 Thank you and welcome. This is the Education Committee and the Vermont House of Representatives. And today we are looking at Act 1, some requests from the Act 1 workgroup. And I thought we would start today. This is our ethnic studies and social equity workgroup. And I thought what we'd do is start with Jim Dammeray just presenting to us what Act 1 so we can have a better understanding for the people who weren't here of what the mission was in Act 1. And then we're going to hear a little better report from the workgroup and go from there. So Jim Dammeray, thank you. Okay, good morning. So for the record, Jim Dammeray, that's console. Can I show the screen? Again, great. Thank you, Jesse. Let's find Act 1 for you. Okay. So here is Act 1, which was passed in 2019. I'm going to start at the end actually, and then go back because at the end it's really all the work that's being done has a result. And that result is back somewhere in here. Yeah, okay, that's it. Sorry, I'm just trying to find out where to see board. Okay, here it is, right here on I. So we'll go through the duties of the group before doing that just to result of their work. So they're going to make a recommendation to the state board before June 30 of next year around ethnic and social equity study standards. The idea is that they're going to present to the state board a set of standards, which take into account perspectives of historically marginalized groups. And the state board will consider that. And will consider adopting that into a standards that will drive the curriculum in schools. So here's the things about this. First is the state board is not required to act. It's a may in terms of their duties here. They shall consider, but they don't have to act on this report. But the report is all about updating standards for marginalized students. So that's the end result of the work here. So let's go back now and take a look at what they're actually supposed to do. I'll go back to the beginning is how they are. I'll go through the findings. I will go through. Yeah, so first of all definitions are important here. I have a discussion with this person active about this definition here about ethnic groups. So just to remind them members that ethnic groups means non dominant racial and ethnic groups in the US, including people who are abnaki people from other indigenous groups, people of African, Asian Pacific Island. And then ethnic groups that have been historically subject to persecution or genocide. And then ethnic studies means instruction of students in pre K to grade 12 in the historic contributions and perspectives of ethnic and social groups so we talked about ethnic groups, we're going to come on to social groups right here. So it means women and girls, people with disabilities, immigrants, refugees and individuals who are lesbian gay bisexual transgender queer questioning intersects asexual or non non binary. So this ethnic studies as we talk about accompanies both the definition of ethnic groups and social groups. It was the sea creates the advisory working group of 20 members along through all these members but you have 10 members who represent the interest of ethnic and social groups to whom should be high school students. And then you have the bees of course. You've got Vermont college faculty expert ethics studies. You have the curriculum leaders association. Okay, and you get a human rights commission. The way in which the 10 members were appointed, who represent the ethnic groups social groups with by the culture for ethnic and social equity equity in schools. So the coalition is one who chose these appointments. So the working group had to represent the breath and geographical area within the state. And so the rest of this right here is quite standard going to the do these here. So the duties of the working group are first to review standards for student performance adopted by the shape board. And to recommend the state board updates and digital standards to recognize these marginalized groups. So, again, it's around standards. Not around curriculum, which is done at the local level, and the recommendations would be designed to increase cultural competency of students. To increase attention to the history contribution and perspectives of these groups promote critical thinking. Commit the school to eradicating racial bias and curriculum content and methods to enable students to safely explore these areas and to ensure that the basic curriculum curriculum programs are welcoming to all students. Okay, so the working group second duty is to review statutes board rules and school district and supervisory policies that concern or impact standards for student performance or curriculum education school. And then there's a permission to recommend to you for assessor changes with these goals in mind. But first one to the goals above. So I'll go to them again. And then the welcome you pass to report to you. Of any policy that identifies as being review or amendment in order to achieve these goals here. We'll go to them all again but these are all goals in line with promoting the historical contributions and culture, etc of these historically marginalized groups and getting children to appreciate. That. Then the, the do pass to do reports so the, this is a pass report for make March 1, 2020. We have a report that was due to December 15, 2020. And now we're up to this one here three, the report due next July, which will include recommend accessory changes. Any further findings from your state board rules and school district and supervision policies and recommendations for training appropriations to support implementation. And then can we talk about the duties of support so when it's all done. They'll give the state board the recommendations and the state where we'll consider them in terms of updating its standards. And then section two amended the state boards your powers and duties. So it's reporting on a supervisor union school. And let's be here. It's more of the detailed here so I says consistent with state and privacy laws and regulations and it says that hazing harassing or bullying incident shall be decided by incident type. And again by ethnic groups, etc. So we're detailed there. And that is about it for I think I have to say on this. So, should I keep this open show up or should I close this document for you. Why don't we close it so that I can see everybody. So I wanted to give folks that perspective. Since there were I think three of us that were here. I'm more than that. That's right. They're for new for new folks to that bill. Representative Coopley did you have something. No, okay. So with that context. If there are any questions about that I'd like to go on to our to our guests. So welcome. Thank you so much. Chair Web and members of the committee. My name is Amanda Garces. I am the director of policy education outreach for the Vermont Human Rights Commission. And I am also the chair of the act one working group. So, so happy to see you again. And we are at it again. So yeah, I think just for members that are new just, I want to just start by really just highlighting the existence of act one and all of it, all of our, you know, the history and background is in and the act one bill but just to remind ourselves, I always copy, you know, like I always have the green book with me everywhere I go just to remind ourselves that not not long ago 20 years ago in 1999. The Vermont advisory committee to the United States Commission on civil rights found that racism in Vermont schools was pervasive. The follow up report in 2003 said yes, some changes have been made. That was a progress report, but you know, still have a lot of problems and curriculum. It was one of the issues that were talked about around bias. And at 54, which pass, which, you know, a report that was done by the Human Rights Commissions in 2017, I believe, also talked about education and the need for a bias free curriculum. We have all kinds of statistics, including the fact that students with disabilities and black and brown students where this proportional impacted by policies, discipline policies in our schools. So, all of that was all of those reports and kind of lead to the creation of the actual and working group. So today, so we started the working group of four months behind the schedule. We didn't have our first meeting until December 2020. And we have been playing catch up to, you know, we still made our reports. I think, you know, like maybe just a month after. Our reports up to now have, have been made. And I guess we are here for a few things. One is to really ask for the support for the additional three additional members, which is a request we made last year before COVID started and we had to go into COVID mode. But we really feel that we need two more student voices in our working group. We've known that from the beginning of the work. We have amazing students that are giving us really great contributions, but they requested that in the first meeting we need more student voices and we want to honor that. And we also feel that we do need, and it was a request made by the indigenous communities by, you know, our Abanaki that we needed to have one more indigenous representation. So we're asking today to kind of honor the work and bring in those three more voices that can support the work. And that will mean that we need, it's like $1,500 a year for stipends. As the statue says, you know, we begin those members who are now requesting is like $50 a month. $50 per meeting up to 10 meetings a year is what the request is made. We asked the agency of education is about 1500 per member. So it's $4,500 in appropriations for that. So that that was one of the requests that we have today. And we've just submitted a report in January of this year, which included request for appropriation for believe was $118,000. And I'm going to go over a change in that on those numbers and just like give you a little report and mark is here. Mark introduce himself so people know that who Mark is so that we can talk to him. Good morning, all I'm Mark H. I'm the vice chair of the act one working group. Thank you, Mark, we have not had you in this year so welcome. Thank you, it's a pleasure to be here. Yeah, anyway, the two of you want to do it. It's fine. Great. Mark, you want to add something before I jump into other things. Just a little more context. Manda has kicked this off very nicely in February of 2020. Before COVID changed our world. The act one working group through a dedicated subcommittee drafted conceptualized and draft a very comprehensive survey that we disseminated to educators around to get their impressions. We are now working experience with our state educational standards. We are now in the process of studying those results. We also then shifted to a very intensive focus on the education quality standards eq us for short, which no doubt you are familiar with. This is actually sort of the foundation of our education system here in Vermont so much flows from it so we devoted several months worth of work to that effort as well and we have submitted a series of recommendations for changes to the State Board of Education, and that work is ongoing as well. And last summer. We reached out and I to the College of ethnic studies at San Francisco State University it is the oldest college of ethnic studies in the United States it's been in existence for nearly 52 years. There are only two colleges of ethnic studies in the United States. They're both in California the second open recently or was formed recently. Now state Los Angeles, there are a lot of colleges that offer courses and programs and ethnic studies but only two that have colleges dedicated to this work and we reached out to San Francisco because it really is sort of the pinnacle the studies of the United States, and we have made contact with two of the leading scholars and teachers in this field, who are interested in working with us in the next stage of our work which is probably the most critical and that is addressing the standards, analyzing them and reporting to you, and to the State Board of Education. And that's what we'll talk a little bit more after a mother finishes her remarks. So I also want to add that there's a lot of conversation in our state around curriculum bias and how that is impacting a lot of students. And so this is why this work is important educational standards so our work is not to write or draft any curriculum. It's our work and as it's our educational standards which is the learning goals for what students should know and be able to do at each grade level. And so this is why this is so critical educational standards. You know, allowed for local communities and educators to write their own curriculum, which is a detailed plan for the day to day teaching. That has been, that is our focus and that's what we're trying to do. So Mark and I, leading this group have been learning a lot and trying to figure out but at this point right now we're kind of at the crossroads. To the education quality standards kind of opens the door for a lot of things and we started kind of reviewing some of the standards and we kind of hit a wall part because we don't have the expertise in our working group or capacity or time. And there is no current funding for even administration so we are doing it all and we are really grateful to be able to do this work but capacity is very limited for for all of our members right and everybody's giving what they can. So we are a crossroad where we don't feel that we can do or that we should do just a okay job. We feel like this