Michigan State Board of Education for January 8, 2019 – Morning Session


>>GOOD MORNING, AND HAPPY NEW YEAR’S, EVERYONE. THE TIME IS NOW 9:32 AND A QUORUM OF THE BOARD IS PRESENT. THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING OF JANUARY 8, 2019 IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER. THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AND ORDER OF PRIORITY. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS BOARD MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO ADD OR DELETE FROM THE AGENDA?>>MOTION TO APPROVE AS SUBMITTED.>>SUPPORT.>>WE HAVE A MOTION FROM TOM, SECOND FROM LUPE. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE IT SUPPORTED. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.>>AYE.>>OPPOSED, NAY. MOTION CARRIES, THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBERS, YOU HAVE AN INFORMATION FOLDER IN FRONT OF YOU THAT CONTAINS ONE ITEM– REQUEST FOR NOMINATIONS FOR THE SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS SEAC. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED AT THIS MEETING. THE STAFF, THOUGH, IS ASKING THAT BOARD MEMBERS PLEASE SUBMIT NOMINATIONS OF INDIVIDUALS TO SERVE ON THE SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE. AND THEN THE BOARD WILL VOTE ON THE APPROVAL AT THE MAY 15TH BOARD MEETING. I WOULD LIKE TO WELCOME OUR TWO NEW BOARD MEMBERS, JUDY PRITCHETT AND TIFFANY TILLEY. THEY ARE OUR NEWEST MEMBERS TO THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. THEY WERE ELECTED TO THEIR POSITION IN THE NOVEMBER GENERAL ELECTION. THEY WILL SERVE AN EIGHT YEAR TERM. THAT BEGAN ON JANUARY 1, 2019. AND SO MARILYN, WOULD YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THE REST OF OUR BOARD OF EDUCATION?>>I WILL. YOU’VE JUST BEEN LISTENING TO THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT, SHEILA ALLES. SHE’S ALSO CHAIRPERSON OF THE BOARD. AS WE GO AROUND THE TABLE TO THE LEFT, I WILL GIVE YOU THE OFF– TODAY WE WILL HAVE ELECTION OF OFFICERS IN JUST A MINUTE, BUT– SO THE OFFICES THAT YOU HEAR ME SAY NOW ARE FROM THE END OF THE LAST TERM. AND SO CASANDRA ULBRICH SERVED AS CO-PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD MOST RECENTLY, AND CASANDRA IS FROM ROCHESTER HILLS. AND NEXT TO HER IS MICHELLE FECTEAU. SHE’S THE BOARD’S SECRETARY. SHE’S FROM DETROIT. NEXT TO HER, NIKKI SNYDER. SHE’S A BOARD MEMBER FROM DEXTER. AND TIFFANY TILLEY, WE WELCOME YOU. SHE’S A BOARD MEMBER FROM SOUTHFIELD. THIS YEAR’S TEACHER OF THE YEAR IS LAURA CHANG. SHE HAS GOT A SEAT AT THE BOARD TABLE AS A NON-VOTING MEMBER, AND WHEN SHE’S NOT HERE WITH US, SHE IS A MATH AND READING INTERVENTIONIST IN VICKSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOLS. AND WE’RE GOING TO GO ACROSS THE TABLE. WE WILL BE JOINED BY EMILY LAIDLAW AND JOSH NEYHART. THE GOVERNOR ALSO HAS AN EX-OFFICIO SEAT ON– AT THE BOARD TABLE, AND TODAY THEY WILL BE REPRESENTING THE GOVERNOR DURING THE MEETING. AND THEN AS WE COME THIS WAY, JUDY PRITCHETT, ALSO HER FIRST BOARD MEETING, AND SHE’S FROM WASHINGTON TOWNSHIP. LUPE RAMOS-MONTIGNY HAS BEEN SERVING AS THE BOARD’S NASBE DELEGATE. SHE’S FROM GRAND RAPIDS. PAMELA PUGH IS A BOARD MEMBER FROM SAGINAW. NEXT TO ME IS THE BOARD’S TREASURER, TOM McMILLIN, AND HE’S FROM OAKLAND TOWNSHIP. I’M MARILYN SCHNEIDER. I’M THE STATE BOARD EXECUTIVE. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU, MARILYN. AND VENESSA, I BELIEVE YOU HAVE A NEW EMPLOYEE TO INTRODUCE THIS MORNING?>>YEP. GOOD MORNING. STEVEN, CAN YOU INTRODUCE YOURSELF TO THE ROOM?>>MY NAME’S STEVE [ INDISTINCT ] CURRICULUM AND INSTRUCTION UNIT, WORKING ON COMPETENCY-BASED EDUCATION, ONLINE LEARNING AND ALTERNATIVE ED.>>OKAY, THANK YOU, STEVEN. ARE THERE ANY OTHER NEW EMPLOYEES IN THE AUDIENCE TODAY? SEEING NONE, LET’S GIVE STEVEN A WARM WELCOME TO THE MDE TEAM. [ APPLAUSE ] AND WE WOULD LIKE THE AUDIENCE TO PLEASE INTRODUCE THEMSELVES. AND WE’LL START WITH MARTY ACKLEY.>>GOOD MORNING, I’M MARTY ACKLEY. I’M THE DIRECTOR IN THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS HERE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.>>CAROLINE LIETHEN. I’M THE LEGISLATIVE LIAISON FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.>>I’M STEPHEN DeGROW. I’M THE LEGISLATIVE ANALYST FOR MDE.>>ALISANDE SHREWSBURY. I’M [ INDISTINCT ].>>GOOD MORNING, DONNA OSER WITH THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS.>>GOOD MORNING. [ INDISTINCT ]>>DAVID MICHELSON, MICHIGAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION. [ NO AUDIO ]>>[ INDISTINCT ].>>TERANCE LUNGER, SUPERINTENDENT, CALHOUN INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT.>>[ INDISTINCT ].>>[ INDISTINCT ] OFFICE OF SYSTEMS EVALUATION. [ NO AUDIO ]>>FRONT ROW.>>HI, BRETT SMITH. SECRETARY, TREASURER IN THE MICHIGAN EDUCATION– [ NO AUDIO ]>>–VICE PRESIDENT, MICHIGAN EDUCATION– [ NO AUDIO ]>>GOOD MORNING, HOWARD BARON, BLOOMFIELD HILLS SCHOOL BOARD.>>HI, I’M ANDREW BRONSTEIN. I WORK AT THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.>>DON HUBLER, MACOMB ISD, AND A MEMBER OF [ INDISTINCT ].>>JUSTIN CLEMENT, THE FREDERICK GROUP.>>[ INDISTINCT ].>>PAULA HERBART, PRESIDENT OF THE MICHIGAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION.>>DAN QUINN, PUBLIC POLICY ASSOCIATES.>>[ INDISTINCT ].>>–KENT ISD [ INDISTINCT ].>>[ INDISTINCT ].>>GOOD MORNING, JULIE [ INDISTINCT ]. [ NO AUDIO ]>>KEVIN LAVERY, WKAR, FORMER SUPERVISOR OF [ INDISTINCT ]. [ LAUGHTER ]>>[ INDISTINCT ], FACILITATOR FOR MICHIGAN SPECIAL EDUCATION.>>KAREN NICOL, REGION 5 TEACHER OF THE YEAR.>>MORNING, SCOTT KOENIGSKNECHT, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT FOR P-20 SYSTEMS AND STUDENT TRANSITIONS.>>[ INDISTINCT ] OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, AND SPECIAL ASSISTANT TO DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT VENESSA KEESLER.>>GOOD MORNING. KYLE GUERRANT, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT FOR FINANCE AND OPERATIONS.>>VENESSA KEESLER, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT FOR EDUCATOR, STUDENT AND SCHOOL SUPPORTS.>>MARK HOWE WITH THE OFFICE OF THE SUPERINTENDENT. [ NO AUDIO ]>>[ INDISTINCT ] [ LAUGHTER ]>>GOOD MORNING. LOIS LOFTON-DONIVER FROM THE [ INDISTINCT ].>>ONCE AGAIN, GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE, AND WELCOME. IF YOU PLAN TO OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT AT TODAY’S MEETING, PLEASE COMPLETE A FORM AND GET IT TO MARILYN. FORMS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE TABLE JUST OUTSIDE OF THE BOARD ROOM, AND THEY MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE PORTION OF THE MEETING DEVOTED TO PUBLIC COMMENT. PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BEGIN IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE LUNCH BREAK, WHICH IS SCHEDULED FOR APPROXIMATELY 1 PM TODAY. PLEASE BE HERE AT THAT TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT. THE FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS TODAY IS THE CEREMONIAL SWEARING IN OF OUR NEW– TWO NEW STATE BOARD MEMBERS. IT IS THE BOARD’S CUSTOM TO HAVE A CEREMONIAL SWEARING IN DURING THE FIRST OFFICIAL MEETING OF THE NEWLY ELECTED BOARD MEMBERS. JUDY PRITCHETT AND TIFFANY TILLEY WERE ELECTED BY THE VOTERS DURING THE NOVEMBER 6, 2018 ELECTION. THEIR TERM OF OFFICE BEGAN ON JANUARY 1ST. ALSO ON THAT DAY, THEY WERE BOTH OFFICIALLY SWORN IN. SO IF TIFFANY AND JUDY WOULD PLEASE JOIN ME AT THIS END OF THE TABLE, PLEASE. AND IF YOU WOULD BOTH RAISE YOUR RIGHT HANDS AND REPEAT AFTER ME. I– STATE YOUR NAME– DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR…>>I, JUDY PRITCHETT, DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR…>>THAT I WILL SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES…>>THAT I WILL SUPPORT THE CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES…>>AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS STATE…>>AND THE CONSTITUTION OF THIS STATE…>>AND THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES…>>AND THAT I WILL FAITHFULLY DISCHARGE THE DUTIES…>>OF THE OFFICE OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION…>>OF THE OFFICE OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION…>>ACCORDING TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITIES.>>ACCORDING TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITIES.>>CONGRATULATION TO BOTH OF YOU.>>THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]>>DO EITHER OF YOU HAVE GUESTS TO INTRODUCE TODAY?>>I DO HAVE TWO GUESTS. UM, MR. MICHAEL DEVAULT, WHO IS THE SUPERINTENDENT IN MACOMB INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT WHO ALREADY INTRODUCED HIMSELF AND MR. DONALD HUBLER WHO IS A MEMBER OF THE MACOMB INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT BOARD OF EDUCATION, A MEMBER OF THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS, AND A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL SCHOOL BOARD ASSOCIATION.>>AND MY DAD WASN’T ABLE TO MAKE IT TODAY, BUT I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE PAULA HERBART FROM THE MEA, WHO WAS A BIG SUPPORTER OF BOTH OF US DURING OUR CAMPAIGNS.>>YES.>>THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND, AGAIN, WELCOME TO THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ]>>NOW WE WILL MOVE TO THE NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS, WHICH IS THE ELECTION OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION OFFICERS. EACH ODD NUMBERED YEAR, ACCORDING TO THE BYLAWS, THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION ELECTS OFFICERS FOR PRESIDENT, VICE-PRESIDENT, SECRETARY, TREASURER, AND DELEGATE TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS. SO WE WILL BEGIN TODAY WITH NOMINATIONS FOR PRESIDENT. ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT?>>MADAME CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO NOMINATE CASANDRA ULBRICH FOR PRESIDENT OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION.>>OKAY, PAM HAS NOMINATED CASANDRA. IS THERE A SECOND TO THE NOMINATION?>>SECOND.>>OKAY, MICHELLE HAS SECONDED, SO IT HAS BEEN MOVED AND SECONDED. CASANDRA, DO YOU ACCEPT THE NOMINATION OF PRESIDENT OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION.>>I DO.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR THIS OFFICE? SEEING NONE, NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF PRESIDENT ARE NOW CLOSED. MARILYN, WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE THE ROLE?>>I WILL. FECTEAU?>>YES.>>MCMILLIN?>>YES.>>PRITCHETT?>>YES.>>PUGH?>>YES.>>RAMOS-MONTIGNY?>>YES.>>SNYDER?>>YES.>>ULBRICH?>>YES.>>TILLEY?>>YES.>>EIGHT, ZERO.>>OKAY, MOTION CARRIES, EIGHT, ZERO. CASANDRA IS THE PRESIDENT OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION, AND THIS IS A TWO YEAR TERM FOR 2019 AND 2020.>>THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] NOW WE MOVE ONTO THE OFFICE OF VICE-PRESIDENT. ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF VICE-PRESIDENT? CASANDRA?>>I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE PAM PUGH FOR VICE-PRESIDENT.>>OKAY, CASANDRA HAS NOMINATED PAM. IS THERE A SECOND?>>SUPPORT.>>SUPPORT– OKAY, MICHELLE HAS SUPPORTED THE POSITION, SO WE HAVE– HAS BEEN NOMINATED AND SUPPORTED. PAM, DO YOU ACCEPT THE POSITION OF VICE-PRESIDENT? THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR OFFICE OF VICE-PRESIDENT? SEEING NONE, THE NOMINATION FOR VICE-PRESIDENT IS NOW CLOSED. AND MARILYN WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE THE VOTE?>>YES, FECTEAU?>>YES.>>MCMILLIN?>>YES.>>PRITCHETT?>>YES.>>PUGH?>>YES.>>RAMOS-MONTIGNY?>>YES.>>SNYDER?>>YES.>>ULBRICH?>>YES.>>TILLEY?>>YES.>>EIGHT-ZERO.>>OKAY, MOTION CARRIES, EIGHT-ZERO. PAM WILL BE THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION’S VICE-PRESIDENT. [ APPLAUSE ] AND THE NEXT OFFICE IS SECRETARY. ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF SECRETARY, TOM?>>I WOULD LIKE TO NOMINATE MICHELLE FECTEAU.>>OKAY, TOM HAS NOMINATED MICHELLE. IS THERE A SECOND?>>SECOND.>>SECOND BY CASANDRA. MICHELLE, DO YOU ACCEPT THE POSITION OF SECRETARY?>>YES, I DO.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF SECRETARY? SEEING NONE, MARILYN, WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE THE– NOMINATIONS ARE NOW CLOSED, AND SO MARILYN, WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE THE ROLE?>>YES, FECTEAU?>>YES.>>MCMILLIN?>>YES.>>PRITCHETT?>>YES.>>PUGH?>>YES.>>RAMOS-MONTIGNY?>>YES.>>SNYDER?>>YES.>>ULBRICH?>>YES.>>TILLEY?>>YES.>>EIGHT-ZERO.>>OKAY, MOTION CARRIES, EIGHT-ZERO. MICHELLE WILL BE THE STATE BOARD’S SECRETARY. CONGRATULATIONS. [ APPLAUSE ] AND THE NEXT OFFICE IS THE OFFICE OF TREASURER. ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF TREASURER, MICHELLE?>>I NOMINATE TOM MCMILLIN.>>OKAY, MICHELLE HAS NOMINATED TOM.>>SUPPORT.>>AND THERE IS SUPPORT BY PAM, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND SUPPORT. TOM, DO YOU ACCEPT THE NOMINATION?>>YES, I DO.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR TREASURER? SEEING NONE, THEN THE NOMINATIONS FOR THE OFFICE OF TREASURER ARE CLOSED. AND MARILYN, WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE THE ROLE?>>YES, FECTEAU?>>YES.>>MCMILLIN?>>YES.>>PRITCHETT?>>YES.>>PUGH?>>YES.>>RAMOS-MONTIGNY?>>YES.>>SNYDER?>>YES.>>ULBRICH?>>YES.>>TILLEY?>>YES.>>EIGHT-ZERO.>>MOTION CARRIES, EIGHT-ZERO. CONGRATULATIONS, TOM, YOU WILL BE THE BOARD’S TREASURER. [ APPLAUSE ] AND THE NEXT POSITION IS THE DELEGATE TO THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF STATE BOARD OF EDUCATIONS. ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS FOR THIS POSITION?>>I NOMINATE TIFFANY TILLEY.>>OKAY.>>SECOND.>>ALL RIGHT. LUPE HAS NOMINATED TIFFANY. CASANDRA HAS SECONDED. TIFFANY, DO YOU ACCEPT THE NOMINATION FOR DELEGATE TO NASBE?>>I DO.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS FOR THIS POSITION? SEEING NONE, THE NOMINATIONS ARE CLOSED. MARILYN, WOULD YOU PLEASE TAKE THE ROLE?>>YES, FECTEAU?>>YES.>>MCMILLIN?>>YES.>>PRITCHETT?>>YES.>>PUGH?>>YES.>>RAMOS-MONTIGNY?>>YES.>>SNYDER?>>YES .>>ULBRICH?>>YES.>>TILLEY?>>YES.>>EIGHT-ZERO.>>MOTION CARRIES, EIGHT-ZERO. TIFFANY, CONGRATULATIONS ON YOUR POSITION AS DELEGATE TO THE NATIONAL STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. [ APPLAUSE ] AND I BELIEVE THAT THAT CONCLUDES OUR NOMINATIONS TODAY. CONGRATULATIONS TO ALL OF OUR NEW STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEMBERS. LET’S GIVE THEM ONE LAST ROUND OF APPLAUSE. [ APPLAUSE ] WE WILL MOVE NOW TO… YEAH, WHO KNEW. WE ARE AHEAD OF SCHEDULE. SO WE CAN BEGIN A PRESENTATION ON OUR K-12 COMPUTER STANDARDS. SO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA TODAY OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING IS A PRESENTATION ON THE K-12 COMPUTER SCIENCE STANDARDS. THESE WERE DEVELOPED WITH INPUT OF A STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE THAT BEGAN BACK IN MAY OF 2018. THESE NEW STANDARDS ARE CRITICAL FOR MICHIGAN STUDENTS TO BE SUCCESSFUL IN 21ST CENTURY ECONOMY. THIS IS AN INFORMATION ITEM ONLY. IT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE STATE BOARD TODAY. HOWEVER, A SERIES OF FIVE IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT SESSIONS ARE BEING PLANNED FOR FEBRUARY, AND IT IS ANTICIPATED THAT WE WILL BRING THESE STANDARDS BACK TO THE BOARD FOR THEIR APPROVAL IN APRIL. OUR PRESENTERS TODAY ARE VENESSA KEESLER, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT IN THE DIVISION OF EDUCATION, STUDENTS, AND SCHOOL SUPPORTS, MICHELLE RIBANT, OUR DIRECTOR OF 21ST CENTURY LEARNING, AND ANN MARIE MAPES, EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY MANAGER. WELCOME.