 ask if anybody in the audience has anything to say? No. So can I make an introduction? Yes, please. Veronica Eldridge, she was here last month as well. She is doing some practicum hours with us, an Eastmont player. She's looking, she's at SNH, she's looking to get her administrator's license. So she's been putting in lots of the hours both at school during the day and then at four hours for the last two meetings. So I just want to do it. And I'm a lot of people don't know. And she's an Eastmont player. She's a teacher at very young school. She played self-overdare. So in case you didn't know. Yes, but only like I'm able to go. All people, you would be okay with it. Keep going, don't. We were just introducing the guest. Provisions to the agenda? Anybody? Move us to the consent agenda, 2.1 approvements of 10 to 26. Take a motion. I'll take a motion. I mean, I'll be a make a motion. I'll make a motion to accept or to approve the minutes. I'll take a second. I'll second it. Thank you. Any discussion of the minutes of September 26? Do we get spellings and all of that? Not seeing or hearing any discussion. I'm ready for a vote. All of those in favor of approving the minutes as presented, please say aye. Opposed, abstained. Thank you. 3.1 student monitoring report. Were you all able to access the full monitoring report on under Bill's blog? In pieces, parts. Like I found some slides in different parts of it. It wasn't exactly like what he was projecting. Okay. So, so I'm going to direct you to a totally different place where you'll see Eastmont failures. Okay. Given the late hour and the number of slides that I've put together, I'm going to show you the highlights tonight. But so that you all know how to get to the full 30 something slide presentation, if you're interested in looking at a lot more data, if you go to the WCSU site, go to administration, superintendent, superintendent's blog, then you'll see over on the right hand, it says October monitoring reports. Oh yeah, I did see them all over there. Okay. So that's where you'll, but I'm going to show you because a number of slides you've already seen tonight from the full presentation, and then a lot of them are just me getting into the weeds with data that I won't waste your time with tonight. But so these are really the highlights. So looking at transferable skills, one of the things that I tried to do because this is a very similar report as I shared with you last October is to do a comparison of where we were a year ago. So looking at the 2018 climate survey data, which, which students, families and teachers took in the late spring of 2018 last year, 85% of our students in grades one through six believe they work problems out with their peers and 92% of students in grades one through six believe they have choices in what they learn. This number has increased from 65% a year ago. Our climate survey data doesn't doesn't align well with our transferable skills, but it's really the only place right now we have data on our transferable skills. So I felt like this is important data to share. At the end of this year, our teachers will all have had a full year of reporting on report cards, the transferable skills, and assessing students, but right now we just don't have that information. This is a similar slide as what I shared last year, but it's an update of all that we we did in the 2017-18 years for professional learning. EMS teachers spent about 110 hours last year in PD, whether that was the 90-minute embedded PD sessions or the 90-minute Wednesday afternoon ones. And this is just a list, not an exhaustive list, but it covers most of what we spend our professional time on last year. Can I ask a question? Yeah, please do ask questions. How much time do you feel you guys are spending on an infinite campus learning and adjusting? Yeah, so we are using one Wednesday month for IC as a whole staff. Troubleshooting, just helping each other out. Dave Willard is our IC person in the building. He is spending two hour long lunch periods a week, like on Mondays and Wednesdays, where people just come to his room and it's open and he's available to help support. So I would say on average a teacher's probably spending about an hour a week maybe on IC. And do you feel that's sustainable or turned down? It's overwhelming right now, but it's not, but it's because they're learning to feel it. Really? What are they doing? Entering scores. So the expectation is that all teachers will enter assignments they're called, but scores into IC at least once every two weeks in every subject. Every single EMEA's teacher in their goal setting this fall wrote a goal for themselves. So some might have written, I'm going to learn the tool, right? It's at that level. Some might have written, I am going to enter in assignments for once a week. Some goals were really more around what it is they wanted to report to parents, not the tool, but the information provided. So for the parent portal? It's all parent portal. It's all entering in assignments, so they've had their traditional paper grade books. It's used in the electronic grade book. Any other, please stop me as we go through. So this next slide is specific to EMEA's. On the left you're going to see similar to what you saw in the cafeteria, but this is what I had shared a year ago where we were with report card local and SBAC as far as triangulation and where we are now. Very similar to SU. Our teachers are scoring students. My assumption similar to bills is a little bit harder than our local assessments and SBAC measures. This is the literacy. So that's the goal that our report cards now, so since you left our report card language has completely changed, which should be in alignment with the other two. But is literacy not the classroom changed as well? Well, yes. To reflect, yes. We're students. Yes. That's the goal. And it looks as though it's happening in literacy. My next slide that I'm going to show you isn't quite the same. Similar to what we saw in math, there's still a discrepancy in what our teachers are seeing and assessing on a daily basis in math and what our local and SBAC assessments are, the data that that's giving us. So it came down slightly from 80% to I think that's 67%, but we're still in math. Our teachers are scoring students as doing, being more proficient than our local assessments or SBAC. Both of those got closer to the SBAC. But both are, yes, both did, yes. So besides not having enough time for math teaching, does that mean that they might have not as high expectation as they have in literacy in math? Could that play into it? Because there's no you