has such an impact to our schools to our state that we need to do it right. And by right means we need to bring the right level of expertise to support us in really helping us build a framework for questioning the standards the way that they need to be questioned. And this is why we had been talking with community response education community responsive education in San Francisco which are led by the ethnic studies professors and Mark can talk a little bit about that. So the community responsive this education program is affiliated with San Francisco State University's College of ethnic studies. And one of the things that's really exciting about working with them is that the people who founded the program lead it. They're not only scholars and researchers who are respected in their field but they're also teachers and they provide for excuse me professional and curriculum development expertise to public schools to teachers to community groups. Their goal is to make public schools as responsive to the needs of everyone in our community, as they should. And we want the school houses of the future to be places where all of our youth, all of their parents, all of their cultural heritage is in groups are respected are free from any kind of discrimination and persecution can achieve their potential. And this is what CRE focuses on. And this work of the standards is really the foundation of what comes next. And they are actually excited about working with us because a we are a state with an overwhelmingly white population. And they are traditionally people who work in communities with a much higher percentage of BIPOC individuals and students and communities. And they see the work that we're doing here in Act one as a very exciting opportunity, and an innovative one to expand the scope of ethnic studies. And to begin looking at how ethnic studies can be foundational to the work of schools here in Vermont, as well as anywhere else in the United States. And they're excited to be about the folks we've been talking to. Again, they're not just researchers and scholars which is critical and respected in their field, but they're on the ground. They're working in schools, and they're working with community groups, and that is really the heart and soul of the coalition that started this work of the Act one working group. We're not looking for them to do our work want to be really clear about. Now in the act one working group and Susanna, we will do this work, but we need their guidance and expertise to help us to structure it, the point us to where we need to focus our energies. Where are we strong in the stands, where are we deficient in the stand. How can they be improved, and how can we make education as effective as possible. We need them as guides as experts as Amanda said, and with that we're convinced that we can do this work ourselves, just as we've done already with the EQ us, and with our survey. Thank you. One year survey to be to be complete. We are analyzing it now so we had about 298 respondents which is. Was it educational personnel is it teachers or this survey was just for you. Yeah, for teachers, their staff of school districts. Yeah. Okay, great. And Susanna here too so Susanna wants to jump in. She's also part of the working. Yes. And I know she has a time. Okay, and time so thank you so much for joining us as well. Dr Davis appreciate having you here. And you've been, you've been in Vermont now for about a year or so. Coming up on two years, two years. Well we have one year that kind of blew up on us so. Yeah. But I don't think there was anywhere I would have rather been than than here so I was grateful for that. Thank you for the record Susanna Davis racial equity director. I am not a doctor. I just, I just play one in the pavilion. And I think we just dispense degrees here since we are the Education Committee. Yeah, yeah, well, we'll take it. And you know I really I don't have a whole lot to add actually I think that Amanda and Mark have done a great job of laying out where the where the group is. There is so much passion and expertise in the room and so much momentum we've identified real clear need that can help us accomplish the goals not just those as stated in the enabling statute, but also those that we've set for ourselves and that we'd like to see accomplished for schools across the state. I mean, of course, you all know that investment, especially in something like education, and especially in something like equity, it is continuous and, you know, for us to, for us to do the work and take the work seriously we've got to continue to to support it and in some cases, that means reviewing how we resource it every now and then to ensure that we're providing adequate support. And I think it might mean revising goals, missions, etc. So I really just want to echo what what Mark and Amanda have said I think they've done a wonderful job leading this group, as far as we've come, given our, our capacities or timelines, etc. And for us to enter the next phase of that work. I think it's an exercise in, in entrusting the community and trusting the subject matter experts to, to let us as state leaders know what they need, or what we need in order to proceed further in a way that's, that's going to serve the, you know, the spirit of the statute and also actually make a difference. So, I guess that was a really roundabout way of saying ditto to everything that was already said. Yeah, I, again, I just I have very strong and very positive feelings about the outcomes we can accomplish here. And I just want to make sure that we're we're cradling this work as much as possible. The committee has already had conversation about adding, adding members, student members and I think that that does not look like it's a problem at all from from recent experience conversations. We have struggled a little bit with the idea of the appropriation, going through in this way. Primarily because this isn't a group that appropriates and, and also that this is part should be part of professional development within within districts. I believe we have someone from the, from the AOE here as well. And that's not to say that this isn't a great idea, but maybe this is the wrong train to put that on. There's another another place that that we could address this and not clear about that yet, hoping we can get a little bit of help from the agency on that. And I see representative James has a question. Thank you chair web, and thanks to you for being here today. I just to refresh my memory. I thought there were two sort of distinct appropriation requests and I could be wrong but I thought one request was to hire a consultant to guide or support the working group as we've just been discussing, and then separately there was an appropriation request to send teachers out to San Francisco State and I view those two appropriations kind of differently. So am I am I wrong about that. Correct. You are correct. And, and so after we testified and all of that so we, we and would be meeting with a community response team and just like asking other consultants. Figure out that 25,000 is not going to get us too far either so we wanted to request a little change in the appropriation so we had requested 25,000 for the consultant. We requested 10,000 for accessibility issues so, as you know, any of these documents they were policies are jargoni. So, you know, that the general public doesn't really, you know, as a parent trying to understand the standards for our kids. All of that. We want this work to really be comprehensive. And we need to be able to make it accessible for the communities to understand what the process is going through so that we can get their feedback. We want to be able to make this information accessible for working group members who are from the community. Some who have requested this in terms of accessibility issue. So we need a 10,000 to hire someone that can help us with that accessibility issue there as many experts in the state, many that work with some of the disability rights organizations that do this beautiful work that can support that piece of it. So that was an appropriation for 10 plus so then, and then it was this is outside from the teacher training, and then another 5,000 which included the appropriations for the three members, and then 500 for the admin. Right now I'm paying out of pocket for the survey monkey for him, for example. And that's like $35 a month that that, you know, that it should be covered by this work, not by me. So the that so that, and then so we just don't think 25,000 is going to be enough. We did have a lot of conversations about how maybe we can do a work around with the teacher program. And like have them, and have us work with San Francisco state to try to figure out which teachers could go with their own PD money, or try to find some other way. So today we are changing that request to be 50,000 for the consultant. Plus the 10,000 for accessibility, plus the 1500, the 5000 that includes the membership and then technology fees. That's 65,000. I'm sorry. Is this something that could be addressed just by giving you more support from the agency. The standards work I don't believe can be addressed that way. I think we do need the resources of the experts we spoke to earlier. I don't think that in the 10,000 with accessibility, I'm not sure if they, if the AOE that's a question for the AOE, if they have the staff to support actually making all these documents accessible. But if they did have that staff. Yeah, that would be great. That would be the appropriate. Yeah, that would be great. Yeah. Okay. I don't see other questions if that is it I'll go on to just a careless. You don't see anything at the moment. So, stay with us. And just to careless. I believe I saw you here. I'm here. Hi everybody good morning. For the record I'm just a careless division director of the student pathways division at the agency of education and I'm happy to be here I know that there was some scrambling at the last minute. With some schedule changes. You know, and my understanding is that Secretary French has already testified to this and spoken to chair web. And I'm not sure if the agencies position on the bill has changed but I think I can And some of the issues that have been raised in particularly questions around where the agency can support the group, you know, my colleagues, Amanda and mark and Susanna, you know, I know well and Amanda and Susanna sit on a task force to diversify the educator workforce that the agency has been supporting for a couple years. So, obviously the agency completely supports the work of this group. Absolutely agrees that this is work that needs to be done. I do think that there's opportunity for more involvement and collaboration with the agency. I, you know, I know my, my team stands ready and, and I think I am on his invitation was able to work with the work group wants, and we were able to road test the tools that I think they spoke to in the report. Certainly, you know, particularly in looking at some of the recommendations they've made around revisions to the education quality standards. It's, it's in no way, you know, contrary to any of the work that we've been engaged in, as we've been working in parallel with the work group so certainly when it comes to accessibility, this is something that the agency has expertise in. Not only do we have to follow federal regulations that are fairly restrictive that exceed probably what most people have to comply with when it comes to communications. And we have trained web liaison throughout the agency as well as our communication director who can speak to this and that's something we have to do. In fact, if we don't do, we get our hands slept by the federal government so this is something that we actually I think are well positioned to address. Obviously, we also have teams devoted with the special education team, the MTSS team. We have folks who are responsible for titles and have expertise in English language learners, etc. So that that's work that we've been doing for a long time and certainly can assist with as well as also helping folks with the technical components of policy and schools, etc. You know, I think with the standards work I might disagree with Mark in the sense that we do have people who are well positioned and who've been engaged in this work who could be providing more assistance. We've actually been engaged in work around equity literacy, equity literacy grants. This is a round that went out in 2019 we've just launched another round of proposals around developing inclusive communities and education equitable equitable education systems. But I think also in looking at some of, you know, when we look at law, right, which is sort of the, the biggest most global bucket, and then we go down to rules which is what this group has been engaged in and that's like sort of the second tier of the education equality standards. These are really rough tools and then you start to get into specific content standards you start to get into policy and practice and so we've also been, as this group was working on the education quality standards, having parallel been addressing issues related to, you know, how do you implement and how do you practice this and how do you refine your proficiency based graduation requirements. And so we've got these tools and we've started to launch these equity spotlights on particular proficiency based graduation requirements as they pertain to specific disciplines and standards with corresponding resources that we're rolling out. And I'd love to start to bring the two