>>THANK YOU, SHEILA. I AM GOING TO TURN IT DIRECTLY OVER TO ANN MARIE AND MICHELLE TO SHARE WITH YOU THIS EXCITING WORK WE’VE BEEN DOING ON THESE K-12 COMPUTER SCIENCE STANDARDS.>>AND I’LL JUST PROVIDE A LITTLE CONTEXT. LAST MONTH, WE WERE HERE PRESENTING ON OUR UPDATE ON THE MI ROADMAP, WHICH IS THE STATE TECHNOLOGY PLAN, AND REALLY THE CREATION AND ADOPTION OF THESE STANDARDS IS A PIVOTAL COMPONENT OF THAT PLAN. WITH THAT, I’LL TURN IT OVER TO ANN MARIE WHO HAS DONE THE WORK ON LEADING THE GROUP THAT DEVELOPED AND NOW IS PRESENTING ON THE STANDARDS.>>THANKS, MICHELLE. SO WE’D LIKE TO BEGIN WITH SHARING WITH YOU WHAT COMPUTER SCIENCE IS AND WHAT IT IS NOT, BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME COMMON MISCONCEPTIONS AROUND COMPUTER SCIENCE. SO COMPUTER SCIENCE IS A THEORY AND PRACTICE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO PROGRAM A COMPUTER TO DO WHAT YOU WANT IT TO. IT ALSO IS A TOOL THAT HELPS TELL A STORY OR MAKE SOMETHING HAPPEN WITH TECHNOLOGY. IT’S ALSO A DISCIPLINE THAT EMPHASIZES PERSISTENCE AND PROBLEM SOLVING, A SKILL THAT’S APPLICABLE ACROSS DISCIPLINES, WHICH DRIVES JOB GROWTH AND INNOVATION ACROSS ALL SECTORS OF THE ECONOMY. AND IT’S ALSO A SKILL THAT TEACHES STUDENTS HOW TO USE COMPUTERS TO CREATE, NOT JUST CONSUME, TECHNOLOGY. WHAT IS IT NOT, IT’S NOT LEARNING HOW TO TYPE OR USE A MOUSE. IT’S ALSO NOT LEARNING HOW TO WORD PROCESS, USE A SPREADSHEET, USE EXCEL OR PRESENTATION SOFTWARE. IT’S ALSO NOT LEARNING HOW TO BUILD OR REPAIR COMPUTERS. IT’S ALSO NOT LEARNING HOW TO PLAY VIDEO GAMES, AND IT’S NOT ALSO THOSE SKILLS THAT STUDENTS NEED TO FACILITATE ONLINE ASSESSMENTS. SO COMPUTING EDUCATION IN K-12 SCHOOLS DOES INCLUDE COMPUTER LITERACY AND EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY. AND THOSE ARE MORE RELATED TO OUR MICHIGAN INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY COMPETENCIES FOR STUDENTS, WHAT WE CALL THE MITECS, AND ALSO INCLUDES DIGITAL CITIZENSHIP AS WELL. SO THESE ARE COMPETENCIES THAT STUDENTS NEED TO BE ABLE TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO USE COMPUTING SOFTWARE AND PRESENTATION TOOLS AND JUST COMPUTERS AND DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES IN GENERAL ACROSS THE SPHERE OF ANY APPLICABLE USE. INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY, YOU MIGHT SEE SOME OVERLAP WITH COMPUTER SCIENCE, BUT IT IS REALLY INSTALLING AND ORGANIZING AND MAINTAINING COMPUTER SYSTEMS RATHER THAN THE CODING ASPECT AND THE UNDERSTANDING HOW COMPUTERS WORK. SO COMPUTER SCIENCE IS THE STUDY OF COMPUTERS, AND THEIR ALGORITHMIC PROCESSES, INCLUDING THEIR PRINCIPLES, HARDWARE AND SOFTWARE DESIGN, APPLICATION AND WHAT’S REALLY CRUCIAL IS THEIR IMPACT ON SOCIETY. SO WE WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU THE URGENCY AROUND THIS WORK AND THE REASON THAT OUR TEAM CAME TOGETHER BACK IN MAY OF 2018. AND THAT’S REALLY, AS YOU SEE FROM THIS SLIDE FORM THE MARSHALL PLAN FOR TALENT, THERE IS THIS INCREASING NEED TO HAVE COMPETENT INDIVIDUALS WHO UNDERSTAND COMPUTER SCIENCE AND I.T. AND CODING. AND THIS JOB GROWTH RATE THROUGH 2024 IS GOING TO INCREASE THE MOST. AND SO WHAT’S REALLY KEY HERE IS THAT YOU SEE THIS BUBBLE ON THE SLIDE JUST EXPONENTIALLY, IT’S THAT– THE LARGE BLUE ONE UP IN THE TOP RIGHT HAND CORNER– IS THAT NOT ONLY IS COMPUTER SCIENCE AS AN INDUSTRY GOING TO EXPAND, BUT ALSO IT’S INHERENT INTO ALL THESE OTHER CAREERS THAT WE SEE DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN AS WELL. SO EQUITY IS ALSO A CONCERN TO US, NOT JUST FROM THE EQUITY OF ACCESS, BECAUSE NOT ALL STUDENTS HAVE ACCESS TO COMPUTER SCIENCE OPPORTUNITIES IN OUR STATE. WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT COMPUTER SCIENCE IS ACCESSIBLE WHETHER YOU LIVE IN THE U.P. OR YOU LIVE IN A SUBURBAN AREA OR IN A, YOU KNOW, A VERY URBAN SETTING. SO WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT WHEREVER YOU RESIDE, TEACHERS AND STUDENTS ALIKE HAVE ACCESS TO COMPUTER SCIENCE LEARNING OPPORTUNITIES. WE ALSO WANT EQUITY OF ACCESS FOR ALL STUDENTS, AFRICAN AMERICANS AND HISPANIC YOUTH AS WELL. WHILE IN 2018, OVER 1,700 STUDENTS PARTICIPATED STATEWIDE IN AP COMPUTER SCIENCE PRINCIPLES. ONLY 63 OF THESE STUDENTS WERE AFRICAN AMERICAN AND ONLY 75 WERE HISPANIC AND ONLY 28% OF THE TOTAL STUDENTS WERE FEMALE. SO IT’S REALLY CRITICAL THAT WE SEE EXPANSION OF ACCESS IN TERMS OF EQUITY FOR ALL MICHIGAN STUDENTS. SO NATIONALLY, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT HAS REALLY BEEN TRENDING. AS YOU’LL SEE UP HERE, WE HAVE OVER 38 STATES THAT HAVE COMPLETED AS OF THIS MONTH, OR ARE IN PROGRESS OF DEVELOPING, COMPUTER SCIENCE STANDARDS, AND WHEN AMAZON WAS LOOKING FOR ITS HEADQUARTERS. YOU KNOW, ITS SECOND HEADQUARTERS, THIS WAS ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT THEY ASKED OF US AS A STATE: DO YOU HAVE COMPUTER SCIENCE STANDARDS IN PLACE SO THAT YOU’RE READYING A WORKFORCE FOR COMPANIES LIKE AMAZON. SO THIS IS A SLIDE SHARED BY ONE OF OUR STAKEHOLDERS, [ INDISTINCT ] FROM APPLE. AND YOU SEE THAT IN A WORLD POWERED BY CODE, UNDERSTANDING KEY SOFTWARE CONCEPTS HAS BECOME A NEW LITERACY. SO AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, NOT ONLY IS COMPUTER SCIENCE AN INDUSTRY IN AND OF ITSELF, BUT COMPUTER SCIENCE AND CODING AND THE PIECES OF THE PRINCIPLES AROUND C.S. ARE INTEGRAL TO ALL THESE DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES THAT YOU SEE DISPLAYED ON THE SCREEN IN FRONT OF YOU. WE ALSO WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU THE SLIDE FROM ANOTHER PARTNER THAT PARTICIPATED ON THE COMMITTEE, WHICH WAS AMAZON. AND SO THIS IS A SLIDE OF COMPUTER SCIENCE PATHWAYS, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT COMPUTER SCIENCE PATHWAYS THAT STUDENTS– THAT YOU CAN TAKE IN THE EMPLOYMENT MARKETPLACE AT AMAZON. BUT WHAT IS KEY IS THAT THESE ARE CAREER PATHWAYS THAT ARE AVAILABLE NOW, NOT WHAT OUR STUDENTS ARE GOING TO BE SEEING IN 10 TO 15 YEARS WHEN THEY’RE ENTERING THE WORKFORCE. AND SO WE’VE SHARED THIS SLIDE WITH TEACHERS WHO’VE REQUESTED IT, BECAUSE THEY WANT TO SHARE WITH THEIR STUDENTS, “WHAT ARE THE POSSIBILITIES “WHEN I’M DONE WITH MY SCHOOLING “AND WHAT’S GOING TO BE READY “FOR ME WHEN I’M AVAILABLE “AND WANTING TO ENTER “INTO THE WORKFORCE?” SO YOU’LL SEE HERE IN FRONT OF YOU THE MICHIGAN INTEGRATED TECHNOLOGY COMPETENCIES FOR STUDENTS. SO THESE ARE SKILLS THAT SUPPORT LEARNING ACROSS THE CONTENT AREAS. AND COMPUTER SCIENCE HAS ALLIANCE WITH THE MITECS, AND THE MITECS HELP ALL STUDENTS PREPARE FOR A DIGITAL WORLD BY FOCUSING BROADLY ON TECHNOLOGY COMPETENCIES. BUT THE DEEPEST CONNECTIONS BETWEEN COMPUTER SCIENCE AND THE MITECS ARE REALLY AROUND COMPUTATIONAL THINKING. SO YOU CAN THINK OF COMPUTATIONAL THINKING AS A SET OF OVERLAPPING PROBLEM SKILLS APPLIED IN A VARIETY OF SETTINGS. IT IS A CRITICAL COMPONENT OF COMPUTER SCIENCE. WHEN INCLUDING COMPUTATIONAL THINKING AND LEARNING ACROSS THE CONTENT AREAS, IT CAN REALLY ENHANCE AND FLEX THE PROBLEM SOLVING MIND. SCHOOLS ALREADY TEACHING CODING AND COMPUTER SCIENCE WILL BENEFIT FROM WEAVING INTO EXISTING CONTENT AND ACROSS DISCIPLINES THIS IDEA OF COMPUTATIONAL THINKING, WHICH CAN DEEPEN, ENRICH AND AMPLIFY LEARNING, AND JUST REALLY MAXIMIZE THE REACH OF COMPUTER SCIENCE. THERE ARE ALSO SOME OVERLAPS IN TERMS OF OTHER COMPETENCIES IN TERMS OF EMPOWERED LEARNER AND DIGITAL CITIZEN. SO AS MENTIONED PREVIOUSLY, WE BEGAN THIS WORK BACK IN MAY OF 2018. WE BROUGHT TOGETHER A NUMBER OF STAKEHOLDERS, SO MANY OFFICES FROM ACROSS MDE AS WELL AS OTHER STATE AGENCIES, INCLUDING DTMB AND THE MiSTEM NETWORK, THE MICHIGAN FILM AND DIGITAL MEDIA OFFICE, AND THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE. WE ALSO HAD NONPROFIT AND PROFESSIONAL ASSOCIATIONS REPRESENTED FROM CODE.ORG, THE COLLEGE BOARD, MASSP, MICHIGAN VIRTUAL, MAISA AND MASA. WE HAD HIGHER EDUCATION REPRESENTATIVES INCLUDING MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, AS WELL AS THE MICHIGAN COMPUTER SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION AND THE MICHIGAN INITIATIVE FOR CYBERSECURITY EDUCATION, MICE. WE HAD A NUMBER OF COMPUTER SCIENCE CLASSROOM TEACHERS REPRESENTED ON THIS GROUP, AND SOME OF THOSE ALSO INCLUDED EARLY CHILDHOOD AND CAREER IN TECHNICAL EDUCATION TO ENSURE TIES ACROSS THE P-20 SPECTRUM. WE ALSO HAD REPRESENTATIVES FROM AMAZON, APPLE, SQUARE ONE, MICROSOFT, AND ADVISORS FROM THE NATIONAL WORK THAT’S BEEN DONE AT THE COMPUTER SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION, APPLE, MICROSOFT, AND GOOGLE. SO THESE ARE THE GUIDING PRINCIPLES THAT DROVE OUR WORK. WE WANTED TO ENSURE THAT ALL STUDENTS AND TEACHERS HAVE EQUITABLE ACCESS TO AND PARTICIPATION IN COMPUTER SCIENCE. WE WANTED TO FOCUS ON THE ESSENTIAL STANDARDS THAT ALLOW FOR EXPANSION WITHIN CONTEXT AND USE RESEARCH AND BEST PRACTICE TO DRIVE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPLEMENTATION. WE WANTED TO ALIGN TO NATIONALLY RECOGNIZED STANDARDS AND FRAMEWORKS AND ALSO ENABLE TEACHERS TO IMPLEMENT THE CURRICULUM IN WAYS THAT ENGAGE AND INSPIRE STUDENTS AND SUPPORT THEIR LEARNING. SO YOU’LL SEE THAT OUR AGREED UPON FOUNDATION IS THE COMPUTER SCIENCE FRAMEWORK, AND YOU SEE UP ON THE SCREEN THAT THIS IS DEVELOPED WITH A PARTNERSHIP WITH CODE.ORG AND THIS [ INDISTINCT ] TEACHERS ASSOCIATION. AND OVER ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, WE ALSO DECIDED TO LEVERAGE THIS WORK OF THE NATIONAL GROUPS. SO WE REVIEWED ABOUT FIVE STATE STANDARDS IN DEPTH. AND WE EXAMINED NUMEROUS OTHER STATE COMPUTER SCIENCE STANDARDS. AND AFTER A LOT OF REVIEW AND CONSIDERATION, THE GROUP SETTLED UPON LEVERAGING THE K-12 SCIENCE FRAMEWORK– COMPUTER SCIENCE FRAMEWORK AS WELL AS THE COMPUTER SCIENCE TEACHERS ASSOCIATION STANDARDS WITH A MICHIGAN FLAVOR. DOWN AT THE BOTTOM IN THE LEFT HAND CORNER, YOU SEE THE CORE CONCEPTS AND PRACTICES. SO THAT IS WHAT STUDENTS SHOULD KNOW AND UNDERSTAND. WHAT YOU’LL FIND ON PAGE FOUR AND IN FIGURE TWO OF OUR STANDARDS DOCUMENT. SO THESE ARE COMPUTING SYSTEMS, NETWORKS AND THE INTERNET DATA AND ANALYSIS, ALGORITHMS AND PROGRAMMING, AND THE IMPACTS OF COMPUTING. DOWN AT THE BOTTOM IN THE PURPLE, YOU’LL SEE THE CORE PRACTICES. THIS IS WHAT STUDENTS SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO AND DEMONSTRATE. THESE ARE FURTHER DELINEATED INTO SUBPRACTICES AS IDENTIFIED IN THE STANDARDS ON PAGE FIVE. AND THESE INCLUDE FOSTERING AN INCLUSIVE COMPUTING CULTURE, CREATING COMPUTATIONAL ARTIFACTS, COLLABORATING AROUND COMPUTING, TESTING, AND REFINING COMPUTATIONAL ARTIFACTS, AND RECOGNIZING AND DEFINING COMPUTATIONAL PROGRAMS… AS WELL AS COMMUNICATING ABOUT COMPUTING AND DEVELOPING AND USING ABSTRACTIONS. SO OUR VISION IS ALL LEARNERS DEVELOP FOUNDATIONAL COMPUTER SCIENCE SKILLS TO SOLVE PROBLEMS AND BE PRODUCTIVE CITIZENS, AND DOING SO, STUDENTS WILL LEARN NEW APPROACHES TO PROBLEM SOLVING, THEY WILL HARNESS THE POWER OF COMPUTATIONAL THINKING, AND THEY WILL USE COMPUTER SCIENCE TOOLS TO CREATE TECHNOLOGY. SO YOU SEE HERE DISPLAYED JUST THE FORMAT OF OUR STANDARDS DOCUMENT. IT FOLLOWS THE FORMAT OF ALL THE OTHER ACADEMIC CONTENT STANDARDS IN TERMS OF LOOK AND FEEL WITH AN INTRODUCTION. AND THEN OVER HERE ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, YOU SEE OUR LABELING AND CODING MATRIX WHERE WE EXPLAIN THAT MORE IN DEPTH. SO THE STANDARDS ADOPTION FOR MICHIGAN, WE HAVE FIVE SECTIONS. 1-A IS GRADE SPAN, SO GRADES K-2. AND THIS IS C.S. STANDARDS FOR ALL STUDENTS. 1-B IS GRADE 3-5, C.S. STANDARDS FOR ALL STUDENTS AS WELL. SECTION 2 IS GRADES 6 THROUGH 8, SO MIDDLE SCHOOL, C.S. STANDARDS FOR ALL STUDENTS AS WELL. AND THEN SECTION 3-A WHICH IS GRADES 9 TO 10, C.S. STANDARDS FOR ALL STUDENTS. 3-B IS UNIQUE IN THAT IT IS GRADES 11 TO 12, AND IT IS FOR STUDENTS WHO WISH TO PURSUE THE STUDY OF COMPUTER SCIENCE IN HIGH SCHOOL BEYOND WHAT IS REQUIRED FOR ALL STUDENTS. SO WE SEE OPPORTUNITIES FOR STUDENTS HERE IN TERMS OF EARLY MIDDLE COLLEGE, AP, AND CTE ALL COMING TOGETHER IN 3-B. C.S. IN HIGH SCHOOL CAN BE PRESENTED IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS, BUT WE SEE 1-A THROUGH 2 REALLY BEING PRESENTED IN A WAY THAT’S INTEGRATED THROUGHOUT THE CONTENT AREAS. SO IT’S NOT NECESSARILY SOMETHING STANDALONE. SO OUR NEXT STEPS, OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PROPOSED TIMEFRAME OPENS ON JANUARY 14TH AND THAT WILL CONCLUDE ON FEBRUARY 20. THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE HERE AT THE WEBPAGE THAT YOU SEE. WE HAVE FIVE PUBLIC COMMENT IN-PERSON SESSIONS AND WE ARE GOING TO BE TOURING THE WHOLE STATE, SO THE U.P., THE UPPER LOWER PENINSULA AS WELL AS THREE SESSION THROUGHOUT THE BOTTOM OF THE LOWER PENINSULA.>>AND BEFORE I TURN IT BACK TO SHEILA FOR QUESTIONS, I JUST WANT TO THANK THE TEAM. ANN MARIE’S LEADERSHIP, MICHELLE’S LEADERSHIP IN THIS AREA, AND THEN THE TEAM JOINED US TODAY, SO JOE AND DAVE AND BECKY AND AMANDA, THEY’VE BEEN WORKING REALLY HARD WITH A LOT OF STAKEHOLDERS TO BRING THIS TO YOU NOW, AND THEY HAVE A VERY DEEP PASSION AND COMMITMENT TO THIS WORK. SO THANK YOU GUYS FOR YOUR SERVICE, AND WITH THAT WE’LL TURN IT BACK TO YOU.>>OKAY, THANK YOU TO THE TEAM AS WELL. WE WILL NOW OPEN IT UP TO COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS. TOM?>>I’M CURIOUS WHY THIS IS ONLY INFORMATION ONLY. I THOUGHT USUALLY BEFORE IT GOES OUT TO THE PUBLIC, STANDARDS COME BEFORE THE BOARD, AND IF WE DON’T HAVE ANY PROBLEMS, THEY GO OUT TO THE PUBLIC. BUT I– IN THE PAST, I THOUGHT WE HAVE NOT JUST BEEN, “BY THE WAY, “WE’RE GONNA DO THIS,” BUT “MAY WE DO THIS?”>>SO THE PROCESS IS THEY COME TO THE BOARD FOR INFORMATION BEFORE PUBLIC COMMENT, AND THEN PUBLIC COMMENT IS THE FIRST OF, AS WE’VE SEEN WITH SOCIAL STUDIES STANDARDS, SOMETIMES SEVERAL ROUNDS OF COMMENT. HOPEFULLY ONE, BUT PERHAPS MORE. AND THEN WE BRING THE RECOMMENDATION BACK TO THE BOARD WITH THE CHANGES, THE COMMENT, AND EITHER ACCEPT, REJECT, SO IT’S INFORMATION AT THIS POINT BEFORE IT GOES FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.>>NO, OTHER STANDARDS, THAT WASN’T THE CASE. WE ACTUALLY WERE ASKED TO BASICALLY OPINE WHETHER WE FEEL IT’S READY TO GO TO THE PUBLIC, BUT I HEARD THAT– IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE WAS DATA PRIVACY, YOU KNOW, THAT’S A CONCERN IN THIS AREA. THE– I’M WONDERING ABOUT HOW THIS IS GOING TO BE APPLIED. THERE’S NO– IT’S NOT GOING TO BE IMPLEMENTED IN ANY STATEWIDE EXAM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. FOR SCHOOLS THAT WOULD PREFER TO DO WHAT APPLE AND AMAZON’S EXECUTIVES DO AND NOT HAVE TECHNOLOGY IN THEIR SCHOOLS, AT THE WALDORF SCHOOLS OR WHATEVER IN SILICON VALLEY, THOSE SCHOOLS IN MICHIGAN COULD DO THAT, THEY DON’T HAVE TO DO THESE STANDARDS, IS THAT RIGHT?>>RIGHT, SO THE BASIC CONSTRUCT AROUND STANDARDS IS THAT THEY DEFINE, AS ANN MARIE LAID OUT, WHAT STUDENTS SHOULD KNOW AND BE ABLE TO DO IN TERMS OF COMPUTER SCIENCE. AS FAR AS HOW DISTRICTS IN SCHOOLS IMPLEMENT THESE STANDARDS, HOW THEY INTEGRATE THEM INTO THE REGULAR COURSEWORK, K-8 OR IN STANDALONE CLASSES POSSIBLY BEYOND THAT, THAT IS ALWAYS A LOCAL DECISION. YOU KNOW, WE DID DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH ON HOW MANY SCHOOLS WE’RE TALKING ABOUT IN MICHIGAN WHO MAYBE DO NOT ENGAGE IN A TECHNOLOGY FREE ENVIRONMENT. BY OUR COUNT THERE ARE PERHAPS FOUR, AND THEN A FEW PRIVATE MONTESSORI SCHOOLS WHO MAYBE DO AS WELL. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE– SO THERE ARE A HANDFUL, AND WE WOULD OF COURSE WANT TO PRIVILEGE THOSE SCHOOLS MAKING CHOICE AS APPROPRIATE. ONE OF THOSE SCHOOLS HAS AN AMISH COMMUNITY, SO THEY DON’T ENGAGE IN TECHNOLOGY FOR LEARNING BECAUSE OF THE BELIEFS OF THE COMMUNITY, BUT THEY ARE CONNECTED AS THEY SERVE AS A HUB FOR OTHER SCHOOLS IN THE– OR A HUB FOR THE DISTRICT IN THE ISD. SO THERE IS CHOICE IN THIS, BUT AGAIN, WE THINK ABOUT MAYBE SIX SCHOOLS WHO ARE ACTIVELY NOT USING TECHNOLOGY. WE WANT TO SUPPORT THE OTHER 3,400 IN THEIR EFFORTS IN THAT SPACE.>>RIGHT.>>AND AS THE TEAM REFERENCED, THIS IS NOT ALL ABOUT SCREENS. IN FACT, IT’S NOT ABOUT SCREENS AT ALL. IT IS ABOUT THE PRINCIPLES, THE COMPUTATIONAL THINKING, THE PROBLEM SOLVING. I MEAN, WE NEED STUDENTS TO BE GOOD PROBLEM SOLVERS. AND I THINK– I LIKE HOW ANN MARIE HIGHLIGHTED, AND I’VE SEEN THIS WITH MY OWN SON, WE WANT THEM TO CREATE TECHNOLOGY NOT JUST CONSUME IT. AND THIS HELPS THEM BE ABLE TO CREATE, TO BE TRANSFORMATIVE THINKERS IN THE SPACE THAT’S EMERGING. SO THAT’S WHAT THESE ARE ABOUT. NOT– THIS ISN’T ABOUT SCREENS IN FRONT OF KIDS.>>OKAY, I KNOW THAT THERE MAY BE SIX, BUT THERE COULD BE A LOT MORE COMING THAT ARE OPTING OUT OF TECHNOLOGY. AND THEN FINALLY, ON ONE OF THE SLIDES ABOUT THE AMAZON COMPUTER SCIENCE PATHWAYS, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS NOTHING IN THE STANDARDS. IT’S JUST AN FYI THAT THEY’RE GIVING? BECAUSE I, YOU KNOW– AMAZON MAY NOT EVEN BE AROUND IN FIVE YEARS, SO YOU SAID THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY’LL HAVE AVAILABLE TO THEM WHEN THEY GRADUATE. BUT FOR ALL WE KNOW THEY MAY NOT BE AVAILABLE, SO AS LONG AS IT’S NOT TOO NARROW. I’M ALWAYS WORRIED ABOUT THINGS THAT ARE TOO NARROW, SO THANKS.>>THANK YOU, TOM. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?>>I HAD A QUESTION. I’M JUST CURIOUS, SO WHAT WOULD A KINDERGARTEN TO SECOND GRADE CURRICULUM LOOK LIKE IN COMPUTER SCIENCE?>>SO THERE ARE WAYS TO INTRODUCE THESE CONCEPTS AT A REALLY EARLY AGE, AND SOME WAYS ARE, YOU KNOW, TO INTRODUCE THE CONCEPT OF ALGORITHMS, AND WE HAVE A VERY BEAUTIFUL WAY IN WHICH THIS HAS BEEN LAID OUT JUST ON A PIECE OF POSTER BOARD. SO HOW DO YOU DEVELOP A PROCESS, AND THEN HOW DO YOU GO THROUGH AND THEN DEBUG THAT PROCESS? SO STEP BY STEP, LAYING THAT OUT. AND WE HAVE ONE EXAMPLE THAT’S JUST THE EXIT STRATEGY FOR HOW DO YOU LEAVE YOUR CLASSROOM. AND SO STEP ONE WOULD BE TO LINE UP, AND THEN THE STUDENTS DELINEATE THE STEPS AND GO THROUGH AND DEBUG THAT PROCESS. SO WE’RE REALLY TALKING ABOUT THIS IN A WAY THAT DOESN’T REQUIRE SCREENS ALSO AT THOSE REALLY EARLY AGES.>>NIKKI?>>JUST TO ADD TO THAT, I WAS LOOKING AT COMPUTATIONAL THINKING WHEN YOU GUYS MENTIONED IT. BASIC THINGS, KINDERGARTEN, FIRST, SECOND, DEVELOPING PATTERNS OR RECOGNIZING PATTERNS IF YOU WILL. JUST FROM A LARGER PERSPECTIVE, JUST TO SHARE HOW– BECAUSE I NOTICED YOU GUYS SAID THAT THIS TRANSLATES TO DIFFERENT INDUSTRIES. IT DOES. YOU KNOW, LIKE, IN DIFFERENT– LIKE IN HEALTHCARE, YOU CAN REALLY KIND OF GET TO THE HEART OF AN ISSUE OF SPREADING INFECTION, IF YOU WILL, IF YOU CAN ETHICALLY USE DATA, IF YOU WILL. SO I DO THINK THAT THIS IS VERY APPLICABLE. I DON’T THINK IT’S, LIKE YOU’RE SAYING, SCREEN ORIENTED, BUT IT IS A WAY OF THINKING, AND WHEN USED ETHICALLY, IT’S POSITIVE. IT CAN REALLY HAVE A GOOD IMPACT.>>THANK YOU. ANY OTHER– YES, PAM?>>JUST A REALLY QUICK QUESTION, AND I PROBABLY MISSED THIS, VENESSA, YOU WERE SAYING, IT’S THE FIVE PUBLIC COMMENT AND IN-PERSON SESSIONS, WHERE WILL THOSE BE OR WHAT’S THE COMPOSITION OF THE GROUPS THAT YOU EXPECT?>>SO WE HAVE ONE HERE IN LANSING AT THE LIBRARY OF MICHIGAN, AND THEN WE HAVE ONE FEBRUARY 4TH AT EUPISD. WE HAVE ONE FEBRUARY 5TH AT COPESD, ONE AT KALAMAZOO RESA, AND THEN ONE AT OAKLAND SCHOOLS.>>SO TWO IN THE UPPER PENINSULA, OAKLAND, KALAMAZOO, HERE.>>AND THE ONE HERE IS ALSO SATURDAY, TOO.>>AND WE WILL DO ONLINE ALL OF OUR WAYS TO GATHER COMMENT AS WELL.>>BUT THAT’LL GET A GOOD CROSS SECTION OF…>>I THINK WHAT WE’VE FOUND– I MEAN, YOU KNOW, ALL THE STANDARDS THAT WE’VE DONE, THESE ARE PROBABLY A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT IN THE SENSE THAT THEY’RE NEW. I THINK WHAT WE’VE FOUND IS THAT THE ONLINE PICKS UP A REALLY GOOD CROSS SECTION, AND THE IN-PERSON DOES AS WELL, BUT SOMETIMES WE MAY WANT TO DO THE FIVE AND THEN SAY, “YOU KNOW, WHO’S WHO “UNDERREPRESENTED, HERE’S SOME “MORE WE WANT TO ADD.” THAT’S WHAT WE’VE DONE IN THE PAST. WE KIND OF START WITH KIND OF THIS IS OUR STANDARD OUT OF THE GATE APPROACH, AND WE SEE HOW THE COMMENTS GO AND WHAT KIND OF REPRESENTATION WE GET. WE CAN ALSO SOLICIT SPECIFIC FEEDBACK FROM CERTAIN GROUPS. I’M SURE OUR PARTNERS WILL BE SOLICITING FEEDBACK, BUT WE CAN USE SOCIAL STUDIES AS A TEMPLATE FOR SOME OF THE GROUPS TO ASK IF THEY HAVE COMMENT ON THIS. SO I THINK WE’D LIKE TO TRY AND APPROACH OF ONLINE WITH THE FIVE IN-PERSON AND SEE IF WE CAN GET TO THE DEGREE OF SPREAD THAT WE NEED. AND THEN IF NOT, THEN WE’LL ADD SESSIONS AND DO MORE THINGS.>>THANK YOU, PAM. LAURA?>>MICHELLE, TO ILLUSTRATE WHAT THIS COULD LOOK LIKE IN A SECOND GRADE CLASSROOM TOO, IT’S EXCITING TO SEE TEACHERS USE TECHNOLOGY NOT AS SOMETHING EXTRA, BUT AS A SOMETIMES MORE ENGAGING WAY TO DO WHAT WE’RE ALREADY DOING IN OUR CLASSROOM. MY STUDENTS WERE WORKING ON DEEPENING THEIR COMPREHENSION THROUGH RETELLING, AND THEY WERE RETELLING FAIRY TALES THAT THEY HAD READ IN SMALL GROUPS. THEN WE TOOK THESE LITTLE OZOBOTS, WHICH ARE SMALL LITTLE ROBOTS, AND THE STUDENTS PROGRAMMED THEM, THE SEVEN-YEAR-OLDS. NEVER IN FRONT OF THE SCREEN WERE THEY PROGRAMMING, BECAUSE IT’S A COLOR-CODING PROGRAMMING THAT THEY’RE USING, A VERY BASIC LEVEL, BUT THEY WERE RETELLING THE STORY WITH THESE BOTS, MAKING THEM MOVE FASTER WHEN THE STORY SPED UP, AND MAKING THEM STOP AND SPIN AROUND IF IT WAS A BIG CLIMAX IN THE STORY. SO THAT’S JUST AN EXAMPLE OF HOW THE LITTLE ONES CAN USE THIS TECHNOLOGY, AND IT’S INTEGRATED INTO WHAT WE DO. IT’S EXCITING.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU TO THE TEAM FOR YOUR EFFORTS IN PUTTING THESE STANDARDS TOGETHER, AND THANK YOU TO THE TEAM FOR YOUR IN-PERSON PUBLIC COMMENT SESSIONS THAT YOU WILL BE HOSTING, AND ALSO YOUR WILLINGNESS TO EXPAND THE IN-PERSON SESSIONS IF YOU FEEL THAT YOU ARE NOT GETTING THE REPRESENTATION THAT YOU FEEL IS REFLECTIVE OF THE EDUCATORS IN OUR STATE. OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND I’M HESITANT TO START ANOTHER PRESENTATION AND THEN HAVE TO INTERRUPT IT. I DO… WE COULD MOVE TO THE REPORTS OF THE PRESIDENT, OR WE COULD MOVE TO THE REPORT OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT, RATHER THAN START A LONGER PRESENTATION. [ INDISTINCT ] OKAY, WE’RE GOING TO ADJUST THE AGENDA, TO ACCOMMODATE SOME SHORTER PRESENTATIONS, RATHER THAN MOVE INTO A LONGER PRESENTATION, WITH THE ANTICIPATED ATTENDANCE OF THE GOVERNOR, SO WE WILL– MOVE TO THE REPORT OF THE PRESIDENT, AND SO, CASANDRA, AS THE NEW PRESIDENT, DO YOU HAVE A REPORT TO SHARE WITH THE STATE BOARD?>>I DO. SO FIRST OF ALL, LET ME JUST SAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE VOTE TO BECOME PRESIDENT OF THE BOARD. I’M VERY HONORED TO BE SERVING IN THIS ROLE, AND I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT. I WANT TO CONGRATULATE THE OTHER MEMBERS THAT ARE SERVING IN ROLES. I WANT TO WELCOME TIFFANY AND JUDY TO THE BOARD TABLE. THIS, YOU WILL FIND, I THINK, IS A VERY FULFILLING COMMITMENT TO THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, AND AT TIMES CAN BE VERY FRUSTRATING, BUT– [ LAUGHING ] AT THE END OF THE DAY, YOU’RE DOING REALLY GOOD WORK, AND THE WORK THAT YOU ARE DOING IS BOTH APPRECIATED AND IS MOVING THE STATE FORWARD, PARTICULARLY FOR OUR KIDS. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE YOU PUTTING YOUR NAMES FORWARD AND CHOOSING TO BE A MEMBER OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. TRADITIONALLY, THE STATE BOARD HAS HAD TWO CONSISTENT COMMITTEES, AND IN OUR BYLAWS, IT ALSO CALLS FOR IF THERE ARE NEEDS FOR ADDITIONAL COMMITTEES MOVING FORWARD, THAT THE CHAIR CAN APPOINT THOSE. I’M SORRY, THE PRESIDENT, SORRY. AND SO FOR OUR CONSISTENT COMMITTEES, THE FIRST ONE IS THE AGENDA PLANNING COMMITTEE, AND TRADITIONALLY WE’VE ALWAYS HAD THE FOUR EXECUTIVE BOARD MEMBERS SERVE AS OFFICIAL MEMBERS OF THAT COMMITTEE, AND SO, I WOULD SAY THAT WE WILL CONTINUE THAT TRADITION, SO THAT COMMITTEE WILL BE MADE UP OF MYSELF, PAM PUGH, MICHELLE FECTEAU, AND TOM MCMILLIN. HOWEVER, AS ALSO IS OUR TRADITION, WE ALLOW ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD TO PARTICIPATE IN ANY OF THE COMMITTEES, SO IF YOU WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN A LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, YOU ARE MORE THAN WELCOME TO DO SO. THE OTHER COMMITTEE IS THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, AND THAT COMMITTEE IS ALSO REPRESENTATIVE OF FOUR BOARD MEMBERS, AND LUPE RAMOS-MONTIGNY HAS AGREED TO SERVE AS THE CHAIR OF THE LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, SO THANK YOU, LUPE, FOR THAT. THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WILL BE TIFFANY TILLEY, JUDY PRITCHETT, AND NIKKI SNYDER. AND YOU GUYS WILL BE ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER TO COME UP WITH A SCHEDULE THAT WORKS FOR ALL OF YOU, TO BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE IN THOSE MEETINGS. I KNOW NIKKI SOMETIMES HAS TIME CHALLENGES, SO IF WE CAN WORK AROUND THOSE, THAT’S WONDERFUL, BUT SHE ALSO RECOGNIZES THAT THERE MAY BE TIMES THAT SHE JUST WON’T BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE. AND THAT IS ACCEPTABLE AS WELL, AND FOR THE REST OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, OF COURSE, IF YOU WANT TO PARTICIPATE IN LEGISLATIVE COMMITTEE, LIKE THE AGENDA PLANNING COMMITTEE, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE’VE ALWAYS DONE HERE AT THE BOARD. THERE’S ALSO THREE COMMISSIONS THAT WERE– WE HAD REPRESENTATION BY EITHER RICHARD OR EILEEN, AND THEY WERE THE ONLY BOARD MEMBERS THAT WERE ON THOSE COMMISSIONS. AND SO I SENT OUT AN EMAIL TO SEE IF THERE WERE ANY– IF THERE WAS ANY INTEREST IN BOARD MEMBERS SERVING ON THOSE. [ APPLAUSE ] [ LAUGHTER ] [ INDISTINCT ]>>YOU JUST START CLAPPING.>>APPARENTLY.>>AND APPARENTLY, THERE’S LOTS OF INFLUENCES. [ LAUGHTER ] [ APPLAUSE ] [ APPLAUSE CONTINUES ] [ INDISTINCT ]>>CONGRATULATIONS.>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. HI, TOM, HOW ARE YOU DOING? GOOD TO SEE YOU. THANK YOU. HI, HOW ARE YOU? [ INDISTINCT ], HOW ARE YOU DOING? CONGRATULATIONS, JUDY. [ INDISTINCT ] AT THE FRONT, ALL RIGHT. HEAD OF THE TABLE. THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.>>MORNING.>>CONGRATULATIONS, AND WELCOME TO THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING. WE ARE SO HONORED AND PLEASED TO HAVE YOU HERE WITH US TODAY. KNOWING THAT THIS IS YOUR FIRST FULL WEEK IN YOUR TERM OF GOVERNOR OF THE GREAT STATE OF MICHIGAN, WE CAN ONLY IMAGINE HOW BUSY YOUR SCHEDULE IS, AND SO WE ARE TRULY GRATEFUL FOR THE TIME THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO SPEND WITH US TODAY, AND WE ARE SO LOOKING FORWARD TO YOUR REMARKS THIS MORNING.>>WELL, THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THIS, AND THIS IS QUITE A RECEPTION. I DON’T GET THIS KIND OF RECEPTION EVERY ROOM I WALK INTO. [ LAUGHTER ] I DO APPRECIATE IT A GREAT DEAL. AS A MOM OF KIDS WHO ARE IN THE PUBLIC SCHOOLS, AS SOMEONE WHO WAS RAISED BY PUBLIC SCHOOL TEACHERS, AND HAD A GRANDFATHER WHO WAS A SUPERINTENDENT OF PONTIAC PUBLIC SCHOOLS, THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I’M PASSIONATE ABOUT, AND I THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU ALL DO. AND I DO WANT TO TAKE A MOMENT AND REFLECT ON MY FRIEND, BRIAN WHISTON. MY GRANDMOTHER TAUGHT HIM IN 4TH GRADE AT WATERFORD PUBLIC SCHOOLS. AND HE WAS A WONDERFUL PERSON, AND I KNOW THAT A LOT OF THE WORK THAT WAS TEED UP THAT YOU’RE CONTINUING IS REALLY CRITICAL, AND I WANT TO BE A GREAT PARTNER, AND I WANT TO MAKE EDUCATION– I WANT TO CHANGE WHAT’S HAPPENING IN EDUCATION IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN. I WANT TO TREAT TEACHERS WITH RESPECT, MAKE SURE EVERY CHILD HAS REAL OPPORTUNITY, AND WE THINK OF EDUCATION AS LIFELONG LEARNING AGAIN, WHICH I THINK ARE THINGS I KNOW THAT PEOPLE AROUND THIS TABLE HAVE GIVEN A GREAT DEAL OF THOUGHT TO AND WORK TOWARD. AND I THINK WE ARE GOING TO DO SOME GREAT THINGS TOGETHER. AND SO I SIMPLY WANTED TO COME TO THIS MEETING AND ACKNOWLEDGE THE WORK THAT YOU’VE DONE, AND TELL YOU HOW EXCITED I AM ABOUT WHERE I THINK WE CAN TAKE OUR STATE, FOR THE KIDS OF OUR STATE, THE PARENTS OF OUR STATE, AND FOR OUR ECONOMY IN OUR STATE. SO THANK YOU.>>WONDERFUL TO HAVE YOU WITH US. THANK YOU. [ APPLAUSE ] AND THIS TIME, WE ARE GOING TO RECESS OUR STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING TO GIVE MEMBERS OF THE STATE BOARD AS WELL AS OUR AUDIENCE AN OPPORTUNITY TO GREET YOU. SO WE WILL TAKE A SHORT RECESS.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. [ INDISTINCT CHATTER ]>>–CAN ADJOURN OUR RECESS, AND ASK BOARD MEMBERS AND STAFF TO PLEASE COME BACK TO THEIR SEATS. WE WILL RECONVENE OUR MEETING. [ LAUGHTER ] [ INDISTINCT CHATTER ] [ INDISTINCT CHATTER ]>>IT TRULY WAS AN HONOR AND A PRIVILEGE AND A-AND A PLEASURE TO HAVE GOVERNOR GRETCHEN WHITMER WITH US THIS MORNING, AND TO HEAR HER STORY ABOUT THE ROLE THAT HER FAMILY HAS PLAYED IN EDUCATION FROM STATE SUPERINTENDENT TO HER GRANDMOTHER BEING A TEACHER OF BRIAN WHISTON. SO THAT WAS VERY LOVELY TO HAVE HER HERE. AND THANK YOU TO EVERYONE WHO WAS HERE TO PROVIDE SUCH A WARM WELCOME TO THE GOVERNOR. THE M-MANY MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE WHO WERE HERE THIS MORNING. GREATLY APPRECIATE STEPPING AWAY FROM THE WORK THAT YOU ARE DOING TO BE HERE TO WELCOME THE GOVERNOR. AND IT WAS A WONDERFUL OPPORTUNITY FOR THE MDE STAFF TO HAVE A CHANCE TO MEET THE GOVERNOR, AND TO BE HERE TO HEAR HER REMARKS, SO, WE APPRECIATE THEM BEING HERE AS WELL. SO WE’RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THE PRESIDENT’S REPORT. WE WILL FINISH THE PRESIDENT’S REPORT, AND THEN WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE PRESENTATION OF THE MICHIGAN INTEGRATED CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS. SO, CASANDRA, I’LL TURN IT BACK TO YOU.>>THANK YOU. YES, THAT WAS VERY EXCITING, AND-AND THANK YOU TO THE STAFF FOR ARRANGING FOR THE GOVERNOR TO COME, AND-AND JOIN US. HOPEFULLY THIS IS THE BEGINNING OF A-A VERY FRUITFUL RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE AND THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION AND THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. JUST TO-TO WRAP UP THERE– I WAS MENTIONING THAT THERE WERE THREE COMMISSIONS THAT EITHER RICHARD OR EILEEN WERE THE ONLY STATE BOARD OF ED MEMBERS ON. ONE IS THE CAREER READINESS CROSS-SECTOR TEAM, WHICH I BELIEVE IS AN MDE– ER, STATE-LEVEL GROUP. THE SECOND IS THE NASBE GROUP FOR SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL LEARNING. AND THE OTHER ONE IS ANOTHER NASBE GROUP FOR EARLY-LEARNING WORKFORCE. AND I DID HEAR FROM TWO BOARD MEMBERS. TOM EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN THE SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL LEARNING, AND JUDY EXPRESSED AN INTEREST IN EITHER THE CAREER READINESS OR THE EARLY LEARNING TASKFORCE. SO I JUST WANT TO OPEN IT UP. IF THERE ARE ANY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE INTERESTED IN SERVING IN ANY OF THESE ROLES?