in grades 9 through 12 on our state's safe haven law, which allows mothers of newborns to surrender
unharmed babies to designated facilities within 45 days of birth without fear of being prosecuted. Public chapter 164 requires guidelines and educational materials to be developed and distributed to each local education
agency serving students in grades 9 through 12 and to each public charter high school before the start of the 2026 2027 school year. This item proposes a new standard for the 202627 school year
to ensure that our students are instructed on the safe haven law in accordance with public chapter 164. Minor revisions were made between first and final reading to ensure alignment with public chapter 224. The department
recommends approval on this item on final reading and the state board staff concurs with this recommendation. We have a recommendation for health education standards Tennessee lifetime wellness standards grades 9 through 12. Is there a motion to approve on final reading? >> So move.
>> Vice chair comments moves. Is there a second? Miss McInturf seconds. Any questions or comments? All in favor then for approving health education standards Tennessee lifetime wellness standards grades 9 through 12
signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Next is Education Preparation Policy 5.504. And uh Dr. Nelson, you don't have to read the whole cover sheet. Just quickly summarize it. We're kind of short on time.
>> Sure, absolutely. Hello. Good afternoon. I'm Jennifer Nelson, senior director of educator preparation at the department. Uh this item presents the following revisions to the ed prep policy 5.504. Uh it provides candidates in an internship or job embedded clinical
practice. the limited flexibility to complete requirements in adjacent school years. Um provided that uh the totality of the clinical practice must be equivalent to one full uh academic year. At least 100 days of the internship or
job embedded clinical practice must include direct teaching experiences and the EP requests permission from the department for the candidate to complete in uh the clinical practice in adjacent years. There have been no changes to this item since first reading and the Tennessee Department of Education
recommends approval of this item on final reading and the staff uh the SBE staff concurs with this recommendation. >> Thank you. We have a recommendation for education preparation policy 5.504 on final reading. Is there a motion to accept? >> So move. >> Vice Chair Cence moves. Mr. Jensen
seconds. Any questions, comments? All in favor signify for education preparation policy 5.504. 504 signify by saying I I opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Next item, professional assessments for Tennessee educator
policy 5105. Miss Taylor Reed. Likewise, just summarize. >> Good afternoon. Taylor Reed, senior director of lenture for the department. Tennessee State Board of Education Professional Assessments Policy 5.105 outlines general lenture requirements and assessment requirements. This item
amends section two by removing outdated language related to the acceptance of the principles of learning and teaching assessment. This item also proposes revisions to the specialty area content assessments by adding titles for the national evaluation series or NES assessments to applicable Tennessee
endorsements. Uh these expanded titles provide opportunities for educators to demonstrate content knowledge to obtain, renew, reactivate or expand their educator license. There have been no changes since first reading. The Department of Education recommends acceptance of this item on final reading. The SBE staff concurs with this
recommendation. >> Is there a motion to accept professional assessments for Tennessee Education Policy 5.105? Miss Cob moves. Is there a second? Mr. Wells seconds. Any questions or comments? All in favor for professional assistance
for Tennessee Educational Policy 5.105 signify by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Thank you. Next item, graduation permissions and substitution policy. Miss Brianna Summers. Summarize.
>> Good afternoon, cherry band members. Brianna Summers, director of policy and academics. As mentioned, graduation requirements and substitutions are among our most frequently asked stakeholder questions. So, this item, similar to the one I presented first, is just further clarifying things for counselors um and
local folks making decisions for students. Um there have been no substantive edits uh between first and final reading beyond some course changes. >> We have a recommendation for graduation permissions and substitution policies 3103. Is there a motion to accept?
>> So move. >> Vice Chair Cins moves Miss McInurf. Did you >> I saw that smile. >> Any questions or comments? We have a motion and a second for graduation permissions and substitution policies 3.103.
All in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. Next item, education preparation providers and specialy program areas approvals. Dr. Jennifer Nelson. Again, >> good afternoon. Jennifer Nelson, senior
director of educ educator preparation at the department. I will try to be as fast as I can on this one. Um, so, uh, this item, uh, delivers action recommendations for educator preparation providers and their specialty area programs or what we like to call SAPS.