pieces of work together so that we can start to scale these efforts. I do think that, you know, from the perspective of supporting professional learning. And there's an enormous amount of money coming into the state and particularly to the locals. In addition to some of the state grants that we have available around this work and particularly in engaging professional learning but also interrogating curriculum, and starting to engage in that refining revising curricular work that we think is particularly when it comes to then practice in the classroom, because certainly the one of the greatest influences is that when somebody goes into the classroom and closes the door. At some point, it doesn't really matter what the standards and particularly those big bucket standards, you can have people who engage in enormous and effective instruction that is inclusive and respectful and you can with those same standards have someone make curricular choices that result in harm and so I think, you know, exploring how we can provide guidance to locals to use the funds that they have available to support some of that professional learning and that curriculum redesign is an effective strategy that's worth exploring. So our programs have an extra 400 million coming to them as a result of 400 million federal funds. Yeah, I think as an interesting thought point, I know the Learning Policy Institute had put out some work around, you know, what do these funds mean and even identifying that one major lever that these funds can be used for is diversifying the educator workforce right so there is there how these funds can be used and not seeing these things as separate initiatives but really in thinking about how we engage in recovery work is the opportunity to think about redesign and achieving the goals of, you know, a fair and equitable education system that serves all students and starting to address these issues with the guidance of the work group who's who's already done exceptional work. So do you have a recommendation on on what we can do to support. It sounds like there's some alignment in some of the thinking but not necessarily the way to get there. So, you know, and I might, I might be misperceiving this so I would ask, you know, Mark and Amanda and Susanna to correct me but you know in reading the report it sounds like definitely there's just more work to do right. COVID through a wrench on everyone. Right. And so really, they've been taking this very, you know, thoughtful, reflective approach to the revision and that that revision process hasn't ended that it needs to be completed. And I think seeing that go forward and continue to complete it, but perhaps with some additional support or collaboration with the agency. And I know my, my content standard folks are sort of chomping at the bit would love to be working with this group. You know that might be a first step also as we're seeing how some of the funding issues that are coming in sugar out and and again I would just offer up that we can absolutely support, you know, that technical guidance piece that that was outlined in the bill. Thanks. You know, I, I'm glad to hear that we can help with some of the technical stuff. You know, I just want to put in a pitch for the concept of tapping into the consulting expertise of San Francisco, is it San Francisco State. Sorry. I, you know, I just this bill is so important. And this work is so important. And the final report is so important. And, you know, however we wind up recommending that the State Board of Ed revise our, our standards is just it, you know, really, really matters. And so to the thought of the AOE really getting engaged in this work. I would say yes, and you know it's unless I'm misunderstanding the funding request, I, you know, I was, I was less supportive of the idea of sending 30 teachers out because I felt like that was something that should be contained maybe in the final report. And we think we should do this. But in terms of tapping into what sounds like really unique expertise. You know, from an outside source, I don't see why the AOE and the task forces collaboration can't be informed by that in a really unique, you know, I don't want to say once in a lifetime chance but this is a big deal. And if we have experts who can help. I would be really supportive of that, especially if it's at the level of 5050,000. Why would we not want to bring that voice into the conversation. Representative Boston. Yes, thank you. I just want to say and I think representative Brady represent representative we've worked in schools. You know, I've worked in schools where the AOE or other great ideas, wonderful ideas. I was there, but the implementation was not well thought out. And I want this to work just like representative James does. I want the implementation, even if it takes time to be really well thought out. I want teachers to have a voice in this from on teachers, and I'm really glad about the survey, because I'm curious I'm very interested to see what the results are from teachers as to what some teachers would like to see now, what some teachers would like help with, but I think that's a huge component before we bring in someone from the West Coast I'm very concerned about bringing in expertise from San Francisco. That is a really different environment if you real if you read how much pushback now. And I think that there is the ethnic studies, entering the California school system. It's concerning to me, in terms of the public response to that, the way it's being implemented, and some of the content. Today would be really hesitant to work with, you know, at this point to have anybody come in I would love a consultant. I totally support a consultant who knows Vermont or at least knows New England to work with you. Do you have a question to represent Boston. My question is, how you're going to use the survey to inform your work, and how you're going to involve Vermont teachers in this conversation in terms of what questions they have. You know what support they would like, you know what their thoughts are, because I think they're a big component of this that that needs to be included. I think that a few things about the last question. I think that this work. The way that we think of this work. It's not we are not the experts, the experts are the community and we're not just looking at teachers we were looking at parents and we're looking at students. The students against racism to the survey, 290 students, 97 students that asked the question about how schools are engaging around race, and there's not many if you haven't seen that report I will ask Addie to send it to you. Because it's a really great little survey that talks about how race and those conversations are happening in the school from the school perspective. Now on the other side, the coalition, who kind of let this work, who I am a member of but who are not as involved as I used to be. They're doing a really great work, and they're doing a lot of this work ties in with act one, they've done two educational events in the past two months where they had about 70 of 50 of them are teachers from Vermont schools that are part of all this conversation so I think that to think that this work can happen without the voices of the people. It's not, it's not going to be the work and that's what this is why this work is so important because it is really, we always have seen and we have talked about act one being a loop mechanism for all the work that is happening on the road so we don't think that we are speaking for teachers, we are hoping for their voices. That's number one number two, because we are a very white state, and people who do ethnic studies and don't have the live experience are now going to be able to help us guide this work well and this is why we want to work with some transistor state. These are all BIPOC people people with disabilities people that work in all of this from a live experience which is very, very different, which is why act one exists to bring the voices of the people who have been formed by the systems for too long. These 11 members who are from the community are people who are in touch with all of that work so having the work that I think the backlash in the San Francisco State is a very different conversations they're not looking at standards they develop curriculum and a lot of the backlash goes to the Palestinian conversation. So I think like we need to be thoughtful about when we are comparing that work what is happening there. And many of the members yes they did all this work, again from the live experience of the people. So how we're going to be using this result the result of the survey it's not it's only 297 teachers who didn't collect regional information around who the teachers are. It was an anonymous conversations, and it's just a little glimpse about what we can do. We've talked about focus groups. All of that requires funding and money to do the work well right so here we are again San Francisco State is like the folks from that we're asking for the support of the community response team is not to do the work for us. We have the lived experience, we have the community, we want their expertise to help us frame how we will tackle the, the standards. Mark, I know you have things to add about that. I think you covered that very nicely. And I want to, I want to, I know that I see just, I think as a response to an earlier piece. So, I'd like to go to Jeff. Yeah, you know, I think I just wanted to put a several links in the chat, but certainly can follow up and send some organized work because I know it sort of runs into itself when it's in the chat but you know I just want to surface to that there are there is work underway and that there are resources and supports that are available right now. You know, whether that's in addition to what's being recommended and certainly I think our participation in the New England secondary schools consortium where we're working with our New England states and as an example. So, I co-chaired with my colleague Ventura Rodriguez from Massachusetts Department of Education who's, he's a deputy commissioner for the Center of Strategic Initiatives with a focus on engendering educational equity, and we co-chaired the New England regional task force on diversifying the educator workforce and so we do have those connections and a lot of that work through our consortium is looking at leveraging regional solutions to issues related to educational equity and particularly, you know, systemic racism, etc. That includes that sort of curriculum focus and looking at standards as well as data collection. So I would just want to put forward that there is that work that is underway and has been ongoing since 2018. And that there are resources that are on the east coast as well that we could be leveraging, whether it's in addition to, or, you know, as an initial step that I would just want to put forward. Just to the survey, I would, and I know Amana is already probably familiar with this, but in 2018 we had engaged in our supporting educational equity initiative, in which we, through the work of a consultant worked with for about a year educators of color populations and women to surface recommendations from an educator perspective around how we could support educational equity and systemic racism. And so I put a link there where there was recommendations directly from educators about what they would like to see. And again, to representative James question. I would just say that as an initial step and knowing the funding that's available coming into the locals. And I don't know if these things are actually in conflict, but certainly through the connections that the work group has with local communities and with local educators that you easily could put forward and have folks engage in that professional funding, or engage a consultant or expert using those local funds to consider to continue to leverage this work. And I just would say that that would be something worthy of consideration. And we're going to have to probably, I know that we're probably going to come back to this at some point, but we've got to move on to the next part of our agenda as well. Representative Conlon, please. Thanks. Good morning, Mark. And good morning, Amanda. Nice to see you both again. So, I'm trying to sort of bottom line this what it sounds like is we've got a task force has really sort of said, you know, we sort of know what the problem is, and we know where we want to be. But we need the expertise to translate that into, frankly, standards that are appropriate to present to the State Board of Education. Could that be an accurate statement as to what you're trying to solve. And then I will just add so we can wrap up quickly. You know, the challenge we have with the money is yes, all the locals are awash in in federal dollars but how do you sort of grab little tiny bits and pieces here and there to help this organization have an appropriation to finish up what they need to do. But anyway, if you could just sort of kind of help me bottom line the real problem if I'm corrected my assessment. Thank you for the clarity of the question. Mark, do you want to give it a crack? Yeah, I think that pretty much hits the nail on the head. We need some extensive expert guidance in order to fulfill the mission of Act one, and to provide all school districts with the kind of support and consultation that they're going to need in the future when they begin to do this hard work in their communities with parents with students and others. So I think representative Conlon your question was very clear