could make that. I think this range, I don't know if we have the data to draw on that. We say there's not on a line that, by what's assessed or reported to be assessed. We have to go, I think Alicia may have that from her walkthrough, so she's in new classrooms a lot more. But we have it across, we don't have the quantitative data that doesn't give you the lot. But don't. All the data, data gives you the lot. But don't we have more data now in our data well for where students are in both literacy and math, better or is math still We're still lacking data in that. This fall we triangulated data just on our fall assessments. We looked at the start of 360 measure and we looked at teacher, kind of teacher judgment, which would be report cards. And as far as other assessments go, we're kind of all over the place. Some grades up to grade two, we're using the PNOA math assessment. Beyond grade two, we don't have other great measures that we're using. That could be something, in conclusion, you come to a minute or another report card slide in just a minute. That I think will help us learn a little bit as well. So the blue, the blue bar was the data on our report cards from 2016-17 and the red is from this past year. So I'll let you look at that for just a minute. One thing that this is telling me and the math and literacy goes in with that for the report cards is we, our teaching is more aligned on your question to the SLOs, what we're reporting on. I think that as individuals, we sometimes have a tendency to get the benefit of the doubter score higher if you look at the blue. Last year when I reported this, it was 80% or greater in every subject that students were proficient. We know that's not the case. And if you look at this past year's data, I think that's a more realistic view because we're assessing to measures that we just didn't have before with the report card data. We knew our report cards needed to change. So this is following similar to those like two cohorts of students over time, our current sixth graders and our current seventh graders. At the bottom it's hard to read but that's from 2015 through 2018. So it's three years worth of data. What you want to see is a jump of between 30 and 40 points per year. So the goal or the hope would be that the students would gain about 60 to 65 points growth over the period of time. A huge celebration similar to what we saw with SU data is our students are growing at a higher rate than that in literacy. And just to remind you, the black line is proficient. The yellow line is where the median scored for EMS. So we are scoring above proficient over time following these two cohorts of students. And this is a comparison free and reduced lunch and non. I did not do IEP students following cohorts because their numbers were so small. But if you look at our non free and reduced lunch students as third graders, and then again as sixth graders, they made 130 points worth of growth. And our third graders as sixth graders free and reduced lunch made 157 points worth of growth. This is a huge celebration for us. Our potentially at risk students, our free and reduced lunch students are making greater growth than those not identified. So these slides that look like this with the yellow and black lines are all only aspect data. So I'm going to show you a slide on that in my analysis. But so you're looking for at least 90 points in these slides. 90 points would be three years worth of growth. Our students are growing. It actually ends up being two and a half years worth of growth every two years. But I'll show you what I'm interested in. Well, I don't need an answer, but will we be able to draw some correlations between the tier, the additional tier interventions that we're doing in that by town meeting? Same word. Well, I mean, as we continue to defend that program, does it look like some of this data would be some of this improvement that we're seeing that we could make a correlation between our dedication of resources for that? Well, no. The outcomes from that are being reflected in some of this data that we're seeing. Yes. I'm going to share with you an activity that I did with the staff and looking. So we went through the very long 30 slide presentation. And I'm going to share some questions that came about from them and some next steps for us in looking at the data. We, this report, because, well, one of the reasons, because our reports needed to be consistent across the issue and not every school has the same interventions, they all look different. So what you're seeing is I'm only using free and reduced lunch. Could we pull out those students receiving interventions and look at their data? Yes. But it's not for tonight. That's fine. Yeah. But whatever the data is, if I mean, so this is a tiny snapshot that we're seeing. But I mean, my feeling is, you know, like maximum kudos to our staff. I mean, I'm looking at free free and reduced lunch that, you know, our mean or average, whatever that whatever that yellow line is, the median has moved in those three years from below proficient to above proficient. Yes. I mean, we're moving the needle. Finally. So some of my frustration shared at the full board. I had this report previously. I couldn't have been quite as frustrated. Okay. Anyway, thank you. So just some analysis from those slides. Our report cards are much more aligned with local and aspect. Those numbers up there show the 61, 66, and 71%. That's the alignment of this current this year. And that's where we were a year ago. 87% is what teachers believe students were proficient in aspect was telling us 60. So we are getting a much better alignment. Four years of aspect data indicates our students are doing better each year in literacy. So it's an average and you don't have this slide, but it's in the full. So basically, our students in literacy are gaining an average of 34 scale points each year, which is over a year's growth, which is great. EMS median scores continue to be above proficient, which is similar to the SU. We do continue to have a discrepancy in our scores of free and reduced and non. Following two cohorts of students, our free and reduced students are gaining skills actually at a greater rate than those who have not been identified, which is huge. And then following two cohorts over time, students that made at least two and a half years worth of growth in ELA in two years time. What is the percentage of free and reduced now? Mid 20s. We always hover around 24, 26%. Now on to math. Very similar slide. This is using aspect data. Black line is proficient. So this is following two cohorts again, our