We have five of them, and I'll go through them as quickly as possible. Tennessee State University participated in a Cape State probationary review in spring of 2025. The provider is recommended for full approval, minor stipulations for the initial lensure
provider level. Uh in terms of the SAPS, they are being recommended for full approval, full approval, minor stipulations and probationary approval, major stipulations. Those are all delineated in the cover sheet. Tennessee Tech participated in Cape State review
in spring 25. Tennessee Tech is recommended for full approval. All specialty area programs are re for recommended for full approval as well. Aquinus College participating as state managed uh review in the spring of 2025.
Aquinus is recommended for full approval as well as all of their specialty area programs. Knox County EP participated in a state managed full approval review in the spring of 2025. Um it is recommended that they meet
expectation on all standards. Uh so full approval and full approval on their specialty area programs. Teach for America Memphis uh participated in a state managed review in spring of 2025. The EP did not meet expectations on standards one and five with stipulations
in both standards. All reviewed specialty area programs are recommended for full approval minor stipulations. Uh therefore TFA Memphis is recommended for probationary approval major stipulations and their specialty area programs are recommended for full
approval minor stipulations. And uh last is Le Moine Owen College. They submitted an uh educator preparation provider proposal for a recommendation of initial approval. Uh the review considered key components
uh of the state board uh preparation rule and policy and literacy and specialty area standards. The review team concluded that Le Moine Owen College does not meet expectations on the initial EP proposal and is therefore recommended for denial of initial
approval. The Department of Education recommends acceptance on this item on first and final reading and the state staff uh concurs with this recommendation. >> We have a recommendation for education preparation providers and specialty area programs approvals. Is there a motion to
accept? So move vice chair comments moves. Is there a second? Mr. Jensen accept. Are there questions? >> Question on Lemon and College. Um
are I guess with their denial? What do they have to do to come back and be approved? >> Thank you. That's a a good question. They are already working on uh their next uh application. So, we will
continue to provide support for them. Um, there's no timeline. They can uh whenever they're ready to uh resubmit, they are welcome to do that. >> I had a question on TSU. It has major stipulations uh with approval. My
question is is what's the corrective action process and verification that they have corrected those items? >> Thank you for that question. uh start this afternoon, we will send them an email that uh begins the action plan process. They will have 90 days to
uh we have a template that they will complete uh and we will work with them until it is approved. They will identify um the the causes uh this for the stipulations and then they will set goals and then we will work with them uh
and have monitoring uh until their next uh review. Thank you. Any other questions or comments? We have a motion and a second for education preparation providers and special area programs approvals. All in favor signify
by saying I. I. Opposed. Motion carries. Next is 2025 charter authorization valuations. Miss Ally Reid. >> Good afternoon. Ally Reid, chief of strategy for the state board. On first and final reading today are 2025 charter
school authorizer evaluation reports. Charter school authorizers in Tennessee are evaluated with few exception bianually and the process includes a thorough review of documentation that's submitted by the authorizer as well as interviews with school leaders
authorizing staff and a consideration of any appeals history if applicable. In 2025 we evaluated three authorizers. Hamilton County Schools, Knox County Schools, and Rutherford County Schools. This cohort also typically includes Memphis Shelby County Schools. However,
the authorizer received two consecutive exemplary scores and was exempt from this round of evaluations. I'd also like to point out that this was the first year that Rutherford County Schools received an evaluation of their authorizing practices as they now have two charter schools in operation in
their second year. Excuse me. You are voting today to approve the overall ratings for each of the evaluated authorizers, which includes Hamilton County Schools with a score of 2.1, nope, 2.71 out of four, which falls in the satisfactory range. Knox County
Schools with an exemplary score of 3.62 out of four, and Rutherford County Schools with a score of 3.16 out of four, falling in our commendable category. Before I open it up to any questions or comments, I just want to take a moment to publicly highlight a few best
practices that we observed during this evaluation cycle, particularly from the two authorizers who received a commendable and exemplary this round from Knox County Schools. They earned their first score of exemplary and is an excellent model of continuous improvement. Using their 2023