and I think it is it speaks to the heart of why we're here today. But your role isn't really to the last part of what you said in terms of, you know, helping communities and families understand when the role of the task force is to recommend standards to the Department of Education. That's right when you read our EQS recommendations we put a lot of emphasis on the importance of local bodies, teachers, staff, administrators community members, doing the hard work at the local level. Our job is to give them the resources and this and the and the help that they're going to need with these standards, and also with the EQS so they can be effective, but that work you're correct. I think it has to be done well. Thank you. I think that, you know, it's when it comes to equity I know that justice put the AOC literacy grants but I think like the equity grants. But I think that, you know, we need to make sure that districts are ready. And I think with with our work. The work has always been the floor right like all these things are happening but like, because we're also going to be looking at this they work at the district some of the district policies that align with this work and what is happening. Some of the stories that we're hearing from from, for example from that sheet that we that I sent you a couple of weeks ago which was a role play that was happening one of the districts. Because the systems are not in place and they're actually use. When they reply to emails, they use the standards as the way that they were using those. That curriculum piece, they were using a base and they said, look, the standards, let us do this. And so like the curriculum that violence that is happening in some of the schools. At the same time there's really beautiful work that is happening some teachers are doing really amazing things with their students and even in these hard times. These conversations are happening by our teachers they are doing really great work some of them are building ethnic studies units in their classes. Some of them are doing work with students around by standards and how to deal. Some of them are, you know, the students in middle schools are learning about things that their minds are blown away because they finally see themselves represented so I think we have beautiful things that are happening in the state. I think many of those teachers are really excited for this act one working group and the possibilities that can happen. Some of these teachers are in systems that are not ready for them. So they're like also having a hard time. So here, you know, this is work of everybody. And the reason why I push back in like that. We really want this and Francisco folks is because they have the expertise like to like one of the best, like 50 years of practice on around communities that we are advocating for that are really deep into like the life of the students that we want all students to be able to feel like that. So I think we're not asking them to do their work to guide us that work with their brain around ethnic studies and what that means for our state. Amanda and Marcus one thing that I'm hearing is I think that your task in this bill this act one, you're going a bit outside of what it's my understanding of what act one was wanting you to do. Well, Mike, I guess my question for you is, should we stay focused on, you know, the standards and then look at expanding the role of the group, because some of what you're at you're talking about seems like it's an expanded role. When you're talking about that implementation. The teacher may be outside of the role, but like the teacher prep program but the standards knowledge with this is about lanes and like this is our lane, our lane is looking at those content standards, our lane is looking at all the district policies that affect a student from performance. That is all our job to be able to do that so that maybe the teacher prep yes, this is because we're thinking implementation ahead we're like we need to kind of fill the system, get the seeds ready so that when these are ready, you know, like this product income. So no, the standards is our duty most of that. That's your, your primary that's your primary thing that we really wanted to help you to stay focused on that at the same time in terms of those other things looking at the membership of your group. So the superintendents the principles the teachers that you've got a lot of people that can take these ideas take them to their districts and get that done so that you've got a powerful group on this, in terms of people inside government and people outside of government. So, so I want to support you to if we can get this first piece organized and maybe come back next year and we could look at the possibility of expanding some of the mission of the group. If that's, if that's appropriate is one of my thoughts and then I want to go to Jess. Is that a new hand or an old hand. It was a new hand and I would just say because I know we're probably running out of time is, you know, we're here, you know, anything we can do to support the group. I would just say that, you know, I think everyone knows this and you know the, the situation that Amanda was referencing is, we are actually in this real storming phase where we're seeing growth there has been focus on this for an extended time but you know change can happen slowly and then in these big jumps and then conflict arises we've seen that over time and in history as you're trying to do this work that there can be these back lashes community responses that cause conflict and stress on systems. And I would just say that people are going to make mistakes as they're doing this. You know, I think, if I'm remembering correctly with the particular issue I think that Amanda was referencing. And so that was someone trying to use Washington close up curriculum that actually it's a long standing program that's been pretty exceptional that really does focus on addressing issues and teaching students how to engage when there's fairly extreme viewpoints and how do you sort of understand that. And I think what we saw was, there was an implementation error, right, of, of content that caused harm, but in fact actually that was someone maybe trying to do well, but, but perhaps making mistakes and implementation and thinking about how can we do that. Who I think we've seen, you know, we had 12 issues SDs receive awards for our equity literacy grants in 2019. I'm hoping we're going to have an equal output and I think we're starting to see that movement but it's, it's messy, right and mistakes are made and any way that we can support, not just in the standards work but knowing that implementation is something that we can help support as the agency, you know, we're standing ready and would love to do some representative web if I may part of the reason the implementation question has come up for us is because when we took a deep dive into the EQS that document speaks to structures and systems, as well as principles and standards. However, you're correct. The foundation is the standard, which is why we really got to get it right. Everything in the future flows from there. And that's really why we're here today. And that's what we need you to do. We really need you to look at that. Having been an education since the 1980. And it's only 65,000 we're asking, and I can I just say, just to to frame a little bit of those documents that that just references, that's actually curricular violence when the way that they're talking and frame and that it's not. It's not just about implementation like they're already using terms that they shouldn't be using. That's, you know, like forcing a student to look at the profession proceeding. In a time like this, even for particular education practices is curriculum violence and students are impacted by the way that they're these things are framed, even if you're doing right. It's like, you cannot tell me that, you know, in slavery role play. It's good. It's an educational practice. It should not, it should not be so I, I think this work is so important for so many levels, talking and like, as a Latina woman of color, those documents are really hurtful just to like even think about the people in the work that I did with the communities on the border with students who have been deported, you know, like, I think that there are, we can have these big dialogues and conversations and be against some of the policies, but be able to come out without hurting students and students are hurting right now. So I think that it's important. I was too close. I just represent Boston I'm going to have to ask you to wait. And just just to careless. Did you have is that Yeah, I think I just wanted to clarify that, you know, the difference between curriculum and instructional choices and I agree, Amanda, like I think that the instructional choices that were made including content that people were pulling was problematic. So I guess I'll just leave it there. Okay. Representative Austin, can you can you do it in 20 seconds. Okay. I just want to say that the indigenous. Ask, I have recently been thinking that there should be an indigenous person on every committee in the state house. So I would totally support that. Okay. Thank you very much. It's an important conversation. We're trying to work our way through it. We've got loads of money coming in. And using it strategically, certainly as a question of the hour. So, thank you for your time today. Thank you so much. We are interestingly going to move to us 16, which has to do with a task force on exclusionary discipline reform, which is of interest. I think to this group as well, since we have some statistics that are concerning relationship to who is who is more likely to fall under exclusionary discipline. So I want to start with we've got a lot of people here. Quite a group. I actually wanted to start, I think. With one. I'm going to hold for you from then I think I'd like to go to Dr. Chuck Myers from NFI. Check in with you. Thank you so much. It's a pleasure to see you again you certainly have spent some time talking to us related to trauma informed issues and schools and have worked at this closely in this area certainly in our area. And S 16 is a bill that I think we sent to you and we're looking for your we're looking for feedback from the people in this room as to what have we got right. What would you change. You know, are there unintended consequences to what we have here. If we could keep this focus there that would be great. So welcome, Dr. Myers. Thank you very much. And thank you to the committee for hearing these issues. I'm very interested in the conversation we just left. Thank you for letting me sit on that. It's again another really important piece of work. We've, let me just introduce myself so I'm. Dr. Chuck Myers, I'm executive director of NFI stands for North Eastern family Institute. We are a designated service agency with the Department of Mental Health, and also operate five or cooperate five independent schools. Which is the topic pertinent to the committee and this topic are schools that receive referrals from local education agencies. To our schools and most of our students are identified as having some learning difference. That means usually they're on an IP and usually some pretty intensive behavioral issues. And what I want to say initially is that I'm going to split my time with Kim Asim, who is on the screen now, Kim actually supervises four or five schools. I probably won't tell you but I will that she has come to NFI she's worked in a by for almost seven years now. And before that had a long and illustrious history with Howard Center, directing and supervising their school based clinicians so these are folks that are hired by the premium health center to work directly in schools to support the mental health needs that schools identify along with her and 18. So at NFI she's in charge of our schools in terms of the educational curricular disciplinary and administrative budgetary and clinical issues for our schools. So, I do want to say that the focus of this particular task force is essential. And I think needs to be considered in a little bit broader context that although we're talking about behaviors in the school that may result in exclusion, or expulsion, some kind of disciplinary process at least. It's real important that we continue to include families and the social context. So, that's my appreciation for the prior conversation that people realize we're not just looking at a behavior in a school. If we were to do a very strict behavioral analysis about many of the behaviors that are exhibited in schools we would find that the ideology is probably not as much in the school as it is in the community and in the home. And what one of the things that we have found very important in our schools that serve probably the some of the most challenging students in the state is is an awareness that the intergenerational the impact of intergenerational poverty is should not be overlooked or underestimated that it's not uncommon for some of our students to be faced with an ethical dilemma of whether they do well in school and abandoned their family or comply with some of the standards or norms that are their families, which is not to be successful in school. So I would I just want to say that behaviors are important and they represent lots of things and it's important that we spend enough time with kids and that we support teachers and school staff to spend enough time with kids and families to sort out the ideology of behavior. So, but with that I want to turn