current sixth graders and our current seventh graders in math over time. The goal being that they would make 60 points worth of growth in two years is two years worth of growth. So our current sixth graders are right around two years worth of growth in two years and our current seven are just under. And as you can see, our yellow median line looks a lot different than it does in literacy in math. So that last number went down? Yeah. That means our, our, the current seventh graders, our last year sixth graders performed worse than they had the year before. So this is last, so they are now in seventh, but they took this at the end of sixth grade. So that's six, five, four. So that answers my question too, which is whether there was some topic area that we were missing. Didn't our interventions drop throughout that period of time? That did happen. That did happen. Yep. Last year they did? Yep. We had a decrease in FTEs for interventions last year. In math? Yes. I thought Ann moved into that. She, because she was a classroom teacher in third grade and sixth grade, two hours of her day. So she ended up, our FTEs and interventions in math declined greatly last year. That's, that was one of the things that we addressed in the budget. Do you remember I showed you that, that data, and I said, we had some data to share last year that was looking good and I was worried it may not look so good. But that also reminds me of what we learned, not learned, but we learned that we went to the board training altogether, that having that, the teacher that can address the 90 percent, you know, like the high quality tier, high quality tier one is crucial because the interventions fall. It's critical. So while correlation is not necessarily causation, it's an interesting correlation. Well, I mean it suggests that we can get the job done with the resources that were available in literacy with the same amount of resources. We can't get the job done in math. Our resources aren't the same in literacy and math. We had a full-time reading interventionist and we did not. It was a .5 and a .2 in there. Okay. So not full-time. Our reading into literacy interventionist was a 50 percent and our math interventionist is 20 percent. Okay. And what are they now? 50 and 50? Now I'd have to do a time study, so can you hold that and make sure I come back to it? Because that's a really good question, but it will lead me on a tangent that I think is important for you to hear. This is looking also at non-free and reduced students. Same exact cohort of students. They're now in seventh grade, but as third graders where they were performing non-free and reduced, and then as sixth graders, and then as third graders and sixth graders, those identified as potentially at risk students. So the goal point is 90 points worth of growth is three years. So our non-free and reduced are doing, they're making about three years worth of growth in three years and our, in this particular cohort, we're not making the same gains. Same exact kids we're talking about in literacy as in math. So my analysis of looking at all of this data is that report cards are slightly more aligned and you can see those numbers comparing this year to last year at this time. Four years of ESPEC data show that EMS median is at or below provision in all grades. Our scores in math have actually declined since 2014 and 15 in looking at ESPEC alone. There continues to be a discrepancy in math for our free and reduced in non, and then following two cohorts over time, our free and reduced lunch students are not making the same gains. So it's the total opposite of what we saw in literacy. Before I go on because I'm, let me go back to your question, Darcy. So what we do every fall, we give the fall assessments and then we get together as grade level teams with all of the interventions and we look at the data and we decide who needs what for interventions specifically in literacy and math. So both of our intervention is our highly skilled to teach math or literacy. So it's not really a 50-50 kind of a thing. It's an example would be, you know, we may have a grade level that has barely any literacy needs and by the time they get to four through six grade that's the case. They're readers, right? They're pretty strong in our scores support that, but they may both have to be doing math interventions, right? So it's not a matter of anymore we have a math person and a reading person, they're just giving interventions to kids and whatever, which of those two subjects they need. So it's kind of a shift in, so their FTEs are the same, right? We have the two bodies, but another example is in our first grade right now, they're both giving math interventions. So our intervention block really isn't in literacy because our teachers are feeling like they can meet the needs in the classroom, but when we do reteach it's only in math. So it really varies depending on, not necessarily personnel, but what the kids, if that makes sense. It's based on the data, right? To what degree can you disaggregate this data in terms of like, if you look at it from a professional development lens, for example, can you see trends up and downs and I mean, I assume if you can see that that you address it in some way. So Bill was right when he said, and it was actually nine and 10 years ago that we put a lot of focus in literacy instruction. And the teachers really, I think especially at the elementary level, you go into teaching and you know you're going to be teaching reading, right? And writing. As you go up in grades, so first of all, a lot of focus was put into professional development back when you were here indeed around first instruction of reading. What does it look like? We use the Readers and Writers Workshop model. We have had a ton of professional development in it. We have programs that we use in reading and writing. A lot of time has been spent in PD around that. Our scores show that. That has not happened in that in the same way. We don't have a program and you'll see later on we're piloting and we need to have one. And teachers comfort level or interest in teaching math is not quite the same. I have teachers who just would rather not teach math. So we're departmentalizing as early as kindergarten and as high as fifth and sixth grade, but we haven't thrown everything we have into it like we have with literacy and our scores are reflecting that. My personal belief is a huge piece of that is the program. When the program went away, which was around 2014-15, regardless of what you have to say about the program we were using, it was something. And when teachers were