evaluation, the authorizing staff provided feedback and they prioritized uh feedback from the evaluation report in 2023 to drive improvements. The authorizer has two charter schools that are currently in operation serving just 1% of the district's total student
population. Yet, the district staff is incredibly intentional about their partnership with their charter schools, ensuring that they're treated as equally important. and another uh offering in their choice choice portfolio. The authorizing staff has done an excellent job ensuring that the various
departments within the district that engage with charter schools regularly attend charter trainings and team meetings to align support and streamline district communication. As far as Rutherford County Schools, as I mentioned, they're a new authorizer and earned an impressive score of
commendable in their first evaluation. This staff has been really actively engaged and absorbing as many professional development and learning opportunities related to charter schools that they could find and has formed strong relationships with within our authorizing community in Tennessee. The
evaluation report highlights several strengths and best practices including a roles and responsibility tracker that clearly defines expectations for the authorizer and the charter school in serving special populations of students. And this transparency really helps to eliminate gray areas when ensuring
students are receiving the resources and services that they need. So I'll pause there. Happy to answer any questions or comments. >> We have a recommendation to approve the 2025 authoriz charter authorizer evaluations. Is there a motion to approve? >> So moves.
>> Mr. Mullen moves. Miss Maxwell second. So are there questions or comments? >> Mr. Chair. >> Mr. Mullen. >> Thank you. Uh Ally, who who on the Knox County team did you interact with? uh several individuals, Teresa Nixon leads that uh that work for their team.
Um but of course we engage with the superintendent and the board chair as well. >> Okay. Yeah. I just wanted to recognize them for their excellent work. Very very proud of them. Thank you. >> Absolutely. >> Thank you, Terry, wherever you are. >> Is it Terry or Teresa? >> Teresa. >> Teresa. >> Yes. >> Yeah. Congratulations to Knox County. My question is is how do you take lessons
learned from Knox County where they're obviously doing well and move them to Hamilton County or some of these others to to move up. >> Yep. We have uh several different opportunities for authorizers to connect with one another. And as I mentioned, that's exactly how Rutherford ended up in the place they did. They really took
advantage of that. And so all of our authorizing staff members are connected to each other and regularly engaging. I know that Knox County is uh works really closely with Hamilton County and Rutherford as they are some of our smaller authorizers um and they're regularly communicating with each other and sharing best practices. So all of
our authorizers are really comfortable just picking up the phone and asking each other different questions or resources as well as through our highest performing authorizers which is the charter school commission and Memphis Shelby County Schools are excellent in sharing resources and advice too. >> Thank you. Any other comments or
questions? I'm just cur we have >> We have about 120ish in operation. >> Other comments or questions? Have a recommendation for approving 2025 in a motion and a second 2025 charter
authorizer evaluations. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I opposed. Motion carries. Last item, State Board of Education Master Plan. Miss Ally Reed. >> Thank you. The last item on first and final reading is our refreshed master plan that will be in place through 2028
with your approval today. We began a nine-month process to update our master plan last May with a workshop presentation on strategic planning from the National Association of School Boards of of Education uh in which we discussed current trends across the country and best practices when revising
a strategic plan. From there, you appointed three of your colleagues, Mr. Holt, Miss McInturf, and Mr. Jensen to form a strategic planning committee responsible for overseeing our process which involved uh multiple meetings, stakeholder surveys um and lots of really thorough and thoughtful
conversations about how we wanted to adjust the master plan that you have before you now. As you read through it, you'll notice there aren't significant changes in terms of our strategic focus areas. We really kept those intact and most of the revisions live in the expansion of the actions of the board as
well as updates to our goals. You'll also see a larger introduction in the document that is intending to just further explain how we as a state board use the master plan um and our intention that the master plan is designed to highlight key focus areas but not meant
to um suggest that that is all that we work on. We know there are hundreds of things that the state board is responsible for and these are just a focus or to highlight particular focus areas that we want to spend more effort on in the next three years. Other revisions were made to closely