over, if it's appropriate. Thank you because Kim actress spends a lot of time with our schools and knows this work much more than I do so thank you Kim for making time and she submitted documents also that reflect her testimony. Thank you. Should we bring those documents up with a speed part of that. Kim, would you recommend that we be looking at the documents. It's just my my what I'm going to say basically, if you're a multimodal learner and you want to read along while I speak then otherwise, if you're an auditory learner then you can just listen. My goal today was just to talk a little bit about what we do at NFI in our schools and how that promotes success for so many students and thank you for this opportunity to speak to the committee today. So Chuck said I'm the regional director of schools and clinical programming for NFI Vermont. I also work for the Vermont best project and you'll hear in a little while from Amy Willard Sutton who is an integral member of that project. And I also do some work around the SAMHSA grant project aware for implement installing actually an interconnected systems framework which Amy will also speak to so we'll listen to her brilliance in a little bit. In our schools we focus on the importance of relationships and fostering a sense of membership and belonging through the utilization of something we call our overarching framework the normative approach which among many tenants promotes equity and reduces hierarchy. A culture that promotes respect, integrity, active engagement and safety. The primary method of assisting students and recognizing the outcome of their behavioral challenges and choices that do not align with our school wide expectations is a restorative approach. The committee meeting format is used to provide opportunities for students with the assistance of their peers to reflect on their decisions, their choices, understand the potential harm it has done and repair harm through relevant not punitive consequences. We focus on relationship repair not rule violation. In addition we utilize elements of positive behavior interventions and supports PBIS in order to provide positive feedback and reinforcement as a proactive method to prevent behavioral challenges. We also utilize multiple modalities of instruction that include movement to support regulated bodies and minds. Similar to instructional techniques, we differentiate our responses to students stress behavior based on knowledge of the students capacity to reflect. And the safest place for the student to make repairs and please note that I intentionally use the language of stress behavior, not misbehavior. If there is a significant concern that impacts the potential safety, we may ask for a crisis screening from our local DA or enlist the support of police. While it is rare. If an incident should occur that would require a student to be out of community we all we would expedite restorative process to welcome the student back into the community. We understand that stress occurs in the physical and cultural environments, so therefore all involved in supporting student has responsibility to adapt and make changes to remote success and reduce triggers stress is community property. We're all responsible for each other stress and our relationships moderate stress. All of the students we have we serve have intensive social emotional behavioral needs if you look at the triangle. All of our students are in that intensive range that, you know, one to 5% of kids who aren't successful in the public education domain. And this is a result mostly developmental trauma, and yet we rarely rarely engage in exclusionary practices. When you remove a student from the context in which they experienced the stress behavior you eliminate that opportunity for the student to practice more adaptive ways of managing their stress in the very environment in which it occurs. Any practice that has a student leave the classroom or learning environment reinforces marginalization and disenfranchisement and unfortunate template that many students who are subjected to exclusionary practices have. It reinforces their belief that I don't belong. In order for children to feel safe adults need to feel safe at NFI Vermont we promote a culture of wellness through flexibility through respect appreciation feedback and validation of the important work that is done. This creates a culture and a contagion of wellness. When we utilize a method of supervision that doesn't focus on hierarchy, rather it focuses on reflection that allows our staff to be vulnerable because of established safety in our relationships and vulnerable vulnerability is not self indulgent. It's around creativity and it fosters courageousness. The consequence of this practice is the ability for folks to push the pause button, avoid being reactive and stay regulated one faced with dysregulated students in other words, they courtically modulate. Because we know in the wise words of Dr Bruce Perry, a dysregulated adult can't regulate a dysregulated student. The culture that is created is one where feedback is welcome, either positive or constructive. We develop a second theory about students by changing our mindsets and when we change our mindset, we change practice. This is an important element of workforce development. In other words, the way we see students is the way that they see themselves so modeling resilience, restoring their challenges. We foster a healthier sense of self and tolerating the rupture and repair of relationships to build relational endurance are critical features to ensuring that students stay connected to their school community, so as to prevent exclusionary practices and tendencies. All of these ways of work are trauma informed and invite humanity into the daily challenges we all experienced when working with students who are struggling and suffering. So my hope for the task force is that you will include the expertise of those who work in therapeutic day treatment schools, because we're doing a good job. Our systems change, including intentional wellness opportunities for staff throughout their days. Wellness is not an individual's responsibility alone. Organizations also have the responsibility for promoting wellness, provide necessary resources and coaching to provide a durability of change, including trauma informed responsive training, reflective practices and supervision and healthy forums in which adults can discharge their distress. Consider how to integrate practices and resources to ensure there is alignment versus the all too common experience educators have of initiative fatigue. And finally reduce the tendency to engage in higher article dictates about what schools and staff must do and consider participatory decision making. For example, how do we want to be together versus telling people how this is we, this is how we will be together. Thank you. Thank you. One of the points in f 16 says that use of school discipline strategies. Very widely throughout the state is that something you've observed as well. Yes, it is. If I can just add one more thing to that. I'm not promoting that the task for come up with a uniformity of practice. necessarily because I believe very strongly that all schools have a unique culture and we have to be respectful of that culture and the context and culture in which they live their communities etc. I would promote again it's a workforce development issue and how do you tolerate the distress of students and not so that your implicit biases aren't elicited and that you are able to not to overuse the phrase but push that pause button and really reflect on the distress that's occurring in the environment and engage in a healthy relational practice that promotes students staying in their educational environment. Thank you. Thanks. I had, I did step out for a second. I may have missed this. Can I just get a baseline description of. When you talk about our schools. I'm quite sure what that meant. And if you're kind of, if your testimony is kind of focused on therapeutic day programs is which is something that you mentioned. I didn't hear the first part representative Colin. I need kind of a baseline description of NFI and when you refer to our schools are these schools that you work with or schools that you operate. Thank you. I'm sorry if I wasn't clear about that so as Chuck indicated we have five independent day treatment schools for which I oversee. So they are administered by NFI Vermont. And while I have been for the last seven years involved in therapeutic day treatment schools. Prior to that as Chuck mentioned I was my work was providing supports and resources to public schools so my lens is through the therapeutic school community right now. But I think the reason that it's important to consider that lens and consider that expertise is because of the high rate of success that we have in serving students who have intensive social emotional behavioral needs. And the incredible high rate of success we have in returning students to their sending schools to be able to reintegrate into their, their communities. Thank you. Representative Colin. Thank you. You're welcome. Representative Austin. Thank you. As a school counselor in Essex I just want to say that I work with NFI, often with my students and I really respect and appreciate the work you do is very helpful. My question is, and my concern is the lack of data. If we get really good data. I think we're hampered by the fact that it could disclose a student's identity. And I'm wondering what your thoughts are because I, I think without good data we can't really kind of target where we need to put our resources. Representative Austin I do recall working with you in the past actually I think I've done some trainings for you in the past as well so it's nice to see you. So I think there's ways to provide de identifying data to respect the confidentiality of students doesn't necessarily have to be individualized but it can be, you know, more aggregate data. I didn't I was not prepared to share data today I apologize for that. But if we have specific data from our perspective at NFI Vermont we could certainly outline the intervention strategies that we utilize, and how that correlates with the success rate of students meeting their academic behavioral social emotional goals, as well as the success rate that correlates with them returning to their sending school. I can tell you in the seven years that I've been at NFI Vermont. I can count on one hand how many students have returned to their sending school and then come back to us it's very very few students out of the hundreds and hundreds of students that we serve. Thank you that would be that would be very helpful thank you. You're welcome. I want to go on and if you can stay with us we may have questions from the rest of the committee as we go forward. I'm looking for my agenda down here. So, we have. So we go to any wheeler Sutton. And then Jeff Boudreau. Sounds great. I'm chair and the committee for allowing us the opportunity to be here today to provide testimony for s 16. For the record I'm Amy wheeler Sutton training and development coordinator for the best project. And I do have a brief slideshow if I'm able to share my screen. Yes, Jesse can you help. Yes, you should be. What's up. Okay. Okay, can you all see that. Yes, thank you. So alongside Sherry Schoenberg I coordinate the best project which is housed at the center on disability and community inclusion at the University of Vermont. And six, since 1996, the best project has been charged with supporting supervisory unions, districts and schools to increase their capacity to address the needs of students who are at risk of or who experienced social emotional behavioral challenges. And our primary role has been to provide training coaching data support and technical assistance around positive behavioral interventions and supports as Kim mentioned BBS. And for those of you who aren't familiar with PBIS. It is a sustainable proactive school wide multi tiered framework approach, which is a lot of jargony kinds of words but hopefully as myself and Jeff are talking you'll kind of see what I mean by that. The main outcome is to improve social and academic success for all students by utilizing positive preventative evidence based strategies, working as collaborative teams within a school and district and utilizing database decision making. So we're really looking at making systems change and addressing all students social emotional behavioral learning and well being in order to have an impact for all students in a school environment. So one of the outcomes that schools that implement PBIS well are seeing are that school personnel are feeling more effective, and they are seeing reduced exclusionary discipline practices which is why we've asked to testify today around at 16. And I will just say that PBIS is not curriculum or kind of a one day professional development training event that someone would go to. It really is a lifelong or as long as someone's in a school commitment to addressing students, social emotional behavioral learning, and a process of continuous improvement. And we do currently have 164 schools in Vermont who are implementing PBIS to some level of fidelity. And that varies across the state, as you were mentioning. And just one data source that we wanted to provide is that each year we asked the Agency of Education for data around students receiving out of school suspensions and which schools are excluding at what rates. So in school year 2019, we identified 27 of our PBIS schools as exemplar schools so that means that