left to create and figure out on their own, our scores kind of plummeted. What was the point in the program? It wasn't an alignment with Common Core. So there were there were good reasons for it, but it also was to the detriment of our students because teachers are floundering. And I mean, you can speak to that, Ellen. We spend hours and days, you know, talking about math and finding materials and looking at websites and trying to create and our time and energy were not spent in the right ways. Where if we had something in common to look at and as a guide and to use it to train as a framework similar to what we've done with the teachers college and reading and writing, I don't believe our scores would. So is there anybody looking into that? So yes. The good news is there is a pilot going on this fall. Almost every single one of the Islam player teachers asked to be on that and are on that pilot. So they're piloting a couple of different programs, two different programs with the goal that we will have a program next fall. But I think that what we're seeing in scores is a direct result of teachers just trying to do the best they could with what they had. And I may have just missed what you said, but is that pilots? Ask you why there's a program. Thank you. My dreams of papers. I feel for the teachers. So looking at, and I want to share with you some rationale behind this because you saw the table in Bill's package. Spending time talking about that. So we have a total of 155 students in grades one through six. In September, 51% of those students were proficient. And by June, we believe 74% should be proficient. Of those students, we believe 79% will make at least one year's growth. Now, let me tell you how these numbers were developed. And then kind of the thinking, it goes right along with your conversation about guarantees. So I sat down every, I had every single teacher fill this statement out for their children, looking at the data that we have thinking about who their kids are as learners. Who do they know can become proficient, who might be a stretch, but they want to get them there. And then who are those students who we need to keep moving along, but they're not sure that they're going to hit if you're in the red and you are way below proficient to become proficient by June of this year may not be attainable. In looking at that table, there's a wide range of where people hope, where schools hope their students will be from us being the lowest of 79% of our students will make one year's gain to 100% of students in some buildings. And Flora came to me earlier today and she said, you know, what is this? Why are we so low? And I think the way that that we have talked about writing goals and my background in special ed is you write goals that are specific, measurable, and attainable. I don't believe, I think that 100% is a wonderful goal to have. I don't believe that we will have 100% of our students in that place in eight months. I think, Flora, some of those targets, some of those goals you've seen, some boards I know of adopted guarantees, those could be a reflection of boards that adopted guarantees. That's why it's 100%. Yeah, and I was just wondering, because I could see, I thought that there might be something wrong with it there, because when you go, and it said September, a percent of students proficient, we were by far, you know, not by a lot, but, you know, quite a bit. 51% we have the highest proficiency. So then I was like, we have the highest proficiency, we don't have as many students to get up in the growth. So I was just, it was just a question. I was satisfied with that attainable, you know, I think I agree with you that having something more specific that is attainable. We just have to see what the results are. That's what I said to Flora, I said, I think it will be very interesting at the end of the year to see where we all land. You know, my hope is that we're above 79%. And we're, you know, pleasantly surprised, and we've moved more students than we believe could have moved in a year. It goes back to that conversation Ruben, you and Bill and I had where you said a community member had asked you, like, how can you ever say 100% are going to be, right? That means my child's always going to fail because they're never going to be, they're never going to make that 100%. It's just two different ways of thinking. Or the school, by extension, is always going to, it's like no child left behind, which I'm very mindful of setting a goal that looks or smells anything like that. I do not want to set teachers up to fail any more than I want to set students up to fail. That's why we'll be in a growth model. Right. I like the growth model and Matt made a good comment in our group discussion about, you know, maybe the guarantee is something like, you know, some high 90% of students will team these goals, but every student will make some acceptable level of progress each year. Right. So we can acknowledge that this isn't a no child left behind kind of goal, but we're definitely going to make growth happen. Right. We may not get everybody over the finish line because we acknowledge that reality is reality, but we're not going to just give up on that one student who isn't going to ever cross the line and say, you know what, we're just putting our resources somewhere else. Right. And likewise, we're not going to take all of our resources from the students that are already over the line and just leave them there. We want those students to be going as well. That's true. And that was one thing that I talked to the teachers about. We have students looking at last year's growth report. We have students who are in, above proficient in math, who may have made four or five points worth of growth in a year. And I said to the teacher, so what, you know, what are they doing just sitting there putting in seek time? Like they need to be making 30 points worth of growth just as much as the student was struggling. It's not acceptable to say, well, just because they've already got it, you know, they're good to go. You need to be making sure, like you said, every student is making happy growth. As if we discuss guarantees, I'm adverse to guaranteeing outcomes. I think we guarantee opportunities. Because you have to acknowledge part of the outcome is individual. And you can't guarantee what an individual is going to do. But you can guarantee the opportunities that we're going to provide to students. And they don't have to be equal. They can be equitable. So So here's our current state that teachers continue to participate in PD through embedded PD weekly after