>>I GUESS–>>YES?>>I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN THE SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL LEARNING. THERE’S A COUPLE OF THEM THAT ARE QUITE INTERESTING, BUT– [ LAUGHING ]>>I BETTER JUST RESERVE TO-TO ONE.>>OKAY. THERE’S NO REASON WE CAN’T HAVE MORE THAN ONE BOARD MEMBER ON THESE, CORRECT?>>CORRECT.>>OKAY. ANY OTHER INTEREST? JUDY, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO SERVE ON BOTH OF THEM?>>SURE, I CAN DO THAT.>>OKAY. THEN HEREBY APPOINT JUDY TO THE CAREER READINESS CROSS-SECTOR TEAM, PAM AND TOM TO THE SOCIAL EMOTIONAL LEARNING, AND JUDY TO THE EARLY LEARNING WORKFORCE. OKAY, AND THAT CONCLUDES MY REMARKS.>>THANK YOU. WE HAVE JOSH NEYHART, WHO IS JOINING US FROM THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE. WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. WELCOME TO THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING.>>THANK YOU SO MUCH, I APPRECIATE YOU INVITING US TODAY TO BE HERE. THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO THE GOVERNOR, OBVIOUSLY. EDUCATION HAS BEEN SOMETHING SHE’S TALKED ABOUT A LOT. IT’S A VERY HIGH PRIORITY FOR HER, AND HAVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE AT THIS MEETING IS FANTASTIC, AND I APPRECIATE THE INVITATION.>>THANK YOU. AND WE WILL NOW MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM OF THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE MEETING, WHICH IS A PRESENTATION OF THE MICHIGAN INTEGRATED CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS MICIP. THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IS COMMITTED TO A SYSTEM OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT THAT SUPPORTS THE WHOLE CHILD. THIS IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH MICHIGAN’S TOP 10 IN 10 STRATEGIC PLAN, AND ALSO THE STATE’S PLAN FOR EVERY STUDENT SUCCEEDS ACT. THE MICHIGAN INTEGRATED CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS IS HOW MDE WILL SUPPORT SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS TO ASSESS NEEDS, DEVELOP PLANS FOR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT, AND TO ALLOCATE FUNDING TO IMPLEMENT THOSE PLANS THROUGH ONE INTEGRATED PROCESS. THIS IS A PRESENTATION ONLY. NO ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE PART OF THE BOARD, AND WE– OUR PRESENTER TODAY IS VENESSA KEESLER. WELCOME AGAIN, VENESSA.>>THANK YOU, AGAIN, AND THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK WITH YOU ABOUT THIS WORK. SO AS SHEILA ALLUDED TO, MICIP– AND WE USE THE WORD ‘INITIATIVE,’ BUT IT’S REALLY MORE THAN AN INITIATIVE. IT’S REALLY A CHANCE FOR US TO GET OUR PROCESSES IN ALIGNMENT WITH OUR PROMISES. OUR PROMISES OF BEING WHOLE CHILD FOCUSED, OUR PROMISES OF HAVING THE-THE BUSINESS OF EDUCATION NOT GET IN THE WAY OF EDUCATION. AND SO, THIS BUILDS ON– THIS IS NOT SOMETHING THAT CAME OUT OF NOWHE– THIS IS TWO, THREE YEARS IN THE MAKING. AND YOU SEE HERE WE STARTED WITH THE 10 IN 10, AND THE 10 IN 10 IS WHERE WE MADE THE COMMITMENT TO BEING FOCUSED ON ACADEMICS AND THE NON-ACADEMIC FACTORS THAT WE KNOW ARE SO IMPORTANT TO-TO STUDENT SUCCESS. OUR ESSA PLAN REITERATED THAT GOAL. OUR STATE SYSTEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN ALSO HAS THAT AS A FOCUS. AND THEN WE HAVE DONE LOTS OF WORK OVER THE LAST FEW YEARS WITH ALL OF YOU, AND THEN SPECIFICALLY WITH THE SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT COMMUNITY. SO THERE’S A STRAND OF THIS THAT’S ABOUT SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT, DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT. BUT WE’RE TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM USING THOSE TERMS, BECAUSE THIS-THIS ISN’T ABOUT TRADITIONAL SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT AS WE THINK OF IT, AS A PLAN THAT YOU DO, OR THAT– A PROCESS THAT IS KIND OF LIMITED TO A FEW FACTORS, BUT A BROADER APPROACH TO THIS CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PLANNING THAT WE WANT OUR DISTRICTS DOING. SO I SPOKE ABOUT THE WHOLE CHILD ALREADY. WE SPENT TIME AS A DEPARTMENT– ONCE WE SAID, “THE WHOLE CHILD MATTERS,” WE HAD TO AGREE ON WHAT IS THE WHOLE CHILD, WHAT ARE THOSE DIMENSIONS, SO WE CAN BE SPECIFIC ABOUT ALIGNING STRUCTURES AT THE STATE, ISD, DISTRICT, SCHOOL– ALL OF THOSE LEVELS. THIS IS MDE’S ADOPTED DEFINITION OF THE WHOLE CHILD. IT BUILDS OFF THE WSCC MODEL, AND IT HAS– YOU CAN READ IT HERE, BUT IT’S THE CONCEPT THAT THE WHOLE CHILD’S A UNIQUE LEARNER WITH THESE INTERACTING DIMENSIONS– COGNITIVE, PHYSICAL, BEHAVIORAL, SOCIAL, EMOTIONAL. AND AS YOU SEE IN THE BLUE, THERE ARE SPECIFIC COMPONENTS OF THAT, LIKE FAMILY ENGAGEMENT, OR PHYSICAL ENVIRONMENT, OR MENTAL HEALTH, FOR EXAMPLE. SO ONCE WE AGREED ON THAT WE WANT TO SUPPORT THE WHOLE CHILD– AND I THINK WHEN YOU LOOK HISTORICALLY– THIS IS TRUE IN MICHIGAN, THIS IS TRUE NATIONALLY AS WELL. WHAT HAPPENED THROUGH THE NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND TIME WAS THAT THINGS NARROWED IN A LOT OF WAYS. THE FEDERAL– THE FEDERAL INFLUENCE ON STATE POLICY PUSHED US TO BE MORE FOCUSED ON A FEW CORE ACADEMICS, TO BE MORE FOCUSED ON THE STRUCTURES OF THE STATE FOCUSED MORE ON THOSE MORE LIMITED AREAS. AND WHAT WE’VE RECOGNIZED AS A STATE AND WHAT ESSA REITERATED IS THAT WHILE ACADEMICS ARE EXTREMELY IMPORTANT FOR STUDENTS, THEY’RE NOT SUFFICIENT TO GET THEM TO THE GOALS THAT WE HAVE FOR ALL OF OUR LEARNERS, TO THE OUTCOMES THAT WE HAVE FOR ALL OF OUR LEARNERS. AND SO WE AT THE STATE HAVE TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS OF FIGURING OUT HOW WE INTERACT WITH DISTRICTS IN A WAY THAT ALLOWS THEM TO HAVE THAT MORE EXPANDED VIEW OF SUCCESS, AND THAT OUR SYSTEMS HERE SUPPORT THAT. SO WITH MICIP, WE WANT TO PROVIDE DISTRICTS WITH A STREAMLINED AND INTEGRATED PROCESS FOR THREE BIG THINGS. AND MY TAGLINE WITH THIS– AND I SAY THIS IN EVERY PRESENTATION I DO– IF YOU DON’T REMEMBER ANYTHING ELSE, REMEMBER THIS: MICIP IS ABOUT NEEDS, PLANS, MONEY. THAT’S THE THROUGH LINE. WHAT ARE THE NEEDS AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL, THE WHOLE CHILD NEEDS AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL? WHAT’S THE PLAN? SO THAT YOU DON’T HAVE A PLAN FOR THIS AND A PLAN FOR THAT– YOU HAVE ONE PLAN, AND IT’S A HIGH QUALITY PLAN. AND THEN HOW ARE YOU GOING TO USE ALL OF YOUR FUNDING STREAMS AND GRANTS TO IMPLEMENT THAT PLAN? HISTORICALLY, WE’VE– IT’S BEEN MORE LIKE THIS HERE AND WITH DISTRICTS. SO WE HAVE A GRANT STREAM, AND IT SAYS, “YOU HAVE TO DO “A NEEDS ASSESSMENT, YOU HAVE “TO MAKE A PLAN, AND THEN YOU “GET YOUR TITLE MONEY.” WE HAVE SOME SAFE AND SUPPORTIVE SCHOOLS MONEY, SO YOU HAVE TO DO A NEEDS ASSESSMENT, YOU MAKE A PLAN, AND THEN YOU GET THAT MONEY. AND SO YOU SEE THESE SILOS. THE PROBLEM– NEEDS, PLANS AND ASSESSMENTS– OR NEEDS, PLANS AND MONEY– SORRY. I– THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ASSESSMENT, SO I DON’T KNOW WHY I JUST SAID THAT WORD. JUST-JUST HABIT, I GUESS. [ LAUGHTER ] SO-SO THIS HAS BEEN WHERE WE’RE AT, AND YOU CAN SEE THE SILOS. YOU CAN ALSO SEE– I WILL CALL THIS OUT– THE-THE LARGEST POT OF MONEY THAT OUR DISTRICTS GET IS THE PER PUPIL FOUNDATION ALLOWANCE, FOR WHICH THEY MAKE NO NEEDS ASSESSMENT, NO PLAN, AND THEN THEY GET THE MONEY. SO THEY’RE MAKING THESE SMALLER– THESE BIG PLANS TO DO BIG THINGS FOR SMALLER POTS OF MONEY, WITHOUT NECESSARILY THE SYSTEM SUPPORTING A HOLISTIC PLAN THAT INTEGRATES ALL THE FUNDING SOURCES. SO AGAIN, IF YOU REMEMBER THE MICIP, NEEDS, PLANS, MONEY. WE WANT TO LOOK AT NEEDS ALL AT ONCE. WE WANT ONE COHESIVE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT’S BUILT ON THE PRINCIPLES OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT, THE CYCLE OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT. AND THEN HOW TO USE ALL THOSE SOURCES OF MONEY, WHETHER OR NOT THEY, QUOTE, “REQUIRED” A PLAN. CERTAINLY FOR OUR STUDENTS TO SUCCEED, WE NEED A PLAN AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL FOR HOW WE’RE GOING TO REACH THOSE GOALS. SO WHAT THIS WILL HELP US DO IS BRING TOGETHER DATA INTO ONE LOCATION FOR NEEDS ASSESSMENT. THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE POISED TO DO A FAR BETTER JOB WITH THAN WE HAVE IN THE PAST. RIGHT NOW, DISTRICTS HAVE TO DO A LOT OF THE WORK TO FIND THE DATA FOR THEIR NEEDS ASSESSMENT, BUT BETWEEN INCREASED DATA HERE, BETTER DATA INTEGRATION THROUGH THE DATA HUBS, AND JUST ADVANCEMENTS IN THE TECHNOLOGY AROUND DATA SHARING, WE CAN PUT DATA INTO ONE PLACE TO MAKE IT EASY FOR DISTRICTS TO LOOK ACROSS THE WHOLE CHILD AT THEIR NEEDS. AGAIN, WE WANT THAT CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS. WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO INTEGRATE THIS EVIDENCE-BASED PRACTICE GUIDANCE. SO RATHER THAN, “HERE’S HOW YOU USE EVIDENCE,” WHEN A DISTRICT IS WORKING IN A SPACE TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, “WE HAVE THIS NEED. “WHAT DOES THE RESEARCH, “WHAT DOES THE EVIDENCE SUGGEST “MIGHT WORK FOR OUR POPULATION?” DISTRICTS STILL OBVIOUSLY HAVE DECISIONS TO MAKE ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THAT IS TRUE, BUT THIS PROVIDES A SPACE FOR THAT EVIDENCE BASE TO BE BROUGHT IN. AND THEN IT HELPS US BRING ALIGNMENT ACROSS THESE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS. WE DON’T WANT DISTRICTS DOING THAT OLD SLIDE WHERE THEY TELL US THE SAME THING FOR MULTIPLE GRANTS, WHERE THEY’RE DOING FOUR PLANS INSTEAD OF ONE PLAN, WHERE ONE PLAN IS BIG EVEN THOUGH THE MONEY IS SMALL, AND THAT’S A LOT OF WORK FOR DISTRICTS. AND WE HAVE– AND AGAIN, WE OWN THIS AS A DEPARTMENT. WE HAVE LEFT THAT UP TILL NOW ON THE DISTRICTS TO SORT OUT. THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE THAT. AGAIN, HERE’S MY GRAPHIC SO EVERYBODY KNOWS– NEEDS, PLANS, FUNDING. THAT’S WHAT MICIP IS ALL ABOUT, GETTING THIS INTO AN INTEGRATED CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS. LET ME TALK A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT EACH OF THE THREE PARTS. SO NEEDS– AS I SAID, NEEDS ASSESSMENTS NOW HAPPEN BY– HAVE– IN THE PAST HAVE HAPPENED BY GRANT STREAM. WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ACROSS OFFICES, USING THE WSCC MODEL AND LOOKING AT ALL THE COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS TO GET TO ONE ASSESSING NEEDS TOOL THAT ALLOWS A DISTRICT-DISTRICT TO SIT AND REALLY THINK ABOUT THEIR ACADEMICS, BUT ALSO THEIR-THEIR PHYSICAL SAFETY, THEIR MENTAL HEALTH, THEIR SOCIAL-EMOTIONAL OUTREACH, THEIR FAMILY ENGAGEMENT– ALL OF THE PIECES THAT WE KNOW ARE IMPORTANT TO ENSURING SUCCESS. SO A DISTRICT CAN ASSESS ALL THOSE NEEDS, AND THEN DO SOME PRIORITIZATION. NO DISTRICT CAN WORK ON EVERY NEED THAT THEY HAVE, SO HOW DO YOU DIG DOWN AND SAY, “WE’RE GOING TO FOCUS ON “THESE FOUR THINGS BECAUSE “THEY’RE THE HIGHEST “LEVERAGE POINTS.” OR THREE, OR FIVE, OR HOW MANY EVER THEY DECIDE TO DO. WHERE WE’RE AT WITH THIS RIGHT NOW– WE’VE REALLY UNDER– WE REALLY UNDERSTAND THE RELEVANT DATA AND THE GUIDING QUESTIONS, AND WE’RE CLOSE TO A TECHNICAL SOLUTION TO IMPLEMENT. WE’RE STILL WORKING ON THE STORY, RIGHT? WHAT WE FIND OFTEN– YOU– THE OLD ADAGE THAT EVERYBODY SAYS IS, “DATA RICH “BUT INFORMATION POOR.” IF YOU JUST SHOW ANYBODY JUST A SHEET OF A BUNCH OF NUMBERS, IT’S LIKE, “WELL, WHAT AM “I SUPPOSED TO DEDUCE FROM THIS? “WHAT ARE THE QUESTIONS “I’M SUPPOSED TO ASK? “WHAT ARE THE TAKE-AWAYS?” SO THAT’S WHAT WE’RE WORKING THROUGH RIGHT NOW, IS GETTING TO A GOOD PROCESS TO FACILITATE DISTRICTS BEING ABLE TO ASK THE IMPORTANT QUESTIONS OF THE DATA. SECOND PART IS THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WITH THE BEST PRACTICES OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT, LIKE I SAID. AND GETTING CLEAR ON PROCESS VERSUS TOOLS VERSUS SYSTEM. SO THERE ARE A NUMBER OF THINGS IN A GOOD CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PLANNING THAT ARE ABOUT THE PROCESS. THEY’RE ABOUT PEOPLE GETTING TOGETHER, LOOKING AT DATA AND MEETING. THEY’RE NOT ALL ABOUT PUTTING THINGS IN THE SYSTEM. I THINK ANOTHER MISSTEP WE’VE MADE IN THE PAST IS THE SYSTEM HAD A LOT OF HARD STOPS, SO THEN THE SYSTEM BECAME THE THING. YOU JUST HAVE TO CHECK THE BOXES IN THE SYSTEM. AND WHAT WE KNOW IS THAT THAT LEADS TO COMPLIANCE, WHERE THE PLAN IS COMPLIANT BUT IT’S NOT DRIVING CHANGE. UM, AND THIS WAS NOT TRUE OF ALL DISTRICTS– I DON’T WANT TO PAINT WITH A SWEEPING BRUSH, BUT TOO OFTEN WE HEARD DISTRICTS SAY, “YEAH, WE DO “OUR SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT PLAN, “THEN WE PUT IT ON THE SHELF, “AND THEN WE MAKE OUR REAL PLAN “FOR WHAT WE’RE GOING TO DO.” WE WANT TO STOP THAT. WE WANT ONE PLAN MADE, AND WE WANT OUR PROCESSES AND TOOLS AND SYSTEMS TO FACILITATE THAT GOOD PLAN THAT HELPS THE DISTRICTS DRIVE THEIR WORK. WE ARE WORKING TOWARD ONE COHERENT PLANNING PROCESS ACROSS THE WHOLE CHILD, SO INCLUDING INTEGRATING PLANS FROM EARLY CHILDHOOD, SPECIAL ED, CTE, AND OTHERS. SOME OF THOSE PLANNING PROCESSES HAPPEN AT THE REGIONAL LEVEL, NOT THE DISTRICT, SO THINKING THROUGH WHAT DOES A DISTRICT NEED TO HAVE, HOW DOES IT INTERSECT WITH THE ISD, AND HOW DO WE– YOU KNOW, I THINK SOMETHING IN MICHIGAN THAT WE ALL AGREE TO AND NOW ARE TRYING TO PUT OUR PROCESSES IN LINE WITH THIS PROMISE, IS THAT WE NEED TO PULL IN THE SAME DIRECTION. WE NEED TO ALL BE PULLING AS HARD AS WE CAN IN ONE DIRECTION, HAVE OUR RESOURCES AND OUR EFFORTS SUPPORTING OUR STUDENTS IN A COHERENT WAY. AND SO THIS IS PART OF US HELPING DISTRICTS TO DO THAT BETTER AND US TO WORK WITH THEM IN A MORE COHERENT WAY. AND THEN THE LAST PART IS A MORE INTEGRATED GRANT APPLICATION. SO RATHER, AGAIN, THAN SUBMIT THIS ONE, THIS ONE, THIS ONE, MAYBE TELL US THE SAME DATA MULTIPLE TIMES, STRUGGLING TO MOVE BETWEEN PARTS OF THE SYSTEM– AND WE HAVE DONE A LOT OF DATA GATHERING WITH OUR STAKEHOLDERS, SO WE ARE AWARE OF THE LIMITATIONS OF OUR CURRENT SYSTEM, AND OUR ENG– THIS PROCESS IS PUT IN PLACE TO SOLVE THOSE LIMITATIONS, TO MAKE IT MORE FUNCTIONAL, LESS REDUNDANT, AND MORE INTEGRATED, AND TO REALLY GET DISTRICTS TO THAT LINKING, BLENDING, BREEDING OF FUNDS, RATHER THAN TRYING TO START FROM SCRATCH WITH EACH GRANT-GRANT STREAM TO SAY, “WE HAVE TO BUILD “A WHOLE–” SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WITH TITLE. TITLE MONEY IS MEANT, ACTUALLY, AS SUPPLEMENTARY FUNDS FOR STUDENTS WHO ARE AT RISK. THAT IS THE CORE OF THE TITLE PROGRAM FUNDING FROM THE FEDERAL-FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. OVER TIME, WHAT HAP– YOU CAN’T– YOU CAN’T PROVIDE GOOD CORE INSTRUCTION, YOU CAN’T PROVIDE A GOOD CORE EDUCATIONAL ENVIRONMENT WITH YOUR TITLE MONEY. BUT TO DO THE TITLE PLAN AND SAY, “HERE’S HOW WE’RE “GONNA USE THIS MONEY THE WAY “WE NEED TO,” YOU ACTUALLY HAD TO DO THE LARGER PLANNING ABOUT THE-THE BASE, THE FOUNDATION. SO AGAIN, WE WANT THIS TO BE A PROCESS AND A SYSTEM WHERE DISTRICTS ARE FACILITATED IN THINKING ABOUT ALL THOSE