they are implementing with fidelity and seeing both academic and behavioral success. So that's kind of our shining star schools. And for those schools, they only 1.5, sorry, 1.6% of their students were excluded in the form of an out of school suspension for the rest of the PBIS schools in Vermont, who may be implementing to different fidelity or just not meeting that exemplar level 2.2% of their students received an out of school suspension, and then all other schools in Vermont who are not formally implementing PBIS excluded students 3.5% of students. So we're able to see that when schools are able to implement PBIS with fidelity, they are causing fewer of their students to have an out of school suspension. So that would be all of the PBIS schools in Vermont that we had data for. And then the 138 is the rest of the schools in Vermont. Okay, thank you. Yes. So as Kim mentioned, we really embrace and promote a restorative approach. And are really embedding that into all of our professional development offerings for schools. So helping schools think about how they can start from a place of strong relationships, ensuring meaningful engagement of their students and all the work that they do. Voluntary participation, which is in reference to if a student were involved in a behavioral incident that they would never be forced to participate in a restorative approach that they need to voluntarily engage in that. And engaging our students in participatory decision making and our families. I was a member of the coordination team for the contract from the Agency of Education in 2019 and 2020. That ultimately formed the restorative approaches collaborative. And as part of that work, we provided training and coaching to 10 either a school or SUSD team on restorative approaches, and I linked the final report from that project in my written testimony so you could review that and I think Meg Porcella from the Agency of Education also reported on that. I'm not sure if it was to this committee. So as a result of that work, we feel poised to provide some feedback and input on this bill. And I also just want to say I linked the Vermont PBIS annual report in the written testimony as well. The 2020 report was a little different than once in the past because of the pandemic but all of them are available on our website. So as the legislature continues to review S16 we just have a few considerations for you to look at. The first is the goals and composition of the task force. So as many who testified in the Senate and I think also in the House committee have mentioned while improving accurate data collection and analysis is really critical. We believe that this can happen simultaneously with the task force researching ways to affect change in the outcomes for students and developing clear recommendations. So we really want to make sure that that is a focus of the task force, and it doesn't get too sidelined with just the data. Because we really can't wait for the data. We know that currently schools in Vermont are suspending students or excluding students for low level subjective behaviors and disproportionate rates. And as Carlin Finn from Voices for Vermont Children mentioned her testimony, while the findings part of the bill mentions middle school and high school we know that this really is a pre K through 12 issue. It's also important to note that if the task force is going to be looking at data. The suspension expulsion and the truancy data which is referenced in section seven are likely to be significantly skewed as a result of the pandemic for school years 2021. So that's just important to note that it's it might look like suspension and expulsion have really improved or that truancy referrals to the attorney general have really improved but it's really just the context is so different during the pandemic. And while there's language in the bill around eliminating expulsion for students under age eight, we really should be looking at reducing and eventually eliminating expulsion and suspension for all students, especially those under eight. Expulsion is a fairly rare occurrence and I would argue to say is almost entirely based on danger or violence which is what's mentioned in the bill is allowable. So while it seems like a really lofty thing to say we're going to ban expulsion of students under eight. I would look at what I'd want to look at the data and see how common that actually is and how often that's related to something other than for a dangerous behavior. There's actually a bill currently in the Massachusetts legislature that is looking to prohibit or significantly limit the use of both suspension and expulsion in licensed early education and care programs. There's also a consideration that the disability law project mentioned in their testimony around informal suspension, such as when a student is sent home for the rest of the day but not necessarily given an official suspension, or when students end up spending an entire day in something like a planning room, but are not given a formal in school suspension. So that's something that should be considered by the task force when making recommendations around data collection. I just want to draw attention to the importance of language. So in some of the testimony or from some of the legislators, the terms, expulsion and exclusionary discipline have been used interchangeably. But exclusionary discipline is kind of the overarching and refers to any type of school disciplinary action that removes or excludes a student from their learning environment. So I'm encompassing suspension and expulsion, expulsion like I said happens fairly rarely. So I just want to make sure that everyone's clear on that language. And in terms of task force makeup we encourage the addition of a special education director as many have mentioned, and a school counselor because both of those roles bring a critical lens that may not be represented elsewhere on the task force. And the Secretary of Education when convening this task force consider members from the best project, and the Vermont restorative approaches collaborative as possible task force members to be able to lend their expertise. And then just as the Vermont School Board Association VPA and the essay detailed Vermont schools have several established and emerging programs that already are reducing the occurrence of exclusionary discipline. So those programs should really be leveraged and further supported to improve fidelity of implementation and widespread use of those programs and initiatives so that we're not reinventing the wheel. Such as multi tiered systems of support MTSS social emotional learning trauma informed practices PBIS restorative justice and we refer to it as restorative approaches thinking of a really broad school wide approach to that. And then mental health services. So as Kim mentioned three Vermont LEAs are currently engaged in project aware, which is an initiative that serves to establish interconnections between mental health and schools. So that students are supported wherever they are in homes, schools and communities, and then reinvigorating the need for a well vetted statewide school climate survey. So 33 of our Vermont PBIS schools have completed school climate surveys that are directly linked to our project so far this year. Many other schools are also completing school climate surveys and that's a critical piece of data that's being missed right now I think statewide implicit bias training so that school staff are more equipped to deal with those kind of vulnerable decision points that can was talking about to be able to have the skills to recognize their bias in the moment. And alternative methods of schooling when needed. I think both legislators in the task force could think about this issue in terms of systems data and practices so you can see the diagram on this slide, which is what we think of when we're training our PBIS schools. So rather than just saying, you know, what you should do restorative practices or you should have a social emotional learning curriculum to tackle this issue. It's really broader than that. And we need to think about what teaming infrastructure exists in the school to systems level, what professional learning and coaching do do school teams need. What's the priority for this work in the district. And what data are they looking for to know that this is working what practices do they want to put into place to support students, and to really narrow down those practices to just be implementing the ones that we know will be successful and we'll have the biggest impact. As I mentioned, school staff really need professional learning coaching wellness supports in order to be able to do this work so rather than just saying, we're no longer going to suspend and exclude school staff needs skills to implement something instead of suspension and many of those initiatives and programs I just mentioned would be a great place to start. And then lastly I'll just say that data on seclusion and restraint should really be considered either by this task force or more closely by the Agency of Education, while it is separate from exclusionary discipline. So it should not be a disciplinary response. More information on how these two responses are used is necessary and reduction in seclusion and restraint should also be an ongoing goal of the state the districts and the schools and I just had to as a former journalism major had to point out a little typo in the title on page nine line nine seclusion is incorrectly written as inclusion. So, kind of confusing typo, but thank you so much for your consideration of these issues and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you. I'm going to move on to that. I know we would very much like to get, you know, actual some specific language that would could help us as we're moving forward. I want to go to, I think we're going to Jeff. Yeah, hi, good morning everybody. I can't stress enough how important Amy's work is. Thank you for all that you said I definitely agree. And I agree with everything that Kim has said also. My name is Jeff Woodrow. I work at People's Academy Middle level and Morrisville Vermont. So we are public school in the state of Vermont. And we do use PBIS as our framework. We've used it for many years. And I my job specifically I know climate coordinators a little big but I do work with students and staff around stress behaviors. Daily, that's just constantly doing that and also the PBIS coordinator for our school. So I only have a few things to say it'll be really short. I do want us to kind of promote PBIS and say that what Amy is doing in on the ground is working. And I have data that I could probably pull up that now right now, I don't have anything ready. But I do want to say that the data helps our school focus on creating informed decision. And this is whole school individual staffer student around the environment around the location. We can really drill down to whatever we need to kind of find where the trends are across time, things that we need to improve. I use Swiss daily, which is their data program called Swiss. And I report out many times a month the staff to our internal committees. It helps us track what interventions are successful or unsuccessful. It helps direct staff to look at the positives and what students are doing. That's a really important part of PBIS for me. It's a great framework to sometimes staff can get stuck on what students are doing wrong. And it's a, it's built into the system where we're reminding them to look at what's positive and to really focus and teach what they're doing is right. And, and to name that their professional learning opportunities cannot be undersold. I think that's that's a huge part. I think the data is great, but the professional learning opportunities that they provide. Not only encourage staff but also administrators to attend, which is helping improve mindsets around exclusionary discipline. So, finding section one number three does that exclusionary discipline is mostly used is mostly for minor misconduct. That's that struck me, and I would urge the task force to not only just look at the data but potentially talking to principal superintendents and the staff members involved with making these exclusionary decisions that's often not a teacher who's suspending. I believe that that's ever the case. It's really important to talk to who's making the decisions, what kind of training they're getting, and where their mindset is that in terms of biases they may have, or they're the backstop on the exclusionary discipline so I just, I feel like they're, they're a really important group to talk to. And like I said there's usually only one or two staff members making that ultimate decision. Thank you. Appreciate, appreciate hearing from from the schools as well. So, then we have Bernice and then Lance. Yes, good morning everyone Lance and I actually are going to be partnering on our time together. And we are very grateful for the opportunity to be here to share some thoughts and perspectives and recommendations on the bill and also, I was so grateful, we both are so grateful to the opportunity to listen in just to the tail end of the act one because that work is so deeply connected to the primary prevention of exclusionary discipline so I'm just happy to be listening in as a citizen of Vermont and a researcher. So, for the record good morning my name is Dr Bernice Garnett and I'm an associate professor in the College of Education and Social Services at the University of Vermont. I have a master's and doctoral degree in public