align our goals with those of our partner state agency uh organizations, state agencies. Thank you. Um equally focused on education in our state. And so thanks to the Department of Education and your team for your partnership in that as well as the Tennessee Higher
Education Commission for that partnership. At this time, I have asked our committee members if they wanted to highlight anything or share any comments. Um so I'll just open up to them as well as happy to answer any questions. Mr. Hul, um I just wanted to thank um
first of all, Miss Reed for her leadership in this entire process. This is the culmination of a long process that it you can't see it here today, but there was a lot of of uh feedback from stakeholders at many instances throughout the process. Members of the
committee, members of the board, um our our board chair as well participated in the process. Um and I'm really proud of the end result that we've reached. grateful for um our agency partners at Tekk um and the department as well for uh trying to ensure as much alignment as
possible in the master plans. We want to all be rowing together and I I think we've have uh hopefully achieved that. Um, and then also I I wanted to highlight in the final master plan that we've seen such great progress as a state in growth in reading and math
proficiency um to the point where there was a push from the committee to have our our goals now be above 50% proficiency. I really think that could be an exciting tipping point if as a state we we cross over that 50% threshold. It's no longer, we're proud
of growing, you know, from 37% to 41%, but we actually have a majority of the students in our state that are with rigorous standards and assessments, more than half of them are at the levels of proficiency. So, I'm I'm hopeful with the trajectory that we're on that we're
going to be able to meet that that goal. >> Other comments from board members? >> Mr. Jensen, >> quick comment. Mr. Hull, thank you for your leadership throughout the process. Uh, and Miss Ray, all the work that
everybody's done. Um, I I do think it's a document that's uh, in my mind, how do we broadcast it? What do we do to get it to the education committee at the Senate or the House of Representatives or or the governor's
office or wherever that might be, just so that there there's clear uh, communication on that to superintendent of schools. I mean, just so we're not just doing a document and then it it doesn't it does it's needs to be living, I think, is what I'm trying to say.
>> Good comments. >> Thank you, Ally, for all your hard work. I feel like this has been something you've been working on for over a year. Um, I love that we all worked together and we looked at the goals and it wasn't just something that we needed to check off the list because we were in need of of getting this to you all, but we
really debated and made it what we want it to be. We made the goals smart goals where we could actually look and see have we made those and what can we do to adjust. So I it was a great it was a great group. It was a good experience to have and thank you for joining us in all our meetings. Yeah, I I had the pleasure of joining I think all but one meeting
and I was really impressed with how the committee was working, the process that you were going through, like you say, going through each one of those and looking at word for word, what's the right words, what do we really want to do, how do we want to move K through 12 and then the the integration with higher
ed and with uh the workforce and all is critical with TDOE. That's critical that we continue to work closely and align together. So Ally, you did a great job of uh leading it and the the committee
were just was just outstanding. So uh >> thank you. >> Any other comments or questions? >> If none, we have our state board of education master plan for approval for 2026 2028. All in favor signify by
saying I. >> Oh, that's right. We didn't get a motion. >> Vice Chair Cins moves. >> Second, >> Mr. Hold seconds. Now, all in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Opposed. Motion carries. That
completes our formal agenda today. I I would just like to spend a few minutes and and talk about how proud I am to uh be a part of this this board and and work with each of you and and uh to have the honor to be the chairs. I think what we've done over the last year with
regard to this, I think we've demonstrated that we can bring a difficult issue together, that we can study it, we can evaluate it, we can come up with what I think is a good compromise. Sometimes I wish some of our other government officials would do just
the same. But uh I thank each of you for your input and your study and your participation has helped me out a lot. Obviously, we thank the students and the teachers and the input that we've gotten. Just because we don't agree doesn't mean
we don't respect and and uh but I feel positive about what we're coming up with. I think we're moving it in the right direction and it's something that will be better for all individual students and I thank each one of you for doing that.
>> All right. Any other business? >> One item. >> Yes, Mr. comes >> on the way out. Everybody hug somebody, please. >> Nothing else. Uh, any other business? And I declare the meeting adjourned. >> All right, let me see if I can get your
move.