or Wednesday afternoons and then individual coaching sessions. Our report card data, local assessments and ESPEC are becoming more closely aligned. ESPEC data is showing that students are doing better in ELA than in math, especially those who are at risk. Our free and reduced lunch students are making greater gains than those not identified in ELA. Like I said, our math scores have declined over the last four years. And transferable skills continue to be taught and assessed. And my hope is that next October, I will share with you some real data around that. I'm having a, what is ELA? English Language Arts. Thank you. This is having a vocabulary moment. Thank you. The desired state. The goal is that all students will make at least one year's growth in math, right? That is that is where we do want to be. That we will have a common math program to support our math instructions, similar to what we have in reading and writing. That we will have Jen talked about this earlier. We'll have local common assessments for each SLA. We don't. The gap between our at-risk students and those who are not will decrease in all subjects in all grades. We'll continue our coaching in academic behavior and technology. The MTSS, Stephen, what you were, you were talking about our interventions and all of that will be in place for students who need that academically and behaviorally. And this last bullet is around our parent portal and opening that up that the parents and families will actually understand where their students are at at any given time. All right. How are you teaching parents how to do that? So we've had parent information night in early September. We had a huge, huge majority of our parents come. Arlen did six sessions with parents, 20 minute sessions throughout the course of the night where she did training that she took that training and did kind of screenshots through and walked them walk parents through IEC that's been in the newsletter a few times that's gone out to families. So if you didn't weren't able to go, here's how. We've had parents come in and just do individual sessions. Fortunately, we have a lot of we have a lot of new families but we also have a lot of families at U32 who the portal is not new. Yeah. How are you making sure that you reach the parents that really need that access to that data? I think classroom teachers would. They have. So at Open House that was a piece of it, especially the parent teacher conference is coming up. There's a piece around the portal. I feel like we have, and I'll have to look at the percentage. We have a large percentage of our parents. So there's a form you have to fill out in order to get on. A large percentage of our families have done that. So they've at least taken the first step and we're already getting some of our teachers communication from families about assignments, which means they're looking at them. Just going back to one of the things that we've said in the full meeting, which is, you know, those engaging those students and families that are really struggling. How do we make sure that they access those tools that are available? You can get the information on your phone. It doesn't look the same. It doesn't look the same. And I don't know. I mean, it might just be a kindergarten thing, because the assessments are slightly different, but I don't know. You've seen it. But I was like, Jill had posted something and I was like, 16 out of what? And she's like, what doesn't show you? So I said screenshots of my phone and of the web, and you had no idea what the it was out of. So she ended up putting it in the comments, which yes, we did that in October, right, which is great. But it's still a struggle. I mean, for me, I'm like, that's annoying. I have to go all the way. I mean, I hate the phone app anyways, but because you can't do anything on it, but it's it's an interest. She brought that up at our in service in October. So it's definitely a lot of learning from on the teachers and parents, what works, what's useful, what's helpful, what doesn't work, what makes it more confusing. It's all starting to kind of surface as we're using it. But that's it. That's a good point about those who need it and maybe don't necessarily have access to it. That we need to be thoughtful. It's just something to think about. Like, it's not something that I expect an answer to. Do you find that the parents that need the communication also come to a parent-teacher conferences or do you feel like general management? We really, we have, it's, our parents are amazing. They come. You should pretty much everything. And even those families who can't make it, you know, they might, their kids might go to CC after school and we meet with them, well, you know, before they pick them up from CC or, you know, at different times. But we have four phone conferences, you know, we have really good parent participation, whether it's conferences or, you know, other, other way like open house last week, you know, just coming in to look at your children's work. Our parents care very much how their children are doing, which is wonderful. We're lucky in that sense. So this is, this is the hope for this year that instructional coaching will continue. We now have, and Lindy had asked this question. So Anne Carter stepped out to be a small pillar, but is spending some time with us in her role as the WCSU math coach. Identify a common math program as a goal for this year. Continue. So this is a big one, and this goes to the DMG report, the blocks of time for our students who need interventions in multiple areas. That's a huge issue for us. And we're trying to work through that. So that they're not missing tier one instruction, but that they're getting interventions where they need it. We have started really using triangulation of data this year, and we'll continue to do that. And then all of the wonderful opportunities around transferable skills. And finally, the board. What can you do? Continue to support us around the our tiered instruction for students. Hold me accountable for making sure that the teachers are getting what they need in order to provide that high quality instruction for students. Keeping the implementation plan and our CIP at the forefront of our conversations and offer guidance on what your priorities are for us as a school. We've talked a lot about ways to have the board share information with families in the community and then continue to be the support of an important board. A budget question. As you're looking at these math programs, are you looking at purchasing a, I mean that would be a big budget item. If a PAND program