health, which is a discipline primary focused on the prevention of negative outcomes through environmental and structural changes to systems policy procedures and programs to date most of my research has been on school climate, restorative practices and school based health promotion. Hey everyone good morning my name is Dr Lance Smith I'm also a professor in the College of Education and Social Services at the University of Vermont. I'm a former middle school teacher and school counselor representative Austin it's good to see school counselors representing the committee today. My research is primary around issues of equity and consciousness anti racism consciousness and ableism consciousness within schools and in mental health settings, and I am one of those beneficent well intended white teachers that Amanda mentioned in the previous session where my best intentions in trying to help these are students in Vermont schools. I have also caused harm and so that is a primary motivational factor for me in the community based research that our team is doing here in Vermont. So for the past five years Lance and I have been leading a community based participatory research team with fellow colleagues in our College of Education and Social Services at um partnering very authentically with the Burlington school district to build data and sharing systems and structures that support the district wide implementation of restorative practices. So in other words we have spent years working side by side arm and arm, implementing research protocols gathering and analyzing data that connects directly to the heart of our community based participatory research team. How do we redress the hyper representation of Vermont black and brown students, and students with disabilities within the exclusionary discipline systems of Vermont schools. So therefore remarks today are informed or informed by our individual lived experiences, our professional identities, the peer reviewed literature and our community based participatory research project with the Burlington school district. So we're structured to inform both the language in the current bill and the work of the proposed task force. Yeah, so representative web you asked us, you know what have you got right in s 16 and, and what might be the unintended consequences well something you got right that we want to affirm is the bold language that sites the exclusionary discipline disparities that are experienced by Vermont black children children with disabilities English language learners. And as was mentioned in the previous session we've known this for 20 years, but far too often. We don't name it or we, or we skirt around it so well done with that. What we would like you to what we invite you to consider is in addition to these language that names the disparities, we also need to name the root of the disparities. That's institutional racism and structural able ism. No data is gathered in a vacuum no data is understood and analyzed devoid of the context. So if we're producing data that once again just displays more black and brown kids are suspended in schools more kids with with 10% out of the classroom that can reinforce the age old stereotypes that these kids are just inherently problematic so we invite this bill to name the root cause of institutional racism and structural able ism. So in a just to name the peer review literature because there are there are states there are researchers that are diving head first into the content of exclusionary discipline disparities and so I just wanted to briefly cite a recent comprehensive review of exclusionary discipline disparities right that was done by Welsh and little in 2018 and two quotes that I want to name that are deeply connected to the heart of s 16. One is the evidence suggests that discipline disparities may be explained more by the behavior of adults, teachers and principals in school than by student misbehavior and further state today interventions have given insufficient attention to issues of race and culture and a focus primarily on student misbehavior. There appears to be a preference for race neutral policies, the role of race should not be overlooked or under discussed in crafting solutions to the discipline dilemma. Therefore, we want to echo the findings from this article and call in the need for critically conscious school discipline policies and data collection systems right. So transformative anti racist trauma inform an equity centered language is implicit in s 16, but we need to make it explicit, both in the language of the bill and the creation and charge of the task force. So we affirm that valuable statewide data on school discipline is largely unavailable we know this from our own work. It's incomplete and it's not readily available to the communities that needed to inform decisions. So therefore we want to name the critical importance of data ownership and ensuring that school communities have timely and transparent access to school and district lead up level data on the continuum of factors that relate to school discipline outcomes power sharing is a central tenant of community based participatory research, the type of research that Lance and I do with the Burlington school district right we have seen the critical importance of timely return of data to schools to teachers on the ground so they can actually use data to inform program implementation. How can this task force support a streamlined system for school communities to access integrate and act upon the current school discipline data and our reimagining of the data collection process. So this, this s 16, the heart of this is, is all about improving both the breadth and the depth of data that we're gathering across the state of Vermont on suspensions and expulsions and Vermont schools right so it's outcome data that s 16 is looking for. I want to give you an analogy in an attempting to address the COVID-19 pandemic and I don't for a minute want to invalidate the real the suffering and the lived experience of people who all of us who are going through that. But if in trying to deal with that pandemic, we only limited our data gathering efforts to the outcomes of the disease right the number of persons who contracted disease the number of persons who died, and we weren't simultaneously gathering data on the etiology of the disease how it could affect and factors that limit the spread. How successful would we be in interrupting and controlling this pandemic. When it comes to the pandemic of systemic racism and structural ableism in Vermont schools. We need to do the same thing, we need to simultaneously be gathering the outcome data that this that s 16 is currently asking for, but also data that will paint a picture that of the causes of institutional racism and structural racism in Vermont schools, and also will allow us to to mitigate and engage in prevention for example for example. We need data that will help us understand how many black and brown students and students with disabilities have a sense of belonging in their schools because that's significant our research says that thus far very few of those students do. We need to know how many black and brown students and students with disabilities in Vermont trust that when they raise issues of racism and ableism in class, and they bring it to an educator and adult that they will be heard, they will be validated will be taken again our research suggests that that happens far too often with in Vermont schools. So what we're what we're inviting that the the committee to consider is not only having the language that gets an outcome data, but also intentionally gathering data that gets at the etiology and will allow us to mitigate and prevent institutional racism and and structural ableism furthermore on that point specifically student voice is largely absent from outcome data that singularly focused on exclusion suspension and explosion right. And so we want to encourage echoing the comments made by Amy Wheeler Sutton and other testimonies of focus on school climate data and we wanted to share a couple specific examples from our own research with the Burlington School District to showcase and uplift the current efforts of local schools to try to measure school climate and how can we capitalize on the existing data structures that schools are doing to measure school climate at a state level to again focus on the continuum of factors that are related to discipline outcomes by uplifting strength based approaches and focusing on belonging attention and authentic relationships. So for example, we administered a district wide survey to the Burlington School District for students in grades three through 12 that was specifically focused on their experiences with their campus restorative practices but also largely about their their relationship to their school community. We included items like I feel my classroom contributions are ignored because of my race ethnicity disability lack of money, English language learning status, LGBTQ identity. So we have a lot of voice in helping create classroom behavioral expectations and finally their adults here who care about what happens to me. Those are examples of three items on our student survey that are helping us uplift instead center student voice related to do they have a role in creating classroom expectations. Are they aware of what the behavioral expectations are, which is the earlier trickle down. Necessary review of policies to ensure that students, teachers, staff families are aware of our expectations and our current community, but also have a say in creating those expectations right. This is why Bernice and I were so uplifted to hear that as a part of the act one work you'll be adding three students to the committee are students that we work with hand in hand arm and arm in the Burlington School District in this research are teaching us. Nothing about us without us is for us so if you want to. Representative Austin you were talking about a good data if you want to raise the response rates train students and research methodology and in in research ethics and unleash them to gather data within their school system around issues of race and ableism I want to share you an example of student led gathered data here in the Burlington School District school district and one of our youth participatory action research teams so the students wanted to investigate the experiences of racism within their middle school. And one point of data was this this was a quote from an eighth grader in their school whenever a black man is shot by the police I come to school and all the teachers are acting like nothing happens. And in it all they say is oh that's so bad I don't want to think about it. I, I think we should not ignore that. So that's an eighth grade student gathering data about the experience of another eighth grade student and what they found is the frequency of color blind racism within their school. And this throughout our data gathering efforts within the Burlington School District so again just to emphasize, in addition to gathering data on outcomes related to exclusionary discipline, we invite us to gather that data in concert with data on student experiences in schools specifically with regards to to racism and ableism. And specifically there's language in the bill that recommends the task force to change the type of data collected and the data collection process regarding suspension and exposures and we energetically support that language. That was that was sort of created warm fuzziness in my heart and so more specifically we recommend the task force review school district discipline policies to examine the behaviors that warrant a suspension as determined by the school community, and further explore the behavioral referral process and the school based data collection procedures, because the quality of data you're looking at is informed by the quality of the input of the quality of the data. And that is in your that's in your written testimony. Yeah, I know it's a lot. And I just want to briefly. I want to echo what Amy has already said and what Kim has already said schools are experiencing initiative overload so whatever we're going to do to gather this data we invite that to be integrated in the work that's already being done in schools to redress disparities and exclusionary disciplines such as restorative practices happening around the state PBIS multi tiered systems of support and and and social emotional learning initiatives. Let's not add something onto the plate let's let's integrate this into what's already happening. Well taken. We've just two more recommendations and we'll stop right now and this echoes to the previous act one conversation related to being over maxed and without substantial resources to do the work and we are very worried about this happening with the task force. If this is adding on to the plates of overextended professionals already. So we want to call on the Vermont Legislature to establish a grant program with a distinct RFP that will allow for targeted sustainable gather data gathering analysis and data collection efforts by experienced community based researchers that will work alongside local school districts and the agency of education analysis of the school discipline data has to be considered an intersectional lens. We recognize the ways in which race gender poverty disability language intersect to create exclusionary discipline disparities so Vermont is uniquely positioned to lead critical trauma informed and equity based school climate policies and data collection efforts, but is the task