STREAMS AND HOW THEY INTERACT WITH THEM VERSUS THINKING THEY HAVE TO DO EVERYTHING WITH INDIVIDUAL GRANT STREAMS. WE REALLY DO NOT WANT DISTRICTS ANYMORE DEVELOPING PROGRAMMING TO FIT AVAILABLE MONEY. AND WE THINK THAT IN THE PAST, THAT HAS BEEN THE CASE. HERE’S $500,000, SO BUILD OUT THIS WHOLE PROGRAM OF WORK TO GET THAT $500,000, BECAUSE WHO’S GOING TO TURN DOWN $500,000, RIGHT? EXCEPT IF THAT PROGRAM OF WORK ISN’T INTEGRATED INTO THE CORE FUNCTION OF YOUR DISTRICT, ISN’T PART OF A SYSTEMIC CHANGE, IT’S GOING TO– YOU’RE GOING TO SPEND THE 500, MAYBE NOT EVEN EFFECTIVELY. YOU MIGHT EVEN STRUGGLE TO SPEND IT– AND NOT GET THE CHANGE YOU WANTED. SO WHICH PROGRAMS ARE INVOLVED? IN THIS INITIAL PHASE WHICH WE’RE IN NOW, WE WOULD CALL THESE SOME OF THE CORE PROCESSES. SO WE’RE REALLY WORKING ON THE WHOLE CHILD DISTRICT NEEDS ASSESSMENT, THE COMPREHENSIVE WHOLE CHILD DISTRICT NEEDS ASSESSMENT, AND THEN THE SYSTEM TO SUPPORT THAT CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PLANNING PROCESS. SO THIS WILL, IN ITS FIRST ITERATION, PICK UP THE ACTIVITIES THAT WERE FORMERLY THOUGHT OF AS BEING SCHOOL AND DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLANNING. AND THE CONSOLIDATED APPLICATION, AND THEN WITH THIS ADDITION OF THE WHOLE CHILD NEEDS ASSESSMENT. AND THIS IS FOCUSED AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL. WHILE WE WILL STILL ENCOURAGE DISTRICTS TO ENSURE THEY– OR HELP DISTRICTS TO HAVE SCHOOL PLANS, WE KNOW THAT YOU NEED A DISTRICT PLAN TO HAVE SUCCESSFUL SCHOOL PLANS. THAT, AGAIN, HISTORICALLY– THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF MY HISTORIAN IN ME– THE KIND OF ARC OF THAT IS EARLY NCLB SAID, “NO, SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT “PLANNING IS THE PROBLEM.” THERE-THERE WASN’T ADEQUATE SCHOOL LEVEL PLANNING, AND SO WE GOT REALLY FOCUSED ON SCHOOL LEVEL PLANNING AND PERHAPS LOST SOME OF THE IMPORTANT SYSTEMIC THINKING AT THE DISTRICT. FOR EXAMPLE, IF A SCHOOL IS STRUGGLING TO HIRE STAFF, THE KIND OF STAFF THEY WANT, THAT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE SOLVED BY THE SCHOOL ITSELF. THEY NEED THE DISTRICT HR PROCESSES. THEY NEED APPLICATIONS. YOU KNOW, THEY NEED THINGS THAT THE DISTRICT HAS TO BE BOUGHT INTO. AND THEN MOVING INTO THE NEXT PHASE, LIKE I SAID, WE WANT TO MOVE TOWARD THOSE REGIONAL ISD PLANNING ACTIVITIES– THINGS AROUND CAREER TECH, SPECIAL ED, EARLY CHILDHOOD PROGRAMMING– AND ADDING MORE TOOLS TO HELP WITH THAT BLENDING AND BRAIDING OF-OF FUNDS. AND WHERE OUR GUIDING PRINCIPLE IN ALL OF THIS IS THE SEAMLESS INTEGRATION, THAT WHEN THE USER IS IN THE SYSTEM, IT IS HELPING THEM, HELPING DISTRICTS FACILITATE AN EXCELLENT PLANNING PROCESS THAT’S FOCUSED ON THE NEEDS OF THEIR-THEIR CHILDREN ACROSS ALL OF THEIR NEEDS, AND THAT MAKES THEIR BUSINESS WITH US LESS PAINFUL, LEAVING THEM MORE TIME TO BE FOCUSED ON IMPLEMENTING THIS EXCELLENT PLAN TO SUPPORT THOSE OUTCOMES. OUR BASIC TIMELINE. WE ARE RIGHT NOW IN 2018-2019 AND WORKING TOWARD GETTING TO AN RFP OR A BID FOR THE TECHNICAL SYSTEM TO SUPPORT THIS. WE’LL START WITH TARGETED USABILITY AND ROLLOUT. WE– THE WAY-THE WAY PLANNING TENDS TO WORK FOR DISTRICTS IS AROUND MARCH-ISH, THEY START TO DO THEIR MEETINGS WITH THEIR BOARDS, THEY START TO LOOK AT THEIR PLANS. THEY NEED TO GET THEIR BUDGETS DONE BY JUNE 30TH. SO THIS NEXT-THIS NEXT SPRING, EVERYBODY WILL DO WHAT THEY’VE BEEN DOING ALREADY WITH THE POSSIBLE– WE HOPE TO HAVE THE WHOLE CHILD NEEDS ASSESSMENT AVAILABLE IN SOME SORT OF WAY FOR THEM TO START THINKING ABOUT, BUT THE SYSTEM WON’T BE THERE AND WE WON’T REQUIRE ANY SHIFT. SO KIND OF BUSINESS AS USUAL. BUT THE NEXT CYCLE IS WHERE WE ONBOARD IT. ANOTHER THING WE’VE LEARNED HERE IS THAT IF WE ROLL OUT– IF WE ROLL OUT A SYSTEM BEFORE IT’S READY AND BEFORE OUR USERS ARE TRAINED AND EVERYBODY IS ON BOARD, THEN THE SYSTEM COULD BE THE BEST THING EVER AND IT FAILS COMPLETELY. SO WE WANT TO TAKE JUST AS MUCH TIME AROUND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, TRAINING, AND SUPPORT FOR OUR CUSTOMERS– IN THIS CASE, THE DISTRICTS– AS WE DO AROUND BUILDING THE SYSTEM. AND THEN WE’RE LOOKING TOWARD A-A FULL LAUNCH BY 2021. AND I REALLY JUST SAID ALL THAT. CONTINUING OUR STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT. SO IN CONCLUSION, THIS IS SOMETHING WE’RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT. THIS IS KIND OF THE BEHIND THE SCENES WORK AROUND OUR BUSINESS PROCESSES, BUT WE DID WANT TO MAKE SURE THE STATE BOARD WAS AWARE OF IT. IT’S-IT’S A VERY FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE IN OUR BUSINESS HERE AND OUR BUSINESS WITH THE DISTRICTS. WE THINK IT’S A REALLY POWERFUL ENGINE FOR CHANGE. BUT LIKE ANY BIG CHANGE, WE HAVE TO KIND OF– I COULD USE A SPORTS ANALOGY WITH YOU GUYS– STAY IN THE BATTER’S BOX. OR WE GOT TO HOLD THE BALL IN– SOCCER ANALOGY. OR WHATEVER– WE HAVE TO STAY FOCUSED AND PUSH THROUGH THE HARD BECAUSE BIG CHANGE– SOMEBODY USED THE METAPHOR AT ONE POINT– THE HENRY FORD METAPHOR– IF YOU-IF YOU ASKED PEOPLE WHAT THEY WANTED, THEY WOULD’VE SAID, “FASTER HORSES.” WE DON’T NEED FASTER HORSES. WE NEED A CAR. AND SO WE’RE WORKING TO BUILD THE CAR TO GET ACROSS THE FINISH LINE WITH THIS. BUT AGAIN, WE NEED PARTNERSHIP FROM ALL-ALL OF YOU, AND ALL OF OUR PARTNERS IN THE FIELD, AND A COMMITMENT TO CHANGING THE WAY WE DO BUSINESS. SHEILA.>>OKAY, THANK YOU, VENESSA. WHAT VENESSA’S DESCRIBED TODAY IS REALLY A TRANSFORMATIONAL SHIFT IN THE WAY THAT DISTRICTS ENGAGE IN CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT, BECAUSE AS VENESSA SAID– AND I CAN ATTEST TO HAVING BEEN IN A DISTRICT FOR 42 YEARS, IS THAT YOU CREATE MULTIPLE PLANS EVERY TIME WE GOT A FUNDING SOURCE. OKAY, SO THIS IS YOUR 31a MONEY. NOW YOU NEED A PLAN FOR YOUR 31a MONEY. THIS IS YOUR TITLE MONEY. NOW YOU NEED A PLAN FOR YOUR TITLE MONEY. THIS IS YOUR CTE MONEY. NOW YOU NEED A PLAN FOR YOUR CTE MONEY. TAKING ALL OF THOSE FUNDING SOURCES AND ALL OF THE NEEDS, LOOKING AT THE NEEDS OF THE WHOLE CHILD AND IDENTIFYING WHERE DO WE NEED TO PUT OUR ENERGY, OUR TIME, OUR EFFORTS, AND OUR MONEY TO SUPPORT OUR CHILDREN SO THAT THEY CAN BE THE VERY BEST THAT THEY CAN BE. TO CREATE A PLAN FROM THAT LENS AND THEN SAY, KNOWING THAT THESE ARE OUR NEEDS, “HERE’S HOW WE’RE GOING “TO SPEND ALL OF THESE POTS “OF MONEY,” IS TRULY A TRANSFORMATIONAL SHIFT. AND I AM VERY EXCITED TO SEE THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN WITHIN THE NEXT FEW YEARS. AND I KNOW THAT THIS WILL BE A VERY WELCOME CHANGE FROM OUR SCHOOLS AND OUR DISTRICTS. SO I’LL NOW OPEN IT UP TO COMMENTS. I KNOW THAT NIKKI, YOU WERE READY TO EITHER ASK A QUESTION OR MAKE A COMMENT.>>THIS IS A– A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT. I-I DON’T HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN THIS AREA, BUT THERE’S SOME GUT LEVEL INSTINCT I FEEL LIKE I WANT TO SHARE AND JUST TALK ABOUT. AND I KNOW IT’S VERY EXCITING TO YOU GUYS, SO I JUST– I’M NOT TRYING TO SQUASH IT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE ARE A FEW THINGS STILL IM– BAKED INTO IT. SO, YOU KNOW, CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT REQUIRES SPECIFIC GOALS. AND I THINK SOMETIMES THAT’S WHERE THE GRANT-BASED FUNDING COMES FROM, IS THE IDEA THAT WE NEED TO BE SPECIFIC AND TARGETED ABOUT OUR GOALS AND WHERE WE’RE GOING. SO– AND IT’S NOT CONTINUOUS. AND SO THERE’S– INSTEAD THERE’S LIKE A CONTINUOUS EVALUATION AND ACCOUNTABILITY THAT COMES WITH THAT. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT AS WE BLEND AND BRAID, LIKE YOU’RE SAYING, VERSUS-VERSUS HAVE THIS TARGETED AMOUNT OF MONEY WITH A SPECIFIC GOAL, THAT THAT’S STILL THE SPIRIT OF THE CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT. BECAUSE IT IS EASY TO GET A LARGE POT OF MONEY AND KIND OF GET DISCOURAGED FROM HAVING TO HAVE THIS PLAN, THIS PLAN, THIS PLAN. YOU’LL STILL HAVE TO HAVE THIS PLAN, THIS PLAN, AND THIS PLAN IN A LARGER PLAN. SO THERE’S STILL THE REQUIREMENT OF THAT KIND OF PLANNING, AND THEN THE SPIRIT OF BEING SPECIFIC AND TARGETED, OR CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT IS JUST KIND OF NOT REALLY POSSIBLE. SO I FEEL LIKE AS WE– AS WE CHANGE FUNDAMENTALLY ON THAT LEVEL, THAT WE STILL HAVE TO BE REALLY CLEAR ABOUT HOW TO ATTAIN CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT IN THE AREAS THAT WE’RE REALLY LACKING. SO I KNOW THIS IS ALL GENERAL CONVERSATION AND TALK, BUT THERE’S ALSO SOME REALLY LIKE SPECIFIC THINGS WITHIN IT. SO THAT’S MY ONLY– THAT– IT’S NOT NECESSARILY EVEN A CONCERN. IT’S JUST AS LONG AS THAT SPIRIT’S BAKED INTO THE IDEA THAT-THAT PLANNING IS STILL REQUIRED, THE-THE SPECIFICITY, THE TARGETED GOALS– THAT’S STILL THE OUTCOME, THE HOPEFUL OUTCOME.>>YES, AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP. AND SOMETHING WE DON’T HAVE IN THIS PRESENTATION THAT’S PROBABLY TIME TO ADD IS SOME OF THE DEEPER THINKING AROUND HOW THE PLAN LOOKS. SO THERE-THERE ARE SPECIFICITY OF GOALS. THERE’S TIMELINES. THERE’S THE MONITORING AND EVALUATION CYCLE, THE REVISION. BUT YOU ARE RIGHT– UM, SOMETHING WE ALSO– IF WE WANT THIS TO HANDLE COMPLIANCE PARTS, IF WE WANT IT TO MEET THE NEEDS OF ALL THESE GRANT STREAMS, IF GRANT A STILL REQUIRES THAT YOU HAVE A GOAL FOR LITERACY AND YOU WANT GRANT A, THEN, YOU KNOW, ERGO YOU NEED A GOAL FOR LITERACY. BUT HELPING DISTRICTS FIT THAT WITHIN A BIGGER FRAME, I THINK THAT’S WHAT’S BEEN MISSING IN OUR SYSTEMS, IS THE BIGGER FRAME, THE UMBRELLA. SO IF– EVEN IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE 10 IN 10, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT’S OUR BIG FRAME. AND THEN WE HAVE LOTS OF– YOU’RE RIGHT– SUBPLANS, ACTION PLANS TO IMPLEMENT PIECES. BUT TRYING TO GET TO THAT SPIRIT OF BIG STRATEGIC PLANNING, AND THEN INDIVIDUAL COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS. AND IT ALSO GIVES US THE CHANCE NOT TO OVERBUILD AROUND TOO SMALL OF A COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENT. SOMETIMES WE-WE JUST SEE– WE DON’T SEE THE FOREST FOR THE TREES. I GUESS I’M FULL OF ANALOGIES TODAY. WE WANT TO SEE THE FOREST, AND THEN MAKE SURE THE TREES ARE ACCOUNTED FOR, BUT NOT HAVE THE TREES BE ALL OF THE PICTURE. BUT I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT COMES BACK TO US IN FEEDBACK A LOT, BECAUSE YOU’RE RIGHT– IF WE HAVE A PLAN THAT ENCOMPASSES EVERYTHING, MAYBE IT WON’T DO ANYTHING. SO THERE IS MORE UNDER THE HOOD TO HELP THAT NOT BE THE CASE FOR DISTRICTS. THANK YOU.>>BUT THAT CERTAINLY WOULD BE A FOLLOW-UP PRESENTATION, IS-IS TO BRING THOSE DETAILS BACK TO THE STATE BOARD SO THEY CAN SEE THEM. PAM.>>AND I– THIS IS-THIS IS HUGE. AND THIS, TO ME, IS DEFINITELY A SHIFT IN THINKING THAT YOU ALL SHOULD BE COMMENDED FOR. I, SHEILA, DON’T HAVE THE EXPERIENCES THAT YOU HAVE, BUT I KNOW THOSE OF US WHO WORK IN THE GRANT WORLD, WE COULD APPLY THIS TO-TO ANYTHING, BUT TO HAVE TO CHASE DOLLARS VERSUS CHASING WHAT THE TRUE AND REAL NEEDS ARE OF OUR CHILDREN– THAT’S– THAT COULD LEAD TO-TO-TO DESTRUCTION. AND SO FOR YOU ALL TO BE CHANGING THE COURSE OF THAT, I-I REALLY CAN’T SAY ENOUGH OF HOW BIG OF A DEAL THAT IS. TO NIKKI, TO YOUR CONTINUOUS QUALITY– THE QUALITY IMPROVEMENT, I THINK THAT THAT– IT JUST GIVES AN OPPORTUNITY TO CONSTANTLY BE DOING THOSE CHECKS, CHECK-INS, AND MAKING SURE THAT YOU’RE CONSTANTLY MEETING THE NEEDS. NEEDS WILL SHIFT, AND SO TO ME, THIS GIVES THAT OPPORTUNITY, AND THEN SEEK OUT THAT FUNDING FOR THOSE NEEDS AS THEY SHIFT. IT MAY BE THAT YOU’VE ACCOMPLISHED SOME GOALS AND YOU CAN MOVE ON TO THE NEXT THING, OR YOU MIGHT JUST DETERMINE THAT-THAT WHAT YOU THOUGHT WAS THE PROBLEM WAS-WASN’T REALLY THE PROBLEM. AND I THINK THAT THAT-THAT’S A BIG DEAL, ESPECIALLY AS WE TALK ABOUT GRANTS. AND A LOT OF TIMES, WHEN YOU ARE DICTATING WHAT YOU DO BASED ON WHAT THE GRANT REQUIREMENTS ARE, IT’S HARD TO CHANGE COURSE. AND SO WHEN YOU CAN FOCUS ON THE NEEDS AND CONSTANTLY EVALUATE THOSE NEEDS, I THINK THAT THAT’S THE RIGHT WAY TO GO. SO I-I’M EXCITED AND LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING HOW THIS-THIS CONTINUES TO EVOLVE.>>THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR THE FEEDBACK.>>THANK YOU. TOM, AND THEN TO JUDY.>>SO I-I SAW THE LIST OF STAKEHOLDERS. SO WERE THERE SPECIFIC DISTRICTS THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THIS?>>SO THAT-THAT QUESTION’S A LITTLE HARD TO ANSWER BECAUSE GOING BACK TO THE FIRST SLIDE, THIS IS– I JUST WANT TO ASSURE EVERYBODY THAT THIS IS A PLACE WHERE THE MDE DIDN’T MAKE A MOVE ON THE SYSTEMS OR PROCESSES UNTIL WE’RE SURE OF THE VISION AND THE POINT AND THE BIG PICTURE. SO IF YOU THINK ABOUT ALL THE STAKEHOLDERS IN THE 10 IN 10, THAT WAS, YOU KNOW, THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS, AND THEN ESSA WAS ANOTHER THOUSANDS AND THOUSANDS. AND THEN THE– WE HAD A FAIRLY LARGE COMMITTEE SPECIFICALLY AROUND REDOING THE SCHOOL AND DISTRICT IMPROVEMENT PLAN, AND THERE WERE DISTRICTS AND EDUCATION ASSOCIATIONS REPRESENTED. WE’VE ALSO BEEN AT A VARIETY OF CONFERENCES WHERE THERE’S A VAR– DIFFERENT DISTRICTS REPRESENTED. I THINK IN THIS NEXT PHASE, WE’RE ALMOST TO THE POINT OF GOING BACK OUT FOR MORE USABILITY TESTING, MORE FEEDBACK. WE NEED TO– PROBABLY WHAT YOU’RE GOING TO GET AT IS HOW IS OUR REPRESENTATION ON THE DISTRICTS WHO ARE GIVING US FEEDBACK. SO I THINK THAT WE-WE ARE BUILDING OUT AN ENGAGEMENT PLAN FOR THIS NEXT PHASE THAT’S MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHO DO WE NEED TO GO TALK TO ABOUT WHAT. BUT IT’S BEEN IN PHASES, YOU KNOW. IT’S BEEN WHAT’S OUR VISION OF 10 IN 10, AND THEN WHAT’S OUR VISION FOR OUR– THIS PROCESS PIECE. AND THEN SOME INTERNAL WORK TO GET TO A PLACE WE HAD SOMETHING TO BRING BACK AND PROPOSE. BECAUSE THIS ISN’T NECESSARILY SOMETHING YOU CAN DO AS A– I DON’T WANT TO SAY YOU CAN’T DO IT AS A COMMITTEE, BECAUSE WE TOOK SO MUCH INPUT, BUT WE HAD TO DO SOME, LIKE, PUTTING IT TOGETHER IN A PACKAGE. SO YES, A LOT OF DISTRICTS HAVE BEEN INVOLVED, BUT AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK IF YOU WENT AND ASKED– CALLED UP A DISTRICT AND SAID, “DO YOU KNOW ABOUT MICIP?” RIGHT NOW, THEY WOULD NOT NECESSARILY BE LIKE, “OH, YEAH, I’M TOTALLY ON BOARD WITH THAT,” UNLESS THEY HAD BEEN AT SCHOOL IMPROVEMENT CONFERENCE OR SOME OTHER PLACES WHERE WE PRESENTED. THAT’S OUR NEXT THREE MONTHS OF WORK. AND WE WANTED TO SHARE IT WITH YOU FAIRLY EARLY IN THE PROCESS BEFORE WE TOOK IT OUT TO EVERYBODY.>>AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I– AND I SEE WE’RE WAY AHEAD OF SCHEDULE, SO I MIGHT ASK A LITTLE COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.>>WELL, WE’RE NOT THAT FAR AHEAD. [ LAUGHTER ]>>WE– SO-SO PUTTING MY LOCAL CONTROL HAT ON, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS IS NOT THE SCENARIO THAT– BECAUSE I NEED TO DIVE INTO MORE OF THIS TO UNDERSTAND, ESPECIALLY IF IT’S A FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT. BUT I-I’M HOPING THAT IT’S NOT THIS, THAT THERE HAS TO BE A NEEDS ASSESSMENT THAT THE STATE APPROVES, WHETHER OR NOT THE LOCALS LIKE IT, OR THEY’VE GOT TO KEEP CHANGING IT UNTIL THE STATE SAYS YES. AND THEN-AND THEN THEY GET THEIR MONEY. SO YOU KNOW, NOW THAT THE– MONEY DRIVES A LOT OF THINGS, AND SO WHAT I’M HOPING IS IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT THE LOCALS AND THE DISTRICTS WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO SAY, “WE DON’T REALLY LIKE THAT “NEEDS ASSESSMENT TOOL. “WE THINK THIS ONE IS BETTER “FOR OUR DISTRICT,” OR, “WE DON’T– YOU KNOW, “THIS IS WHAT WE FEEL OUR “NEEDS ASSESSMENT AND-AND “THE WHOLE PLAN IS.” OR IS IT-IS IT SOMETHING THAT MDE IS GOING TO SAY, “NO, IN ORDER TO GET MONEY, “YOU’VE GOT TO SATISFY “WHAT WE WANT.”