was bought in math, those aren't as cheap as Cochens writing and reading units type things. So there's some that we're looking at that are free. And then there's others that have a cost to them. We have this math pilot crew. What Bill has told us is basically not to worry about that in our local budgets right now. So that is a very good Bill Kimball question. I don't have the answer for that. I'm not on the pilot. I know that another principal, the principal at Berlin, Erin, had asked that exact question. You know, should we be thinking about this? And he said, we don't need to think about it at the local level now. I don't know if there's SU money they're looking to shift into that. I don't have an answer to that. I remember going through a couple of adoptions when I was working at East Montpelier when they went from everyday math to some other math or and it's a huge cost. So thinking about that is something, I mean to me that's a board kind of thing is budget. The other thing through all of this as you're having your, you know, what I think about all of this is there's a wealth of PD going on at your school with your 90 minute block, your early release time, as well as all your SU time. So there should be some expertise and some real knowledge as far as I think that should be an expectation with that much PD time built into the system. That's not normal in other systems. So I think that's something to keep, I'm not saying cut it or anything else. I'm just saying that needs to be remembered that teachers are spending a lot of time with each other. Yes. Yeah, that's very true. Concerning the math program that may or may not be heard, and there's Ken Wehian, as being one of the fiscally conservative people, I would want, I would expect to hear from you what's the best option and not be concerned about cost. And if it's, you know, a million dollars, then the board is going to say no, we can't do it. But that's why they're piloting. But I mean, literally, if the difference is between $5,000 and $20,000, we need to go for that. That's not a big deal. Probably not, from my perspective. $10,000 is exactly what we need and what the staff fully feels like what's going to work best. We need to have 10,000 more boxes like. We need to put the resources in. Yeah. Yeah. But I think you need to hear from us that find out what's best and tell us that. Right. And you've heard of Ken Steven. From the fiscally responsible one. Um, no, I am waiting to hear back from this, the pilot committee, who also Ellen Dorsey and Han Carter and Jen Miller are all part of that. You know, so we principals are relying on them to share that information back with us as they pilot it with their students. And I don't know the exact timeline of that, but I know it's in people's minds around budget. And we'll share with you when I know more. I think that's it. Yeah. Well, I just wanted to say thank you because a lot of work and, you know, it's very important. It's super informative and, you know, and I, you know, thank you for clarifying that, uh, the attainable goal, which makes me, you know, I think it's also that we're, I'm super proud of the work that we're doing. And yes, please thank everybody on our behalf, you know, because it's, you know, they're working really hard and as dreadful as the math, you know, we have the eye on the ball now. So we're like, yeah. No, this course. This course. No, this course. No, math is awesome. Yeah. That's great. I did see on the, the one question I forgot to ask is like, we, we did had a column for science. So we, because, so Jen shared with you, we did not get any data on, we piloted it in the spring. So we don't have anything to report. Um, and as she said, it was very rigorous. And I'm guessing that when I report to you in a year on YouTube this year, that'll be another topic of conversation. They did announce that the meeting Jen was there two days ago, where yesterday, maybe we were in a couple of clouds yesterday, the AOE is going to release either district or SU, not in the final analysis data from that test statewide in December, I think they said, which nobody had expected. Okay. But they said there is going to be some sort of not student level, but and because we're all individual districts, when they use the word district, I don't really know if, because that would be a school level in our SU. So it may be school level. I don't know, but there will be some data from that science test. Not only was it rigorous, it was very confusing as to how it worked. Yes, it and they are now going to be two complete sessions instead of the way it was last time. So one will end and another one will begin versus a kid sits down and does the whole two sessions without you realizing, wait, this was supposed to be two days or they thought they were done and it just going and going and going. So they have fixed that they said at that meeting. Well, that's good. And then one last thing would you mind because it's being recorded sharing the event that just happened at East Montpelier with the coding of the kids. Oh my gosh, we've had so much happen at East Montpelier. We've had WCAX come to us three times in the last three weeks. So last week, we had, I don't know if you saw it, Thursday night of open house. Some of you know him with him. Governor Scott came and held a press conference in our library, his usual press conference, but the topic was around coding. And this hour of code, it's called where students from all over. Governors got asked what coding was and if you don't know. Basically, everything that goes into making something work or run right programming it. Our students do a lot of that. And so we had students from grades one, two, three and six come and teach him and many members of the AOE how to code and what that looks like at the first grade level and what that looks like at sixth grade level. It was awesome. And it was a great afternoon. They spent about two and a half hours with us. And then today we had them come WCAX came back and they are doing a report. I'll let you know when it's coming out on trauma informed schools and PBIS in elementary schools. So they interviewed on David Lerner, sixth grade teacher. They interviewed students. They kind of recorded a circle. The sixth grade class circled up and talked about PBIS and what that means to them. They interviewed Kelly Bushy. They came here and talked to some students about restorative practice and what that looks like at this level. And they're going to be interviewing Dave Malnick and they're going to put together a piece in the next couple of weeks. So that's very exciting. Also