force to determine what is needed to drastically overhaul the system. What other financially resource and sustainable structures are needed to further reinforce and create action from the task force worth. For example, what is the relationship between the proposed new task force and other existing working groups, like the Vermont hazing harassment and bullying prevention Council that I work on the Vermont racial equity advisory panel that is a working group that was already referenced. How can we streamline the various state working groups to ensure that we're supporting each other works right while we appreciate the importance of creating this task force. What is more critical is that the work of this task force be embedded into the structure and database decision making practices of all Vermont schools. We cannot as a state create a facade of action through the creation of a task force. Point well taken. Representative Williams and then Conlon. Yes hi thank you. My question focuses around schools that in the race aspect schools that have just the one race. How do you fit them in. Is that a part that doesn't come into play or or at what level does it come into play. I mean these are sadly unexposed. Lots of times students. What is your time. Yeah, I would like to feel that if I can so racism is an endemic. It's a pandemic public health issue that is that white students and white people and white parents and white children have an integral role to play we would be doing not only BIPOC students harm in Vermont. If extremely predominantly white schools were also not engaged in the ethnic studies curriculum that was mentioned in the task force. We would also be doing further harm to white students. So I have a white family so I have a five year old and I have an I have a 13 year old, they are in an extremely predominantly white school with they are currently studying the adolescent version of even Max Kendi stamped from the beginning and as white boys, they understand their own implicit bias, they need to understand their, their role in racism when often like their father, they're participating in racism and they don't even know it. So, we would emphasize in the, and the literature supports this that this, this, this work, the ethnic studies curriculum is needed across Vermont. I'm a little bit. I'm watching the time right now we're going to need to switch very soon. I also want to give the committee a 10 minute break. So, I just wanted to be before I go to any more questions I just want to just check with Amanda Garces did she want it. I'm under did you want to add something at this point or is it all been said. I think it's all been said. Yes, I think everybody's great. Great. And representative Brady, I'm going to be asking you to do some follow up here with this. This is, this is our high school social studies teacher that we have in our committee room, which we're very fortunate to have. So I wanted to, to represent Harrison and then Brady. We shut my video off so my voice doesn't sound all funny. First off, I'm not an educator. A basic question. Okay, I decided to go to college and entered as an educator. When I get out of college, will my toolbox be have adequate things in it to deal with all the problems we've talked about today. I realize that a lot of what we're talking about our teachers, and there's an evolution when you become a teacher of continued learning on yourself, but does the green teacher have a toolbox. That's good enough. So I think I'm hearing your question is, are our teachers prepared when they leave their undergraduate degree to advance and support and integrate and implement equity centered pedagogical practices is that sort of your question. Exactly. Okay, so at UVM in the College of Education and Social Services which theoretically prepares right soon to be classroom teachers so I'm mindful of the various positionalities I'm holding here. I would argue that my colleagues would be critical in this space to and question the level at least at UVM are we preparing which is teach the pre service teacher education workforce is predominantly white predominantly female right. We're adequately preparing and engaging and challenging our students to to embody and develop critical consciousness and self awareness and the ways in which their own social position factors are going to show up explicitly implicitly in the ways we teach. I don't know for there yet we've had lots of conversations actually Lance and I co chair, the committee on equity action and diversity in our college to try to do this exact work that we're talking about there's pushback there's resistance there's white fragility like there's all that stuff. I don't think we you ever arrive, ever. And so I think that's a critical importance to realize to practice humility realize that you that there's always more work to be done, particular and in preparing. So I don't, I don't know if your question maybe no is the simple answer. And I'll just say, you know, we work with brandy Simonson out of Yukon around classroom management strategies for teachers. And many of her pre service teachers at Yukon, you know they might get one class that's focused on classroom management behavior support. And, you know, pre service programs are probably trying to do better around including trauma informed strategies and an equity based work but I think it's, it's a work in progress and the teachers that are arriving tomorrow in in classrooms are are not as prepared as we'd like them to be in this area. So I can say, in terms of school counselors, that's happening, and I'm, and I'm being a little facetious there. We are leaning into this work we are experiencing pushback I'm hearing from teachers and school counselors in the field that the younger generation is doing a much better job than people like me who entered teacher education in 1998 but absolutely I echo what my colleague said, we have far more work to do. We've, we've got to do better in the college of education. I'm going to give us three more minutes. And then we're going to give us a five minute break, because we have people in the waiting room. So representative representative Brady. So is there a sort of high school level PBIS type curriculum, there's obviously trauma informed, but I'll admit that volunteering in my kids elementary schools and seeing some really great PBS implementation is some of the best training I ever did as a high school teacher. And, and I haven't seen that framework so much at the high school level obviously you're not going to give out little, you know, get you know the little marbles each time but but a high school level kind of framework that is positive reinforcement based. Does that structure or training exist in our high schools involved in it at all in our state. Yeah. So we have fair haven high school was recently trained. People's Academy is middle. And we have a few other high school of Regens was trained a long time ago I'm not sure about their current status of implementation. So really is context dependent so it is a framework that can be altered to whatever the context is. So like you said you're not going to be giving some kind of, you know, fuzzy to a high school student. And so it's about drawing in that student voice of what is reinforcing to you what do you want our school community to look like and how do we build that together. We're building the PBIS framework and so if schools are hesitant because they think PBIS is for elementary school, you know, it's MTSS for behavior so you're doing MTSS on the academic side. How are you building out those supports at the universal target and intensive levels for your behavior. And there's a lot of national exemplars in the high school area for PBIS. We have one more minute. All right, I'll give it my best shot. The bill calls for the task force to compile emphasize the word compile data which to me says, look at data that exists. It sounds like you're advocating that the task force collected data that doesn't exist. So you said data that will paint a picture of the causes of institutional racism and structural ableism. I don't know that that data exists and I'm not sure that the task force is necessarily the best equipped to collect that data. We refer to my colleague, Bernice, but I would say yes. And if not us, then who, if we're not asking our black and brown students about their experiences of microaggressions in the classroom in Vermont, then we're not getting the data we need that will inform how institutional racism is reinforced in Vermont. So if not us and if not this task force at the statewide level then who, Bernice. Yeah, Representative Colin you're spot on right it's a both and there are there aren't current standardized or supported statewide data systems that collect things like implicit bias microaggression critical consciousness. But we believe that there is an opportunity to reinvigorate the state level conversation about school climate assessment to be integrated into balanced accountability models of schools as part of conversations several years ago about school and state level. That should be our priority if we are wholeheartedly and authentically interested in reducing exclusionary discipline we have to focus on climate and so we can embed some of these questions related to implicit bias and student voice in school climate surveys and this is already happening schools are already collecting school climate data. It's just not being integrated systematically to understand the relationship between school climate and outcomes. It's not a far lift, it's just massaging language creating streamlined processes and the agency of education, creating structures for school school climate data to be integrated. Okay, I'm going to violate my one minute and give representative Austin 15 seconds to ask your question. My question is this. I'm just curious about the role of working with families as partners with their children. So to work on their behavior and specifically to Lance and Bernice the migrant community we're going to be getting, hopefully more migrants, you know, and my concern is the cultural and language barricades that we're integrating into the school, which might be caused for their children's behavior. I think the question is how do we. I'm curious about families but the migrant families where the children become the ones that have to speak with the school system because the parent doesn't have the language. So we have a colleague Cynthia, Cynthia, who I believe is on the the act one task force. This is her area of expertise she has devoted herself to this so I invite us to reach out to her. So let's say in when you ski JFK elementary is a PBIS school. So they've done a lot of work around how to engage all of their families and use, I believe their cultural their cultural liaisons to do some of this work as well so their cultural liaisons are a big part of their PBIS work. And I'll just like to add because S 16 is so centrally focused on data collection. It's critical. It's absolutely critical that we evaluate language accessibility for students statewide and school based surveys for example in the Burlington school district we've spent two weeks now engaging with the Burlington school districts cultural liaisons to audio translate our written English survey into the eight most commonly narrated languages in the school district so we're not just collecting data and student voice from the white kids who can speak English and who can read English because without having data collection systems that are equitable and critically conscious we're never going to elevate student voice from our marginalized populations. And I'm going to have to stop us what I want to say is we're going to be and it's passionate and I can feel the passion in this room, and we are going to be marking up the bill next week. And I'm going to be reaching out to representative Brady to help with that. And I can speak we can talk a little bit later representative Brady about that but we obviously have some great resources here, and I would just ask that you, you could be available for questions at that point because I believe we're going to be trying to move this next week. And so we're now it's really the language. Concepts now it's the language. Okay. And with that, I want to thank you really fabulous conversation and how lucky we are to have these resources versus here and and also so great to be having this conversation follow our discussion about Act one. So representative Brady did you have something. Well the thing that we didn't get to that I do want to his drug drugs. I think that so often at the high at higher levels in high school level expulsion suspension things is around substance abuse. And we haven't talked about that at all so I'm just wondering as we move forward on the bill is there anything missing is there a way to address. I don't know but I'm concerned that we haven't dealt in that realm. Yeah, I think we're going to get back up and maybe you could follow up with some of the experts in this room would be great. Yeah, so to let me know whoever you know is the best to reach out to on the substance abuse parts of our discipline policies yeah. Yeah, we have john kid on our team who's working right now on restorative approaches to drug issues in schools, put me in touch. Can you connect on that. Thank you. I'm going to we are now have an hour behind and I know we have people that are waiting to come in. I can the committee take a five minute break five minutes enough. Okay, we'll take a five minute break we'll be back at 1051 house that Sam. And