today Washington World came with Rotary Club and some students from the Center Armand Career Center and they planted apple trees in honor of David Lerner. So they planted two trees in two different spots. David was a huge, as you know, part of East Montpelier and he was part of the Rotary, brought dictionaries to students, talked about the history of East Montpelier for many years. So we have two trees planted in his honor that happened today. So pictures would be in Washington World on that. So we got some. Where are the trees? There's one up kind of near the sidewalk, near the the loop where you park. And then there's one we have a gap you probably notice in the maple trees along the line right there where we had to take them down. Thanks. Yeah. Thank you. Thanks. If you are interested in looking on a lot more slides with a lot more data, you can go on. And Bill Scott's publicist or something put a lot of pictures from it on Facebook. It was on Facebook. Yeah. And I was at the VSBA conference and I totally said that Dan French came in and he was like the first thing he said. He came over and talked to me and said like, you know, he was really pleased and he wanted to come back. Yeah. So yeah, the secretary of education was there too. And he was super pleased and wanted to come back to the school. And he was very impressed. A lot of men in suits and he was so cute because one of the first graders said, I met with 12 governors too. No, they weren't all the guys. They looked like they could. Lacey was terrified. Yeah, she was. And then she came home and she was like, he didn't even know what coding was. So he's coming back to retouch. Okay. A little bit of levity behind us. Thank you for that. That was really helpful. Act 46 update. Are there any questions, I guess? Because we... Is there anything that we need to cover that we didn't cover in the full board? I don't think, I think the biggest thing is the timeline. We gave Bill, I would have said about 10 or 8 questions on the representation on the borders that somebody resigned from Berlin to... So just getting some things on writing to make sure that we can do what we want to do. And the timeline is just so compressed. So we want to know there's ways that we... Let's say they announced on November 30th that we can turn around and start being proactive now on how to get to the end point. And then whatever work we're doing is advisory to the transitional board, right? Because we don't... I think the impression was that the full board meeting that formed them was it's probably not going to be advisory. It's probably going to be what the decisions will be based on. Yeah, but because we don't have... Because we're not at 706 B, we... Technically, we do not have that authority. That's the way that we are operating, but... You don't have any authority, but you're still going to make specific recommendations. And that's it. So I'm not trying to diminish what we're doing, but I'm also trying to be very careful of the language that we're using. And that is all obviously depending on what they're going to say on November 30th. I just have a question. Yes. Some of it relates to what Alicia was just talking about with Governor Scott coming and the coding program and also the lovely eco harvest day. Does East Montpelier have a higher tech budget that puts money into coding? And does East Montpelier have taxpayer money pay for eco? Are we the only school of the bio elementaries that has eco? Are we the only one that has coding? And what will happen with Act 46 when there's one tech budget and, you know, if people do fundraising, where does that fundraising money go? Does it go into one giant pot or does it keep it? I mean, what happens? Well, I would think the fundraising would be similar to a PTO or PTA, which each school would have their own and have those kinds of funds. I don't know. I don't know. But they talked about councils. Until agreements were reached. Those would be on the forefront of discussion, yeah. Does East Montpelier pay any money for eco? Yes. And the rest is funders. Yes. And so what about the coding? A lot of through grants over the years has been through grants in a week. Every school has a tech budget, which is pretty simple. Pretty much the same. So you could, I mean, it's a question, can you write a grant just through your school? Or does it have to be written for the new? Grant would be written for the new district. And the advantage, the advantage is being a larger district to qualify for more grants. I guess I had a question for Governor Scott that he was sold out and molded to say, did both of the programs school budget? Or of the WCSU budget? Well, he's also very outspoken about the higher spending schools. And we are one. Correct. So there he was touting it. And I looked at it and said to Dave, I tell him, we're one of the highest spending schools when he's there touting it. I just think, you know. Yeah. And I don't think that conversation is going to take, he is specifically conservative. So we don't know what he's going to do. We have very little control of how we're going to use our money anyways, because depending on how they change, if they do a move like they did this year on reducing Education 1, we'll be looking at numbers completely different too. So, so regardless of that 36, to get everybody our schools to go down to get those up, or is everyone going to go up? You see what I'm saying? Yeah, yeah. I guess there's a lot of point that we have. It's a concern. Is that that that is a possibility? Yes. Yeah, right. And it would be a shame. I tend to lean optimistic sometimes. I've worked in budgets where it was so budget schools had personal money, but it's something that has to be because of that school having fundraisers or having grants specific to their whatever. I mean, about the $10,000 that music program, I mean, a gift. Current gifts and funds go forward under it. 46, they remain at the district. And fundraising that's current remains at the school. Those are good questions, but yes. So technically, we're just as a town going to have a raffle. Lottery? Yeah. Yeah. And it's all going to be about culture. Just like it took a while, depending on where we go. I'm not assuming that we're going to be consolidated, but I can see some of the writing on the wall. It's how that culture develops and how do we to how do we to budget it together, right? I don't we don't feel like we're giving to both Peter, like we and it's sort of how we rationalize that we're all interconnected whether we want it or not. I'm part of me thinks that Bill had mentioned in the towards the end that he's going to be asking us for an audit of how our time is spent and what our schedules look like. You know, and I think one of the goals of that 46 is to for equal opportunities for students, right? So, you know, I think that audit, similar to the how much each building is worth and what are our assets and our our debts, it will just give us more information of where we're all starting. I don't know what others I know. Yes, there are other schools that have ego. I don't know who they are or what, you know, what, what extent, because we've just never done that kind of an audit as an issue that I'm thinking is all coming. And there were a couple of superintendents presenting at the BSA meeting and one of them that from the maple run, I forgot his name right now and he said that there's through the process, his schools haven't changed that much. There's a school that offers PE. I forget what he said. It's like today's that we and he said that that that character, that flavor is not something that he has, like try to destroy or change, you know, like the flavor of different schools is still. That's what I see. Yeah, it's still there. So it's so it's depending what culture we create and what, you know, leadership we have for that. So it doesn't necessarily mean that we're all going to be cookie cutter schools, right? That not every school, there's so many. Yeah, I get it. I get it, Ellen, but that's not why we're striving. I think that's fair to say. And I don't think that's what any school in the district wants. So, you know, I think, I don't think any community wants it. So I, again, I remain optimistic, but if that's what it comes to. Okay, good on act 46. Okay. Reports to the board administration. Fiscal report. Action agenda rescind east Montpelier policies C1 board meeting agenda preparations meetings and distribution C2 regular board meetings C3 public participation at board meetings D1 personnel recruitment selection appointment and background check D10 public complaints about personnel. I assume these are all out of date policies that are just on the books. These are the ones from the policy committee. And that's what when we went through, we found things like the background check, all of that has changed since these were written and they've been updated with the BSBA ones that we've been passing. So they needed to just be taken off of the books. I would take a more of your recommendation. I recommend that we resend these. Just summer what they did second to motion. They went through the books. And as we did the recommended and required through BSBA, there were other ones in our books that they are we don't do them. They don't do them that way. Yeah. One thing I need to hear this is that you recommend it. I recommend it because you're the only one here. I'm really good knows right. Well, you're making me powerful. Any discussion? Ready for a vote? All those in favor please say aye. Aye. Abstain. Nay. Nay abstain. Thanks. 5.2 approve retirement opt out for teachers. This has to be on you. And I don't want to limit it. You've done it twice in my nine years. It's just something we do every year. What are what do we opt out that people can not be in the retirement system? Or no. What does this mean? That we allow us early retirement. Early retirement sounds different to me than opt out. Yeah. Our teachers. It's different verbage than we do. Yeah. Yeah. Right. The wording of this may think it wasn't early retirement, the buy out kind of thing. I asked Bill because I noticed it tonight and he said it's just it needs to be on there. You need to take action on it every year. So we're voting. I'm recommending that you do not because do we just take no action or do we have to actively decline? No teachers have come forward and I think that you would the language is weird. That's why I'm asking. So that is the typical language. And then if we were going to recommend something there would be we will allow X number of staff that can exercise that option to get paid to retire. So what this is saying is that we're not extending any extra benefits to retire. You can retire. But you're not getting any salary for a few years. Yeah. So if we're voting, we're voting to approve this, if my understanding. So we're voting against us. We're voting for not. If we approve this, so we're saying that we are voting to approve the opt out retirement for zero teachers. I mean, I don't I make a motion to approve the opt out though. Well, yeah, we don't know if you're we don't want to allow it. Right. So we say. So we're going to vote. Okay. So we're voting. So when I was asked, we're voting to approve no retirement opt out for teachers. Oh, see, I was going to do more. We're making a motion to approve retirement. And then we're going to vote. I think it's better to vote it. To word it differently. To approve that there will be no opt no retirement opt out for teachers. So that by voting affirmative, you're saying, I'll make the motion that we can I phrase that that we do not the motion is we do not offer a retirement opt out for teachers. And I probably should say. I'll second it. Okay. 1819 is not number. No, it's 1920. Yeah. So yeah, that's what I was trying to make. So the motion is not to offer retirement option. Oh, for teachers in 2019, 2020. Okay. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Any discussion? All those in favor of approving of not offering a yes. What Steve said. Hi. Opposed? Thank you. Approve the board order. I make a motion to approve the board orders in the amount of $33,248 and one cent. Discussion. If I just ask what the hindment stuff was, the $600 and something dollars? We a couple of things we're doing the new phonics program in K-2, which has been awesome. And we are piloting FMP version three. We are using version one still and we're looking as an issue to go to version three. Okay. That was totally on my benefit. I have a motion and a second. Is there any discussion? All those in favor, please say aye. Aye. Opposed? Abstain? Future agenda items? Yes. I had talked to Bill about this and wanted to bring it up to the board about our use of the rec board for our athletics versus an athletic director like all the other elementary schools in the district. Years ago we went, everything changed. We used to have the AD when Steve was there. And then we went to the rec board to do this. And I think we need to discuss this as a board. However, it's just a future agenda item so that it can be discussed. Okay. I would like a little more time for BSBA the next time if possible. Okay. Board mutations and I believe that brings us to adjournment.