>>I THINK THAT’S A REALLY GOOD QUESTION, AND SOMETHING THAT AS WE WORK THROUGH THE BUILD-OUT OF THE SYSTEM, WE KEEP TALKING WITH THE TEAM ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT THE SYSTEM FACILITATES DISTRICTS DOING EXCELLENT PLANNING, BUT GIVES THEM FLEXIBILITY TO DO IT AS FITS FOR THEM. SO IN THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT, FOR EXAMPLE, THERE IS NO PLAN TO HAVE IT BE, “YOU HAVE TO “GET TO CERTAIN NEEDS.” IT’S RATHER– THINK OF IT AS LIKE A BUFFET OF NEEDS ASSESSMENTS, AND A PATH THROUGH THE BUFFET SO YOU DON’T JUST GET STUCK IN THE DESSERTS. IF A DISTRICT WANTS TO DIVE REALLY DEEP INTO ONE PART, GREAT. IF THEY WANT TO USE A NEEDS ASSESSMENT THING THAT WE DON’T GET IN THERE, THAT’S ALSO FINE. THERE’S A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY, BUT WE ALSO KNOW DISTRICTS ASK US FOR MORE HELP OUTLINING THEIR OPTIONS IN FLEXIBILITY SO THEY DON’T HAVE TO DO IT ALL THEMSELVES, BECAUSE THEY’RE BUSY WITH RUNNING DISTRICTS. SO I THINK THAT’S AN EXCELLENT POINT, AND ONE WE APPRECIATE YOU GUYS HELPING US KEEP AN EYE ON, IS THAT FLEX BETWEEN STRUCTURE AND SUPPORT AND RESOURCES, BUT NOT BECOMING TOO HEAVY-HANDED SO THAT IT’S COMPLIANCY AND PEDANTIC, AND DOESN’T ALLOW FOR THAT IMPORTANT LOCAL CONTEXT IN DECISION MAKING. BECAUSE ALL THIS HAPPENS AT THE LOCAL LEVEL. I MEAN, WE HAVE TO HAVE STRONG LOCAL IMPLEMENTATION OF ALL OF OUR THINGS, OR ELSE IT JUST STOPS, SO.>>WELL, BECAUSE OF THAT GOOD ANSWER, I’M NOT GOING TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION. [ LAUGHTER ]>>IT’S MY DAY TODAY.>>BUT I’LL KEEP AN EYE ON HER.>>OKAY, SOUNDS GOOD.>>THANK YOU, TOM. AND NOW TO JUDY AND THEN TO MICHELLE.>>VENESSA, YOU INDICATED THAT AN RFP IS GOING TO GO OUT– MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT’S FOR THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT, WHICH TOM WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT. SO, RFP GOES OUT, GETS AWARDED, SO A, B, C NEEDS ASSESSMENT IS APPROVED BY MDE. BUT I THINK WHAT I JUST HEARD YOU SAY IS THAT IF A DISTRICT DECIDED THAT THAT REALLY DIDN’T WORK FOR THEM AND THEY HAD A COMPARABLE TOOL THAT THEY WERE USING, THAT THAT WOULD WORK, OR…?>>YEP, AND I-I ACTUALLY AGREE WITH SHEILA THAT A-A GOOD FOLLOW-UP PRESENTATION WOULD BE A DEEPER DIVE INTO THE-THE NEXT LEVEL OF THE SYSTEM. SO WHAT– AND I– WE AREN’T– WE MAY DO RFP. THERE’S A COUPLE OTHER CONTRACTING VENUES FOR THE STATE, TOO. SO WE’RE STILL EXPLORING WITH DTMB WHAT’S THE BEST WAY. AND WHAT WE DID IS WE SAID, “WE NEED TO FIGURE OUT WHAT “WE NEED THE SYSTEM TO DO.” FORGET WHO-WHO’S BUILT WHAT. WHAT DO WE NEED? AND THEN WE GO OUT, WE WRITE UP ALL THE REQUIREMENTS, AND THEN WE FIND THE SYSTEM THAT CAN DO IT, OR THE COMBINATION OF SYSTEMS, OR WHATEVER. THE NEEDS– THE ASSESSING NEEDS COMPONENT OF THE SYSTEM IS NOT JUST ONE TOOL. IT’S MORE OF A PATH THROUGH. SO IT’S PREPOPULATED DATA THAT LEADS YOU INTO KIND OF GUIDING QUESTIONS. AND ALSO, TO TOM’S– TO BOTH OF YOUR POINTS, ACCESS TO A NUMBER OF DEEPER DIVE TOOLS. SO IF YOU CLICKED ON– IF YOU LOOKED AT YOUR DATA FOR HEALTH AND NUTRITION, LET’S SAY, AND YOU SAID, “YOU KNOW, WE REALLY– “WE’RE REALLY NOT KIND OF “WHERE WE WANT TO BE,” YOU WOULD HAVE ACCESS TO FIVE MORE DEEP TOOLS TO-TO ALLOW YOU TO USE. OR YOU COULD SAY, “NO, THAT’S ENOUGH. “WE GET IT. “THAT’S AN AREA OF FOCUS. “WE’RE GOOD.” OR, “WE DON’T WANT TO USE “ANY OF YOUR TOOLS. “WE’VE GOT A DIFFERENT TOOL “OVER HERE.” SO IT-IT’S LESS OF A– AGAIN, I THINK YOU GUYS ARE ON THE SAME PAGE. IT’S LESS OF A– HERE’S ONE NEEDS ASSESSMENT THAT IS THE ONLY THING YOU CAN USE TO ASSESS NEEDS, AND MORE OF A COMPILATION OF TOOLS THAT HELP DISTRICTS UNDERSTAND THEIR NEEDS THAT THEY CAN KIND OF USE AND GUIDE THROUGH THEIR– YOU KNOW, WORKSPACES IN THE SYSTEM FOR DISTRICTS TO GO IN WHERE WE CAN’T EVEN SEE IT AND PLAY WITH DATA, OR DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. THAT’S KIND OF THE IDEA. AND THEN IT’S NOT ONLY THE ASSESSING NEEDS. IT’S OVER INTO THE PLANNING, AND THEN LINKING UP WITH THE GRANT SIDE, TOO, WHICH– SO THIS IS ALL KIND OF ONE BIG SYSTEM, WHICH DOES MAKE IT BIG, AND DAUNTING. BUT IF WE ROLL IT OUT TO DISPARATELY, IT WON’T– WE WON’T GET TO OUR GOALS. SO WE’RE-WE’RE ALL IN ON GETTING IT TO WORK. DOES THAT HELP?>>YEAH.>>AND AGAIN, I DO THINK A MORE DETAILED PRESENTATION WOULD HELP. THESE ARE REALLY EXCELLENT QUESTIONS.>>AND-AND BEFORE I MOVE–>>I HAVE ONE MORE.>>OKAY, JUDY, GO AHEAD.>>ROLLING IT OUT BASICALLY IN TWO YEARS, HAS THE DEPARTMENT CONSIDERED TRYING TO FIND A REPRESENTATIVE GROUP OF DISTRICTS TO DO SOME SORT OF A PILOT FIRST? OR IS THAT IN THE PLAN AND JUST WASN’T–>>SO, YEAH, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT THAT. THE WAY WE’RE THINKING ABOUT IT RIGHT NOW IS IF BY OCTOBER OF 2019 WE HAVE PURCHASED THE SYSTEM, WE HAVE TRAINING READY TO GO, AND THAT GIVES US SIX MONTHS TO TRAIN EVERYBODY BEFORE YOU’D NEED TO START USING IT– WE’LL GO WITH EVERYBODY. IF NOT, WE’LL ASK FOR VOLUNTEERS TO GO THROUGH IT WITH US THAT FIRST YEAR WHEN WE’RE– IF WE WANT A SOFTER LAUNCH. SO AT THE PRESENT, WE’RE NOT THINKING ABOUT A PILOT, ABSENT THAT NEED FOR A SOFT LAUNCH, PARTLY BECAUSE THEN PEOPLE HAVE TO CHANGE MULTIPLE TIMES. AND YOU KNOW, WE’RE TRYING TO GET– WE THINK WE CAN DO IT ALL AT ONCE, BUT WE ARE KIND OF CONTINUOUSLY INTERROGATING THAT, BECAUSE WE KNOW WORKING OUT THE KINKS IS REALLY IMPORTANT. SO I THINK THAT’S A– RIGHT NOW WE’RE NOT THINKING OF A PILOT, BUT WE HAVE NOT ENTIRELY CLOSED THE DOOR ON THAT AS AN IDEA. THANK YOU.>>GREAT, THANKS.>>THANK YOU, JUDY. AND I JUST WANT TO ADD TO VENESSA’S PRESENTATION A LITTLE BIT ON THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT PIECE. HAVING WORKED ON MULTIPLE GRANTS AT THE DISTRICT LEVEL, WHEN CONDUCTING A NEEDS ASSESSMENT, YOU REGULARLY HAD TO GO TO DIFFERENT PLACES TO FIND DATA. SO YOU WERE CONSTANTLY AT DISTRICTS SEARCHING FOR THE DATA THAT YOU NEEDED IN ORDER TO ENGAGE IN THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT. THIS PROCESS WILL PROVIDE THE DATA FOR THE DISTRICTS SO THE DISTRICT WILL NO LONGER HAVE TO GO HUNTING FOR THE DATA. USING THE DATA HUBS THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO DISTRICTS, THE DATA WILL BE READILY AVAILABLE TO THEM, WHICH IS ANOTHER GREAT ADVANTAGE OF THIS NEW PROCESS. [ INDISTINCT CHATTER ]>>OH, SORRY.>>CAN I JUST HOLD– OKAY, AND WE’LL GO TO MICHELLE AND THEN TO TIFFANY, AND THEN I’M BACK, THEN TO PAM.>>OKAY. THIS SOUNDS LIKE IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE, TRYING TO MAKE THINGS MORE COMPREHENSIVE. AND I-AND I’M– SO I’M THINKING IN TERMS OF THE GOALS. AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY’RE LINKED TO THE TOP 10 IN 10, THE GOALS THAT ARE– SO-SO I THINK MY– I HAD A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT QUESTIONS. ONE IS HOW DO YOU KNOW WHEN SOMEBODY HAS ATTAINED THE GOAL? AND-AND HOW DO YOU ASSESS THEIR PROGRESS? WHAT– ARE THERE ANY SORT OF BENCHMARKS, OR GUIDELINES, OR THINGS THAT WE’RE LOOKING FOR THAT ARE MORE CONCRETE?>>SO I’M GOING TO– WE, THE MDE, WON’T. THE SYSTEM WILL HAVE A FUNCTIONALITY FOR THE DISTRICTS TO DO THAT. SO THINGS LIKE WHEN THEY SET A GOAL, THEY CAN SET A MONITORING SCHEDULE, AND THE SYSTEM WILL REMIND THEM LIKE, “YOU WANTED TO “REVISIT THIS GOAL EVERY “TWO MONTHS,” OR WHATEVER, “AND LOOK AT THIS-THESE “PIECES OF DATA.” THE SYSTEM ALSO HAS A KIND OF LONG– LIKE OVERALL EVALUATION. I THINK THIS IS WHAT PAM WAS SAYING, IS WAS THIS THE RIGHT GOAL? ARE WE MAKING ANY PROGRESS? MAYBE WE NEED TO– MAYBE OUR NEEDS CHANGED, SO WE NEED TO GO ALL THE WAY BACK. SO THE SYSTEM HAS THIS– THAT’S PART OF A GOOD CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT PROCESS, IS GOALS, STRATEGIES, MONITORING AND ADJUSTING, AND THEN OVERALL EVALUATION OF THE PLAN. THAT’S BUILT INTO THE SYSTEM. BUT WE– MDE– WON’T COME AND SAY, “YOU DIDN’T ATTAIN “THAT GOAL,” OR, “YOU DID “ATTAIN THAT GOAL,” OR, “THESE GOALS ARE WRONG,” OR-OR WHATNOT. SO IT’S THAT– DOES THAT HELP? I MEAN, WE-WE WANT TO HAVE A– WE WANT DISTRICTS TO BE DOING THAT, BUT IT’S NOT WHAT THE DEPARTMENT WILL DO TO THEM. IT’S WHAT THEY WILL DO AS PART OF THEIR OWN PROCESS. AND IF THEY– I GUESS IF THEY DON’T WANT TO MONITOR AND EVALUATE, LIKE, ON A SCHEDULE LIKE THEY SHOULD, IT’D BE DOWN TO KIND OF WHAT THEY HAD TO DO TO BE COMPLIANT, WHICH WOULD BE PLANS EVERY THREE TO FIVE YEARS, SO.>>BUT IF THEY’RE NOT– IF THEY’RE STRAYING FROM SORT OF THE GOALS OR NOT MEETING THE GOALS, DOES IT AFFECT THEIR FUNDING?>>I THINK THAT GETS INTO ANOTHER PIECE OF THIS THAT WOULD BE GREAT TO TALK ABOUT, IS THE CONCEPT OF DIFFERENTIATED SUPPORTS OR TRIAGE WITH DISTRICTS. AND SO WITH A– WITH LIKE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, THAT’S OUR MOST INTENSIVE LEVEL OF SUPPORT. SO THAT’S WHERE WE THE DEPARTMENT ARE SITTING WITH THEM AND HAVING CONVERSATIONS ABOUT, “IS THIS EFFECTIVE FUNDING? “MAYBE IT’S NOT. “ARE YOU MAKING YOUR GOALS? “NO, YOU’RE NOT. “WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO?” KIND OF GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN TO WHAT WE’D MAYBE CALL TIER 1 DISTRICTS OR JUST GENERAL DISTRICTS. THOSE ARE DISTRICTS WHO ARE DOING OKAY. YOU KNOW, THEY’RE KIND OF GETTING INTO THEIR GOALS. THEY’RE NOT– OR THEY’RE NOT, BUT WE WOULD LEAVE THAT TO THEM. AND THEN THERE’S THIS MIDDLE LAYER OF DISTRICTS THAT COULD PROBABLY USE A LITTLE MORE TARGETED SUPPORT, EITHER AT THEIR REQUEST, OR POSSIBLY THINGS THAT WE SEE IN THE DATA. BUT WE DON’T-WE DON’T HAVE A PLAN TO HARD ENFORCE RIGHT NOW SOMETHING LIKE, “YOU’RE NOT USING YOUR “MONEY EFFECTIVELY. “ERGO, SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS “TO YOU, OR YOU GET LESS MONEY.” I THINK IT’S A GOOD POINT FOR US TO CONSIDER GLOBALLY ABOUT THAT-THAT TIGHT/LOOSE OF THE STATE TO LOCALS, LIKE WHEN-WHEN SHOULD THE STATE STEP IN MORE, WHEN SHOULD– BUT THE CURRENT MICIP PLAN DOESN’T MAKE JUDGMENT FOR THE DISTRICTS. IT JUST HELPS THEM MAKE THEIR OWN JUDGMENTS.>>THERE’S NO LIKE GOALS NECESSARILY FOR THE STATE THAT WE WANT TO ATTAIN–>>WE DO.>>A CERTAIN THING AND THEN HOLD THE-THE– OKAY, OKAY.>>SO WE HAVE GOALS, AND WE NEED THEM TO ATTAIN THEIR GOALS SO WE ATTAIN OUR GOALS. AND I THINK YOU’RE CALLING A GOOD QUESTION ABOUT WHAT’S THE APPROPRIATE MECHANISM TO DO THAT.>>YEAH, TO MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS. THE-THE OTHER SECTION– I-I’M JUST A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT THE FUNDING, AND THEN WE’VE ALSO BEEN TALKING ABOUT REVISITING THE FUNDING MODEL, YOU KNOW, THE FOUNDATION ALLOWANCE. YOU SAID THAT GETS– IT’S AWARDED REGARDLESS, SO IT’S THESE OTHER GRANTS THAT ARE OUT THERE THAT ARE, I GUESS, FEDERAL, MOST OF THEM, I ASSUME?>>SOME STATE, SOMETIMES.>>YEAH, SO IT– I’M JUST– AND MAYBE THIS ISN’T THE TIME OR PLACE FOR IT, BUT I’M– IT SEEMS VERY COMPLEX, AND HOW THE STATE CAN AWARD– AND I-AND I ASSUME NOT-NOT– THEY’RE COMPETITIVE, SO NOT EVERY DISTRICT CAN GET ALL THE MONEY THAT’S OUT THERE. IT’S NOT ENOUGH FOR EVERY DISTRICT TO GET–>>DEPENDS ON THE TYPE OF GRANT AND FUNDING STREAM. SOME ARE FORMULA, SOME ARE COMPETITIVE, SOME ARE– THAT’S– THOSE ARE REALLY THE TWO KINDS.>>RIGHT, SO WE’RE PUTTING THEM ALL UNDER ONE UMBRELLA FOR ONE GOAL, THEN AWARDING– BUT IT WOULD BE– SOME DISTRICTS WOULD GET SOME OF THE GRANTS, NOT ALL OF THE-THE GRANTS, OR– AND THEN-THEN YOU’D HAVE TO ALSO COMPLY WITH THE FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS ON APPLICATION PROCESS. IT JUST–>>I THINK MAYBE– LET ME EXPLAIN IT THIS WAY. SO IN AN AVERAGE DISTRICT, YOU HAVE FOUNDATION ALLOWANCE, YOU HAVE SPECIAL ED FUNDING THROUGH THE VARIOUS SPECIAL ED SOURCES. YOU HAVE PROBABLY SOME TITLE MONEY, PROBABLY SOME 31a MONEY. YOU MIGHT HAVE SOME– A FEW LINE ITEM GRANTS LIKE THE ASSESSMENT REIMBURSEMENT GRANT, OR YOU KNOW, THE LITTLER ONES. SO YOU GOT THESE FUNDING SOURCES. WE WANT OUR SYSTEM TO ALLOW A DISTRICT TO SAY, “WE WANT TO WORK ON “SCHOOL SAFETY,” LET’S SAY. “SCHOOL SAFETY’S OUR GOAL.” OKAY, WHAT DO WE WANT TO DO FOR SCHOOL SAFETY? WELL, WE WANT A GOOD CLIMATE AND CULTURE APPROACH, AND WE NEED MORE LOCKS ON DOORS. WELL, NOW, WHAT MONEY CAN WE USE TO DO THESE THINGS? WELL, WE CAN USE OUR FOUNDATION ALLOWANCE FOR THIS, WE CAN USE– OH, LOOK. WE CAN USE TITLE IV FOR SOME OF THE SCHOOL SAFETY STUFF, SO MAYBE WE DON’T NEED TO USE ALL FOUNDATION– LIKE, ALL OF OUR LOCAL SOURCE. WE CAN PULL IN SOME OF THIS FEDERAL MONEY. AND THEN, OH, THERE’S THIS GRANT AVAILABLE FOR PBIS SYSTEMS OR SOMETHING. WE’RE GOING TO GO AFTER THAT BECAUSE IT HELPS WITH OUR GOALS. THAT’S HOW WE’RE THINKING ABOUT HELPING DISTRICTS PARSE THROUGH IT. NOT SO MUCH ON THE AWARDING OF WHO CAN GET– LIKE, THE– HOW DO WE-HOW DO WE ALLOCATE OUT WHEN IT’S COMPETITIVE. THAT’S STILL THROUGH THAT CRITERIA, PROCESS, THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT– SO DISTRICTS HAVE A BETTER SENSE OF, “SHOULD I “APPLY FOR THIS MONEY OR NOT? “BECAUSE IT FITS WITH MY GOALS AND IT’LL BE GOOD,” VERSUS, “THERE’S MONEY– “LET’S GO APPLY FOR IT.”>>THANK YOU.>>DOES THAT HELP?>>YEAH, IT DOES.>>OKAY.>>THANK YOU, VENESSA.>>AND THEN TO TIFFANY.>>I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF THE INTEGRATED GRANT APPLICATION. IF I’M UNDERSTANDING IT CORRECTLY, TO ME IT’S COMPARABLE TO WHEN I WAS YOUNG AND YOU HAD TO APPLY TO COLLEGES SEPARATELY, VERSUS NOW WHERE THE KIDS CAN GO INTO ONE ONLINE SYSTEM AND APPLY TO MANY SCHOOLS, AND IT MAKES THE PROCESS A LOT EASIER. SO IF THAT WILL MAKE THE PROCESS EASIER FOR OUR DISTRICTS, I’M ALL FOR IT. THE QUESTION THAT I HAD, JUDY ALREADY ASKED– WAS ABOUT A PILOT PROGRAM. AND SO I STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT YOU DO A PILOT PROGRAM, BECAUSE THERE’S GOING TO BE INFORMATION THAT SOME GRANTS HAVE THAT OTHERS DON’T HAVE THAT-THAT WILL BE NEEDED, AND SO THAT YOU DO WORK OUT THOSE KINKS IN A SMALLER DEMOGRAPHIC AS OPPOSED TO WAITING UNTIL IT’S STATEWIDE AND IT’S CHAOS AND IT’S LESS MANAGEABLE.>>YEP, THANK YOU. AND THE ANALOGY TO THE LIKE KIND OF COMMON APPLICATION IDEA IS A GREAT ONE. SO I’M GOING TO STEAL THAT FOR MY FUTURE PRESENTATIONS. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU, TIFFANY. AND THEN BACK TO PAM.>>I-I’M SORRY. YOU-YOU TRIGGERED ANOTHER QUESTION FOR ME AS IT RELATES TO THE NEEDS ASSESSMENT DATA. SO WILL IT BE PRIMARILY OR ONLY QUANTITATIVE DATA, OR WILL DISTRICTS ALSO BE ABLE TO CAPTURE OTHER INFORMATION TO– I’M ASSUMING YES.>>YEP, SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE– BOTH. SO ALL THE STATE DATA THAT WE HAVE SHOULD BE DISPLAYED BACK TO THEM IN A WAY THAT THEY CAN SEE EASILY AND NOT HAVE TO DIG FOR IT.>>OKAY.>>THEIR LOCAL DATA THAT WE DON’T CURRENTLY HAVE BUT THAT’S IN THE DATA HUBS WOULD ALSO BE DISPLAYED FOR THEM. AND THEN, YES, THIS– EITHER THROUGH ADDITIONAL DATA COLLECTION– SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF A DISTRICT REALLY WANTED TO DO STUDENT ENGAGEMENT SURVEYS, WE’D SAY, “HERE’S EIGHT “DIFFERENT STUDENT ENGAGEMENT “SURVEYS THAT ALL WORK “FOR THESE DIFFERENT PURPOSES. “FEEL FREE TO GIVE THEM “AND USE THAT. “OR JUST REFLECT ON, LIKE, “ANECDOTAL OR QUALITATIVE DATA– “BRING THAT INTO “THE PROCESS, TOO.” SO WE WANT THEM BLENDING ALL THEIR PIECES OF INFORMATION, SOME OF WHICH WILL PREPOPULATE, AND SOME THEY’LL STILL– TO SHEILA’S POINT, SOME THEY’LL STILL HAVE TO BRING TO THE TABLE BECAUSE IT’S NOT SOMETHING WE WOULD WANT TO COLLECT SYSTEMATICALLY. WE’D WANT A DISTRICT TO COLLECT IT AS APPROPRIATE FOR THEIR NEEDS. YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN?>>YEAH, AND I-I GUESS THE QUALITATIVE DATA THAT I’M THINKING OF COULD GET PRETTY BROAD, AND THEY COULD BRING IN OTHER SECTORS THAT COULD BE QUITE HELPFUL LOOKING AT THINGS FROM A DIFFERENT VANTAGE POINT. SO, I MEAN, WE TALK ABOUT THAT A LOT WITH THE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, SO HOPEFULLY THEY COULD BE ENCOURAGED TO COLLECT INFORMATION FROM THAT BROADER CROSS-SECTOR.>>AND THAT GETS TO– I MADE A POINT ON ONE OF THE SLIDES ABOUT PROCESS VERSUS TOOLS VERSUS SYSTEM. IN THE PROCESS, THEY SHOULD BE– AND WE’LL PROVIDE THIS AS TRAINING– IDEALLY YOU HAVE MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDERS, AND IDEALLY YOU HAVE BUSINESS OR COMMUNITY ORGANIZ– LIKE THE PARTNERSHIP MODEL. ACTUALLY, THE PART– THE CORE OF THE PARTNERSHIP MODEL IS, AGAIN, THESE THINGS ARE ALL ALIGNING NOW. THE– IT THREADS THROUGH THIS, THIS IDEA OF MULTIPLE STAKEHOLDERS AT THE TABLE, LOOKING ACROSS THE NEEDS, AND THEN THE PLAN. THAT’S REALLY WHAT PARTNERSHIPS IS ALL ABOUT. SO JUST TRYING TO HELP ALL DISTRICTS DO IT, AND PUT SOME MORE STRUCTURES AND SUPPORTS IN THAN WE’VE HAD WITH THE FIRST ROUND OF PARTNERSHIP IN TERMS OF THEIR NEEDS ASSESSMENT. BUT YEAH, THANK YOU. AND BEFORE I LEAVE, I WANTED TO INTRODUCE THERESA NUGENT. SHE IS MY RIGHT-HAND WOMAN ON THIS. SHE’S THE POINT PERSON IN HELPING US GET THIS ACROSS THE FINISH LINE. AND I DON’T SEE HIM IN HERE, BUT DREW FINKBEINER IS ON THE GRANT SIDE LEADING UP A VERY LARGE CHARGE. SO WE’VE GOT THESE TWO KIND OF– THEY ARE FOR ONE PURPOSE, BUT IN PRACTICALITY, THEY’RE KIND OF TWO BIG SYSTEMS. SO TERRY AND DREW ARE WORKING HARD TO DO– TO TAKE THIS VISION AND PUT IT INTO THE DETAILED THINGS WE HAVE TO DO TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. WE HAVE A PROJECT MANAGER, DAVID EDER, WHO I DON’T SEE IN HERE RIGHT NOW, BUT– I GET TO SIT UP HERE AND DO THE FANCY PRESENTATION, TAKE THE CREDIT, BUT THEY’RE THE ONES REALLY SLOGGING THROUGH THE TRENCHES. SO I REALLY APPRECIATE THEIR WORK. AND APPRECIATE THE TIME YOU ALL GIVE ME.>>ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, VENESSA. THANK YOU VERY MUCH TO YOU AND YOUR TEAM FOR TAKING THE VISION AND TRANSFERRING IT INTO A REALITY WITH A FOCUS ON CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT AS A PROCESS. WE GREATLY APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORTS AND YOUR WORK. THANK YOU. WE’LL MOVE ON TO THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WHICH IS A DISCUSSION REGARDING CRITERIA FOR GRANT PROGRAMS. DO ANY BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF REGARDING CRITERIA?>>WELL…>>YES, TOM.>>I-I APPRECIATE THAT IT SAYS, “BASED ON APPROPRIATIONS,” SO IS THERE-IS THERE MUCH– DO WE HAVE MUCH INPUT IN THIS? OR IS IT PRETTY MUCH CONSTRICTED BASED ON WHAT THE LEGISLATURE SAID FOR 2 AND 3?>>FOR NUMBERS 2 AND NUMBER 3, WHICH IS THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PARTNERSHIP AND THE…>>YOU KNOW…>>SO I’M GOING TO TURN TO SCOTT AND ASK SCOTT TO RESPOND TO TOM’S QUESTIONS, PLEASE.>>AND I WILL START AND THEN TURN IT OVER TO LISA. THIS IS A RESPONSE TO US HAVING TO BID THE WORK. BEGINNING IN 2012, THERE WAS SOME LANGUAGE IN THE BUDGET– WE’RE GOING TO NEED TO TALK MORE ABOUT THIS– THAT REQUIRED US TO BID THIS WORK. AND SO THIS IS PARTIALLY IN RESPONSE TO BID THE WORK. IN TERMS OF THE APPROPRIATION, IT IS AN APPROPRIATION [ INDISTINCT ].>>BUT IT’S AN APPROPRIA-APPROPRIATION FROM 2012? I MEAN, IT’S A REQUIREMENT FROM 2012?>>IT’S A REQUIREMENT–>>IN BOILERPLATE OR SOMETHING? OR– I MEAN, BECAUSE IT– IT MEANS THAT IT WAS IN LAST YEAR’S BUDGET, THE BOILERPLATE STILL? IT JUST REMAINS SINCE 2012? IS THAT KIND OF THE-THE IDEA?>>SO THE BOILERPLATE REQUIREMENT TO BID IT OUT HAS BEEN IN FOR THE LAST FEW YEARS.>>OKAY.>>SO IT WAS IN THE FISCAL YEAR 2018 BOILERPLATE LANGUAGE. IN FISCAL YEAR 2019, THE APPROPRIATION FOR THIS WORK IS $11.5 MILLION. SO WHAT HAPPENS IS ANNUALLY, AS THE BUDGET IS WORKED ON, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT ARE THE NEEDS TO COVER THE COST OF DOING THIS WORK. SO WE KNOW THAT IN FISCAL YEAR 2018, THE APPROPRIATION WAS $11.5 MILLION TO DO THE WORK. AND WE’LL WORK– YOU KNOW, IN 2019 IT WAS 11.5. SO EVERY YEAR, THERE WILL BE AN APPROPRIATION AMOUNT TO COVER THE COST OF THE WORK.>>OH, OKAY, SO THIS IS NOT– THIS-THIS IS ABOUT ADMINISTRATION? THIS IS NOT ABOUT ACTUALLY PROVIDING SERVICES TO KIDS? YOU PAYING VENDORS, OR IS– I MIGHT BE MISS– I’M SORRY. I MIGHT BE MISUNDERSTANDING, BUT–>>SO THESE TWO GRANT CRITERIA OPPORTUNITIES ARE ABOUT SYSTEMS BUILDING WORK.>>OH, OKAY.>>WE’VE– THE CHILDCARE DEVELOPMENT FUND DOLLARS THAT COME–>>OKAY, SO THIS IS NOT ABOUT END USER VENDORS THAT ARE DEALING WITH CHILDREN. THIS IS ABOUT THE ADMINISTRATION OF [ INDISTINCT ] AND SYSTEMS– IS THAT RIGHT?>>THE ACTIVITIES OF THE ENTITIES WHO WOULD ULTIMATELY BE AWARDED THESE DOLLARS ARE WORKING TO BUILD A SYSTEM IN LOCAL COMMUNITIES TO SERVE CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, TO MAKE THEIR ACCESS EASIER, TO HELP IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF EARLY LEARNING PROGRAMS. THOSE TYPES OF SYSTEM BUILDING ACTIVITIES.>>OKAY. AND TO ALLOW FOR CHOICE– OR BIDDING OUT, YOU KNOW, WHICH YOU MENTIONED WAS 2012– TO BID IT OUT SO THAT THERE’S NOT JUST ONE PROVIDER, BUT– AND THAT SYSTEM IS NOT IN PLACE TODAY? IT’S GOING TO BE AFTER THIS IS DONE?>>IT IS CURRENTLY IN– THE SYSTEM THAT’S CURRENTLY IN PLACE TODAY, CURRENTLY IT’S BEING ADMINISTERED THROUGH ONE GRANT, AND THIS WAS [ NO AUDIO ] GRANTS COVER THE SCOPE OF THE WORK.>>THANK YOU.>>AND LISA BREWER-WALRAVEN IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF GREAT START CHILDCARE AND– CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND CARE. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS ON THE GRANT CRITERIA? OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, LISA. THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS. IT IS JUST ABOUT 11:30. WE COULD, AT THIS TIME, ENTERTAIN ANOTHER PRESENTATION, WHICH WOULD BE AN UPDATE ON THE OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, IF THE BOARD SO MOVES. SEEING SOME NODS OF HEADS YES, OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THEN I’M GOING TO ASK OUR PRESENTERS, PLEASE, FROM THE OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS TO PROVIDE AN UPDATE ON THE REVIEW OF GOAL ATTAINMENT PROCESS FOR OUR EIGHT– FIRST EIGHT PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE 21H APPLICATIONS, AND THEN, AS ALWAYS IS CUSTOMARY, A BENTON HARBOR AREA SCHOOLS COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT UPDATE. AGAIN, THIS IS A MONTHLY UPDATE PROVIDED BY OUR OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS. YOU KNOW, ACTION IS REQUIRED ON THE PART OF THE BOARD, SO WELCOME TO BILL PEARSON AND TO LaWANNA SHELTON. BILL IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, AND LaWANNA IS THE INTERIM ASSISTANT DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS.>>CAN I ASK A QUICK QUESTION BEFORE WE GET INTO THIS?>>YES, YOU CAN.>>WHAT WAS PASSED– DID ANYTHING THAT WAS PASSED IN LAME DUCK AFFECT THE OFFICE OF PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS AT ALL? I MEAN, THE WHOLE A-F DEBACLE AND ANY OF THAT? IS THAT–?>>YES.>>IT DID?>>YES.>>OKAY, SO I DON’T KNOW IF WE– YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THAT NOW, OR I’D LIKE TO TALK ABOUT IT SOMETIME DURING THIS MEETING, OR IF WE DON’T KNOW EXACTLY HOW IT’LL IMPACT AND STILL BEING DECIDED, BUT–>>WELL, THE SCHOOL REFORM OFFICER WILL BE ELIMINATED, AND THEN THAT AFFECTS BENTON HARBOR WITH THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT, SO WE’RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT AND WORK WITH BENTON HARBOR TO SEE HOW THAT BLENDS IN WITH THE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT MODEL.>>IT JUST AFFECTS ONE DISTRICT? OKAY.>>AS I UNDERSTAND IT.>>OKAY.>>YES.>>OKAY, AND EVERYBODY ELSE IS JUST THE WAY IT’S BEEN GOING ON?>>1280c WAS ELIMINATED.>>RIGHT.>>WHICH ELIMINATES THE SCHOOL REFORM OFFICER.>>RIGHT.>>AND THE SCHOOL REFORM OFFICE, BUT WE STILL HAVE OUR PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT OFFICE, AND WE HAVE OUR PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT AGREEMENTS, AND THOSE ARE STILL IN PLACE.>>MM…>>OKAY.>>SO OUR WORK WITH OUR PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS WILL CONTINUE.>>SO IT’LL BE–>>BECAUSE WHAT WAS TAKEN OUT WAS THE REFERENCE TO THE SRO AND WAS REPLACED WITH THE WORD, “THE DEPARTMENT”.>>SO IT– GETTING GRADED AN F WOULD NOT SUPERCEDE THE– WHAT WE’RE DOING–>>WELL, I’M NOT TALKING ABOUT A-F, YET. I’M JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SRO AND THE SCHOOL REFORM OFFICER AND THE SCHOOL REFORM OFFICE. AND THE A-F IS ANOTHER CONVERSATION.>>BUT THAT WAS IN THE SAME BILL.>>IT WAS IN THE SAME BILL.>>OH, OKAY, I THOUGHT…>>BUT IT DOES NOT AFFECT THE WORK THAT WE ARE DOING WITH OUR PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, AND IT DOES NOT AFFECT THE MANNER IN WHICH WE IDENTIFY OUR PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, WHICH IS THROUGH LOOKING AT OUR LOWEST PERFORMING SCHOOLS.>>SO LET ME MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD. I THOUGHT TOM WAS ASKING ABOUT THE A-F. YOU WERE NOT?>>WELL, THAT BILL AND JUST HOW IT IMPACTED THE SCHOOL REFORM OFFICE AND THESE AGREEMENTS AND ALL THAT.>>AND THEN MY NEXT QUESTION, WHAT YOU JUST GAVE US, YOU’RE SAYING THAT THE A-F BILL DOES NOT IMPACT THE WORK THAT’S–>>THAT WE ARE DOING WITH OUR PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS. WE’RE GOING TO HAVE MORE CONVERSATION ON THIS DURING THE LEGISLATIVE UPDATE WITH MARTY.>>OKAY, OKAY.>>THAT’S EXCITING.>>I CAN SEE THAT. WE UNDERSTAND YOUR PUZZLED LOOK.>>MORE THIS AFTERNOON.>>YOU GOT US ON THE EDGE OF OUR SEATS. [ LAUGHTER ]>>A TRAILER FOR WHAT’S TO COME THIS AFTERNOON.>>PLANS ON MOVING FULL STEAM AHEAD.>>OKAY.>>AND WELCOME DAN LaDUE WHO’S ALSO AT THE TABLE WITH US.>>OKAY, GOOD MORNING. WE’RE GOING TO GIVE YOU A BRIEF UPDATE. WE’LL REVIEW WHERE WE ARE WITH THE RGA, OR THE REVIEW OF GOAL ATTAINMENT PROCESS AND THE SCHEDULE. WE’LL GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON OUR DISBURSEMENTS OF 21H FOR THE SECOND WINDOW. AND FINALLY WE’LL GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON BENTON HARBOR’S COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT.>>SO WE ARE IN THE MIDST OF STARTING VERY SOON WITH OUR FIRST DISTRICT. AGAIN, JUST A QUICK REMINDER THAT THIS IS FOR OUR FIRST NINE DISTRICTS, FIRST EIGHT DISTRICTS. SO THIS IS NOT FOR ALL OF OUR PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS THAT WE’RE STARTING OUR REVIEW OF GOAL ATTAINMENT PROCESS. IT’S JUST THOSE INITIAL ONES. AS YOU’LL SEE IN A MOMENT, WE HAVE A CALENDAR BUILT OUT IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY WHERE WE’LL BE MEETING ON SITE WITH THEM. THE STRUCTURE OF CONFERENCE IS ACTUALLY KIND OF IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROCESS. THE FIRST PART OF THE PROCESS IS FOR THEM TO COLLECT AND GATHER EVIDENCE THAT DEMONSTRATES THAT THEY’RE MEETING THEIR BENCHMARKS THAT THEY SET FOR THEMSELVES BACK WHEN THE AGREEMENTS WERE INITIALLY DEVELOPED ABOUT EIGHTEEN MONTHS AGO. SO THEN THEY SUBMIT THAT EVIDENCE THROUGH A SYSTEM HERE AT THE DEPARTMENT. THEY COMPLETE A SELF ASSESSMENT AS TO WHETHER THEY THINK THEY ACCOMPLISHED THEIR BENCHMARKS. THEY HAVE A PARTNER OR A GROUP OF PARTNERS THAT ALSO DO THAT SAME SELF ASSESSMENT. AND THEN THE DEPARTMENT GOES IN AND WE LOOK AT THE EVIDENCE THAT THEY’VE PRESENTED. AND WE COMPLETE AN ASSESSMENT OF THEIR PROGRESS TOWARDS THEIR BENCHMARKS. AND THE WE USE THE RESULTS OF THOSE ASSESSMENTS IN A VERY STRUCTURED CONVERSATION. AND THEN DURING THAT CONFERENCE WHERE WE’RE ON SITE IN THE DISTRICTS, WE WALK AWAY WITH CLEARLY DEFINED NEXT STEPS AS TO WHAT THEY’RE DOING WITHIN THEIR PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT, WHETHER THAT’S SOMETHING THAT IS A RESULT OF BEING ON TRACK OR WHETHER IT’S THE RESULT OF A DIFFERENT RESULT, WHERE MAYBE THEY’RE NOT ON TRACK, WHERE THEY WOULD LIKE TO BE. AND THAT MAY INVOLVE TAKING A LOOK AT THEIR PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT AND DETERMINING WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO DO ANYTHING WITH IT. IT’S ENTIRELY UP TO THEM IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT AT THAT TIME. AND THEN THEY HAVE ANOTHER 18 MONTHS BEFORE THE 36 MONTHS, OR THE ENDS OF THOSE AGREEMENTS COME AROUND.>>AND WE ALSO HAVE BEEN IN CONVERSATION AND COLLABORATION WITH MASB, AND THEY WILL BE PROVIDING US WITH TWO FACILITATORS BECAUSE WE WANTED A THIRD PERSON OR A THIRD POINT TO BE THERE TO HELP WITH THE STRUCTURE OF CONFERENCE. THAT WASN’T FROM MDE, BECAUSE WE ARE REALLY COGNIZANT OF NOT HAVING A TOP DOWN APPROACH TO THIS, THAT IT REALLY TRULY IS A PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT MODEL.>>AND SO HERE’S THE SCHEDULE STARTING WITH BRIDGEPORT-SPAULDING ON THE 18TH OF THIS MONTH, AND THEN SAGINAW, KALAMAZOO, DPSCD, AND THEN SEVERAL MORE IN PONT– EXCUSE ME, IN FEBRUARY.>>OKAY, SO SHIFTING TO OUR 21H GRANT DISBURSEMENT.>>SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU IS THE ’17/’18 APPROPRIATION AMOUNT. SO THIS WOULD’VE BEEN IN ESSENCE LAST YEAR, SO THESE DISTRICTS HAVE ALREADY HAD THESE FUNDS OR BEEN ABLE TO USE THESE FUNDS DURING THIS PAST SCHOOL YEAR. WE APPROPRIATED 6 MILLION. WE SPENT, OR DISBURSED OUT TO THE DISTRICTS ALMOST ALL OF THAT AMOUNT OF FUNDS. WE’RE CURRENTLY IN THE PROCESS OF WORKING WITH THE DISTRICTS ON THEIR DEMONSTRATION OF EFFECTIVENESS WITH THOSE FUNDS, MAKING SURE THEY SPENT THEM AND THEY’RE TIED WITH THEIR PARTNERSHIP GOALS. AND THEN THE SECOND FUNDING AMOUNT, THE $7 MILLION. WE’VE HAD TWO WINDOWS SO FAR OF DISBURSEMENTS, ALMOST HANDING OUT NEARLY ALL OF IT. WE HAVE $1.3 MILLION LEFT. WE DO HAVE TWO MORE WINDOWS YET THIS SCHOOL YEAR TO GET THOSE FUNDS OUT THE DOOR FOR THE DISTRICTS TO USE THOSE.>>[ INDISTINCT ] THE PROCESS.>>OH, SORRY, SO THE PROCESS NOW EXISTS OF A CROSS OFFICE TEAM HERE AT THE DEPARTMENT WHERE WE HAVE MEMBERSHIP FROM NEARLY EVERY OFFICE THAT HELPS US GO THROUGH AND LOOK AT THE DISTRICTS AND HOW THEY’RE CURRENTLY SPENDING THEIR FUNDS, BECAUSE, AGAIN, THE 21H IS MEANT TO BE A KIND OF A WE DIDN’T HAVE ENOUGH MONEY OVER HERE, WE’RE SPENDING ALL OF OUR MONEY, AND WE NEED SOME MORE MONEY TO SUPPORT OUR PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT. AND SO WE DO AN ANALYSIS OF WHERE THEY’RE CURRENTLY SPENDING THEIR MONEY. WE LOOK AT THINGS LIKE DID THEY HAVE CARRYOVER FROM FEDERAL FUNDS, OR JUST ANY AVENUE OF WHERE THEY’RE-THEY’RE BRINGING IN THEIR FUNDS. AND THEN WE HAND THAT OUT, MAKING SURE THAT IT’S ALIGNED WITH THEIR PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT.>>SO BEFORE BREAK, I WENT DOWN TO BENTON HARBOR, AND I MET WITH DR. HERRERA FOR FOUR HOURS, SO THAT WE COULD GET TO KNOW EACH OTHER A LITTLE BIT. I COULD GO OVER THE COOPERATIVE AGREEMENT SO I COULD HAVE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WAS AGREED UPON, AND TO TALK TO HIM ABOUT ALL ASPECTS OF THE DISTRICT THAT HE’S HAVING PROBLEMS WITH AND ASPECTS THAT HE THINKS ARE GOING WELL, YOU KNOW, WHAT I CAN DO TO HELP FROM THE DEPARTMENT HERE. YOU KNOW, AS YOU KNOW, THERE’S A LARGE DEFICIT IN THE DISTRICT, AND THERE’S SOME POSITIONS THAT NEED TO BE FILLED. SO WE’RE WORKING ON THAT. WE’RE GOING TO DO SOME STRATEGIC PLANNING WITH THEM. AND I’M GOING TO DO SOME OTHER THINGS THAT DR. HERRERA ASKED ME TO DO. I THINK WE HAD A VERY GOOD CONVERSATION. I UNDERSTAND, I BELIEVE– IT’S ONLY BEEN FOR FOUR HOURS– BUT I THINK I UNDERSTAND THE BASICS OF THE PROBLEMS THAT HE IS FACING AND THE LONG TERM STRATEGIES THAT HE WOULD LIKE TO EMPLOY. SO WITH THAT INFORMATION, THEN I’M GOING TO PROVIDE HIM SOME ASSISTANCE, AND WE’RE GOING TO HAVE ANOTHER MONTHLY MEETING. AND HOPEFULLY WE’LL GET TO IMPROVE STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT AND A REDUCTION OF THE DEFICIT THAT’S OUT THERE. IT’S A LARGE DEFICIT. SO NEXT MEETING, I HAVE SOME AGENDA ITEMS THAT WE’RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT, AND HOPEFULLY WE’LL CONTINUE TO WORK TOGETHER AND PROVIDE GOOD THINGS FOR BENTON HARBOR STUDENTS.>>THANK YOU TO OUR PRESENTERS AND WE HAVE COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS STARTING WITH TOM.>>I’LL BE INTERESTED TO HEAR MARTY TALK ABOUT THE UPDATE, BECAUSE I– 1280c WAS HOW WE IDENTIFIED WHO SHOULD BE IN PARTNERSHIPS, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY. SO IF THAT’S GONE, THEN I DON’T KNOW HOW WE KNOW WHO SHOULD BE IN PARTNERSHIPS AND WHO SHOULDN’T, AND MAYBE MANY OTHER THINGS. I’LL– WE DON’T NEED TO– YOU KNOW, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DON’T WANT TO DEBATE THAT RIGHT NOW OR DISCUSS IT, BUT I CERTAINLY DON’T QUITE UNDERSTAND– I MEAN, I’M GLAD 1280c IS GONE, I JUST DON’T KNOW– IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD IMPACT THIS PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY.>>SO VENESSA, WILL YOU CHIME IN ON JUST THAT JUST A LITTLE BIT? I KNOW WE’RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT IT LATER, BUT AT LEAST TO GIVE YOU SOMETHING TO CHEW OVER LUNCH, HUH?>>CAN I COME DOWN THERE?>>SURE, PLEASE DO.>>OVER LUNCH.>>WHILE SHE’S COMING, CAN I–?>>YES.>>OKAY, THE THREE PEOPLE THAT YOU SAID WOULD BE A PART OF THE 18 MONTH, I KNOW YOU SAID THAT SOMEONE FROM MASB AND THE TWO OTHERS WOULD–>>THE DISTRICT ITSELF AND THEN THE DEPARTMENT.>>THE DEPARTMENT, OKAY.>>AND THE DISTRICT INVITES THEIR PARTNERS.>>MM-HMM.>>TO BE PART OF THE MEETING.>>SO THEY’LL BE PRETTY BIG. THEY WON’T BE A SMALL MEETING. IT WILL BE PRETTY BIG.>>SO, MARTY IS GOING TO TALK MORE ABOUT THE BILLS. WE ARE STILL LOOKING THROUGH A LOT OF ASPECTS OF IT, BUT TO JUST KIND OF RECAPTURE WHO’S PARTNERSHIP NOW AND WHY, BECAUSE IT DOES ACTUALLY INTERSECT ABOUT THREE DIFFERENT LAWS AND THINGS, SO LET ME JUST LAY THAT OUT. THE FIRST COHORT OF PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS WERE DISTRICTS THAT HAD HAD A PRIORITY SCHOOL UNDER ESEA FLEX, AND 1280c, SO THOSE TWO WORK TOGETHER TO IDENTIFY PRIORITY SCHOOLS. BUT THERE WAS A FEDERAL LAW AND A STATE LAW THAT WENT TOGETHER, AND HAD BEEN IN THE SRO, AND HAD BEEN ON THE SRO’S LIST FOR CLOSURE. SO THE INITIAL NINE CAME FROM THAT BUCKET. SO THEIR INSTIGATING FACTOR TO BECOME A PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT WAS PRIORITY SCHOOL STATUS UNDER ESEA FLEX AND 1280c. BUT MINUS 1280c, WE STILL WOULD’VE IDENTIFIED PRIORITY SCHOOLS. SO THAT WAS THE IDENTIFICATION, AND THEN 1280c GAVE IT STATE HEFT TOO. SOME OF THAT CAME ABOUT THROUGH RACE TO THE TOP AND THE FLEX LEGISLATION. BUT REALLY 2010, THE LEGISLATION THAT WAS PASSED IN SUPPORT OF OUR RACE TO THE TOP BID. THAT WAS ROUND ONE. ROUND TWO WERE DISTRICTS WHERE SCHOOLS THAT HAD BEEN IDENTIFIED PRIORITY, STILL AGAIN BACK TO THE OLD ESEA FLEX AND 1280c IDENTIFICATION AND HADN’T MADE SUFFICIENT PROGRESS TO EXIT, SO THAT WAS STILL KIND OF STILL THAT PARADIGM. BUT THEY HAD NOT BEEN ONES WHO WERE FLAGGED BY THE SRO. THEY WERE JUST ONES WHO AT THE TIME SUPERINTENDENT WHISTON SAID, “WE ARE TRYING “TO SHOW EVERYBODY THAT “WE’RE SERIOUS ABOUT MOVING “SCHOOLS FORWARD, SO WE SHOULD “TAKE ACTION NOW. “NOT WAIT AROUND,” AND SO WE DID. AND THEN THE THIRD ROUND THAT WE JUST DID, NOW WE HAD FLIPPED– THE FEDERAL LAW IS NOW ESSA, SO ESSA REMAINS IN PLACE. SO THE TRIGGER FOR COHORT THREE, OR THE THIRD ROUND, I WOULD SAY, NOT COHORTS.>>YEAH, YEAH.>>WAS YOU WERE A COMPREHEN– YOU HAD A COMPREHENSIVE SUPPORT AND IMPROVEMENT SCHOOL THAT WAS NOT AN ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION SCHOOL. AND SO THE FEDERAL LAW STILL REQUIRES THAT WE IDENTIFY CSI SCHOOLS AND DO SOMETHING. OUR SOMETHING IS PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS. AT STATE, WE HAD 1280c, WHICH TALKED ABOUT BOTTOM FIVE. BUT WE ALSO HAVE, YOU REMEMBER, 22p, WHICH IS THE BUDGET LANGUAGE THAT SAYS ANYBODY WHO IS A PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT NEEDS TO HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH MEASURABLE ACADEMIC GOALS, AND–>>NEXT LEVELS.>>NEXT LEVELS OF ACCOUNTABILITY. SO 1280c IS NOW GONE FROM THIS, WE KNOW. EXACTLY WHAT THAT ALL MEANS, WE’RE STILL EVALUATING, BUT WE KNOW THAT FEDERALLY WE STILL HAVE TO HAVE CSI SCHOOLS THAT ARE SERVED WITH SOMETHING. AND OUR SOMETHING, TO SHEILA’S POINT, IS THE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS. AND WE STILL HAVE THE 22p REQUIREMENT THAT PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS HAVE A PLAN, MEASURABLE GOALS, AND NEXT LEVELS OF ACCOUNTABILITY.>>CAN YOU JUST TALK ABOUT WHAT MEASURES GO INTO THE CSI SCHOOL?>>THE CS– TO BE A CSI SCHOOL, IT WAS THE INDEX. IT IS STILL THE INDEX SYSTEM THAT WE’VE BROUGHT BEFORE YOU GUYS BEFORE THAT WE NEGOTIATED THROUGH THE ESSA PLAN. SO THE INDEX WITH THE SIX COMPONENTS, PROFICIENCY, GROWTH, GRAD RATE, SCHOOL QUALITY, ENGLISH–>>PARTICIPATION IN ENGLISH LANGUAGE…>>LEARNER PROGRESS.>>PROGRESS. AND THEN FROM THERE, THE BOTTOM FIVE PERCENT OF THAT INDEX ARE CSI SCHOOLS MINUS, LIKE I SAID, U.S. ED REQUIRED THAT WE IDENTIFY ALL SCHOOLS, INCLUDING ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION EVEN THOUGH WE FOUGHT THEM ON THAT, BUT WE LOST. SO WHAT WE DID IS SAY CSI– ANY DISTRICT WITH A CSI SCHOOL IS A PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT UNLESS THE ONLY CSI SCHOOL IS ALTERNATIVE EDUCATION. THEN WE’LL SERVE THAT SCHOOL, BUT THROUGH A MORE TARGETED, APPROPRIATE– NO THE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT’S NOT THE RIGHT INTERVENTION FOR THAT. THAT’S A DIFFERENT INTERVENTION. SO THAT’S WHERE WE ARE. CLEAR? OKAY.>>BUT THEN WE DON’T HAVE–>>BUT THAT IS ALL THE KIND OF INTERSECTING PARTS.>>IT’S 22p, OKAY.>>I THINK THE KEY IS THAT WITH ESSA, WE HAVE TO PROVIDE SOME LEADERSHIP TO THOSE DISTRICTS, SO WE’LL STILL BE IN BUSINESS.>>THANK YOU. OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, VENESSA, APPRECIATE THAT.>>I JUST HAD A QUICK QUESTION.>>YES, MICHELLE.>>AGAIN, SO WHEN THEY’RE MEETING WITH THESE–>>EIGHT DISTRICTS?>>WITH THE EIGHT DISTRICTS, I– SO YOU’RE GOING TO HAVE MASB AND THE DISTRICT, WHICH I ASSUME IS THE SUPERINTENDENT AND WHOEVER THE SUPERINTENDENT SELECTS. I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT, AND I THINK BRIAN AGREED WITH THIS, THAT IF THERE’S AN ELECTED UNION TEACHER REPRESENTATIVE, THAT THAT PERSON SHOULD ALSO BE INVITED TO ATTEND. AND I’VE SEEN FIRST HAND WHERE SOME SUPERINTENDENTS WILL BRING A TEACHER, BUT THEY WON’T INVITE THE ELECTED OFFICER BY THE TEACHERS. AND I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN INDEPENDENT VOICE OF THE TEACHERS THERE. SO I WOULD ASK THAT IF– THAT THE TEACHER, IF THEY HAVE A UNION, AND WHOSEVER ELECTED TO BE THEIR REPRESENTATIVE BE AT THE TABLE, AND I THINK THAT’LL BRING A GOOD INDEPENDENT VOICE TO THE DISCUSSION.>>SO THIS IS WHERE LOCAL CONTROL AND THE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT MODEL, WE REALLY TRY TO COMPLEMENT IT. AND THIS AGREEMENT WAS DEVELOPED WITH THE DISTRICT BEING THE CENTERPIECE OF IT.>>MM-HMM.>>THE PARTNERSHIP MODEL REALLY RESPECTS THAT, AND SO THAT’S WHY IT’S THE DISTRICT’S RESPONSIBILITY TO INVITE WHO THEY–>>WHEN YOU SAY THE DISTRICT, YOU’RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THE SUPERINTENDENT. THAT’S NOT TO ME THE DISTRICT. THAT’S THE SUPERINTENDENT. BUT– AND I KNOW WHEN BRIAN HAD– THERE WAS THE INITIAL SORT OF GROUPS WHERE WE HAD THESE LOCALLY LOCAL GROUPS COMING TOGETHER TO DO AN ORIGINAL ASSESSMENT, THERE WAS A LETTER THAT WAS SENT OUT TO THE DISTRICTS REQUIRING CERTAIN PEOPLE TO BE AT THE TABLE AND ENCOURAGING OTHER PEOPLE TO BE AT THE TABLE, SO I THINK IT’S CLEARLY WITHIN THE PURVIEW OF THE DEPARTMENT TO PUSH TO HAVE– YOU KNOW, ALSO THERE’S A PTA PERSON ELECTED PARENT AS WELL AS AN ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE OF THE TEACHERS TO BE THERE. I THINK NOT EVEN MAKING ANY ATTEMPT TO MAKE SURE THEY’RE THERE IS A DISSERVICE TO THE PROCESS.>>WE ARE GOING TO DO THAT. YESTERDAY, SHEILA AND I MET WITH THE EDUCATION ALLIANCE AND THAT CAME UP.>>OKAY.>>AND A REPRESENTATIVE FROM FTA, A REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE MEA WAS THERE, AND WE SAID IF THERE ARE ANY DISTRICTS THAT– THEY’RE GOING TO GO BACK TO THOSE EIGHT DISTRICTS, AND THEY’RE GOING TO ASK THAT QUESTION. AND WE SAID WE’D LIKE TO HAVE SOME TEACHERS THERE, SO THEY’RE GOING TO LET US KNOW IF SOMEBODY IS NOT GOING TO BE THERE. SO WE’RE GOING TO INTERVENE THAT. SO THE GOAL IS TO GET TEACHERS THERE TO ALL EIGHT DISTRICTS.>>RIGHT, AND I WOULD SUGGEST NOT HAVE IT BE THE SELECTION OF THE SUPERINTENDENT, BUT HAVE IT BE THE SELECTION OF THE TEACHERS WHO ELECTED THEIR REPRESENTATIVE. THEIR ELECTED REPRESENTATIVE IS GOING TO BE A DIFFERENT VOICE THAN SOMEBODY, GENERALLY, WHO–>>THAT’S A GOOD POINT, BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE TO HAVE– YOU KNOW, THERE IS SOME AUTONOMY THERE FOR THE DISTRICT, BECAUSE THEY WROTE THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT. SO HOPEFULLY THEY WILL HAVE THE LEADERS OF THEIR UNION REPRESENT SO THEY CAN GO BACK TO THE CONSTITUENTS THAT THEY REPRESENT AND JUST SAY, “HERE’S WHAT WAS SAID, “HERE’S WHAT WE FOUND OUT, “AND HERE’S WHAT WE NEED TO DO.”>>BUT WHAT– I REMEMBER THERE WAS A TIME WHEN THE ELECTED PRESIDENT WOULD HAVE TO SIGN OFF ON SOME OF THESE AGREEMENTS. AND I DON’T KNOW IF IT WAS UNDER THE LATEST ROUND OF PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENTS OR IF IT WAS THOSE FINANCIAL, LIKE, PLANS FOR FINANCIAL DEFICIT, BUT THE ACTUAL UNION REPRESENTATIVE WOULD HAVE TO SIGN OFF ON THOSE PLANS. I MEAN, THERE IS– I THINK THERE IS PRECEDENT TO HAVE– I MEAN, I JUST THINK AS A PROCESS, YOU WANT TO HAVE A VOICE OF SOMEBODY– MAYBE IT WOULD BE GREAT FOR THOSE PARENTS AND TEACHERS WHO ARE NOT SELECTED AND THEN UNSELECTED BY– IT WOULD BE–>>ONE OF THE GOALS FOR THE PARTNERSHIP IS TO PROVIDE, BREAK DOWN THE BARRIERS, WHICH HOPEFULLY THEN WILL PROVIDE BETTER ASSISTANCE TO THE DISTRICT. AND IF THE DISTRICT DOESN’T HAVE A SYSTEM WHERE THEY’RE COMMUNICATING WITH THEIR STAFF, THEN THAT’S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM AND THAT’S GOING TO BE EVIDENT.>>AND THAT WOULD BE, YEAH–>>AND THAT’LL BE SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO DEAL WITH IN THE NEXT 18 MONTHS. THAT’S THE WHOLE IDEA OF HAVING THIS MIDTERM, LET’S SAY, EVALUATION OF WHERE WE ARE WITH THE DISTRICT, AND THEY CAN HEAR WHAT WE THINK. AND THEN WE GET TO HEAR WHAT THEY THINK WHAT THEY HAVE ACCOMPLISHED. AND THEN WE’LL MAYBE RESET SOME PARAMETERS AND SEE WHERE WE’RE GOING TO GO, BECAUSE THE NEXT 18 MONTHS GETS TO THE NEXT LEVEL OF ACCOUNTABILITY IF THEY’RE AT A POINT WHERE IT’S NOT MET WITH LIMITED PROGRESS.>>BUT THE ONLY WAY TO FIGURE THAT OUT IS TO HAVE THE INDEPENDENT VOICES THERE, YOU KNOW.>>YEAH, THAT’S OUR GOAL.>>YEAH, I MEAN, TO HAVE THEM AT THE TABLE, THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. AND IF NOT, MEET WITH THEM SEPARATELY AND GET THEIR OPINIONS ON WHAT THE CONCERNS ARE. AND THAT MIGHT EVEN BE A BETTER OPPORTUNITY TO DO AN EVAL– A FULL EVALUATION AS TO TALK TO A WIDER GROUP IN FRONT OF THE COMMUNITY TO GIVE SOME FEEDBACK ON WHAT– HOW THINGS ARE GOING, WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. SO IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN–? SO WHAT I’M HEARING IS TEACHERS ARE BEING INVITED TO THE TABLE, BUT THEY WILL BE SELECTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT AT THIS POINT.>>NO, I DIDN’T SAY THAT. I DIDN’T SAY THEY WERE GOING TO BE ELECTED BY THE SUPERINTENDENT. I’M SAYING THAT WE’RE NOT GOING TO TELL THE DISTRICT, “HERE ARE THE PEOPLE THAT YOU “NEED TO INVITE WITH RESPECT “TO THE TEACHER’S UNION,” BUT I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW– YOU WOULD HOPE THAT THE LEADERS WOULD BE THERE, THAT THEY WOULD SELECT THOSE PEOPLE TO HAVE A VOICE. BUT I CAN’T GUARANTEE.>>NOT IF THEY WANT TO COVER SOMETHING UP.>>WELL, THAT’S NOT–>>MAYBE IF THEY PROVIDED US A LIST OF THE DISTRICTS THAT DIDN’T INVITE THE UNION REPRESENTATIVE.>>YEAH.>>AND JUST LET US SEE THAT LIST.>>YEAH, THAT WOULD BE GOOD.>>I WOULD SAY–>>SO IF I CAN INTERVENE, IN OUR CONVERSATION WITH ED ALLIANCE YESTERDAY, I DID ASSURE BOTH THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTORS OF MEA AND AFT THAT IF THERE WERE SITUATIONS WHERE THEIR UNION LEADERSHIP WAS NOT INVITED, TO LET ME KNOW, AND THEN I WOULD REACH OUT TO THE SUPERINTENDENTS.>>RIGHT, THANK YOU, SHEILA.>>PAM AND THEN TO NIKKI.>>TO TOM’S POINT, I GUESS I WOULD BE INTERESTED IN KNOWING WHO WAS AT THE MEETINGS. AND I DON’T KNOW IF YOU SAID THAT YOU WERE GOING TO PROVIDE THAT, LIKE, A LIST OF– WITH THE INFORMATION, BUT ALSO WHO WAS AT THE MEETINGS.>>WELL, WE WILL CERTAINLY HAVE THAT INFORMATION ONCE IT’S ESTABLISHED AND THEY GET THE INVITE– I MEAN, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO DO PREP AHEAD OF TIME ANYWAY, SO WE WILL EVENTUALLY HAVE THAT, YES.>>BECAUSE THIS WILL BE AN EVALUATION OF THEIR PLAN AS WAS ALREADY WRITTEN. BUT I THINK THAT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD ALSO BE MONITORING, AS YOU SAID, IS HOW THIS PARTNERSHIP IS– HOW THEY’RE REALLY WORKING TOGETHER. AND I THINK THAT’S A TELLING SIGN AS TO WHO’S AT THE TABLE.>>YEAH, YOU’RE KIND OF AT THE SAME POINT WE ARE. THIS IS A FIRST TRY. THIS IS A FIRST GO AROUND IN TERMS OF THE 18 MONTH. SO WE’RE GOING TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TOO AFTER WE MEET WITH THE EIGHT DISTRICTS, SO THAT WE’RE BETTER PREPARED WHEN IT COMES TO THE 36 MONTH. AND THEN WE’RE PREPARED FOR ROUND TWO. SO WE’RE LEARNING, TOO, IN THIS PROCESS, AND WE’RE PROBABLY GOING TO MAKE SOME DECISIONS AND MAKE SOME CHANGES ALSO. BUT THAT’D BE A GOOD IDEA TO HAVE A LIST OF–>>BECAUSE AS A PART OF THE EVALUATION, IT WOULD BE WHO’S AT THE TABLE. I MEAN, HOW IS YOUR PARTNERSHIP REALLY PLAYING OUT ON PAPER AS TO, YOU KNOW, HOW IT’S ACTUALLY– FROM PRACTICAL TO REALITY, AND I THINK THAT THAT WOULD BE [ INDISTINCT ] AS TO WHO IS AT THE TABLE IF THERE ARE COMMUNITY– IF THERE ARE OTHER STAKEHOLDERS WHO ARE THERE WHO NEED TO BE THERE, ESPECIALLY IF THEY’RE WRITTEN INTO THE PLAN OR SIGNED ON.>>THANK YOU, PAM, AND I KNOW THAT AFTER EACH OF THE REVIEWS THAT THE DISTRICTS WILL BE ASKED TO COMPLETE A SURVEY ON WHAT THEY SAW AS THE BENEFITS, AND IF WE HAD TO DO IT OVER AGAIN, WHAT OPPORTUNITIES FOR IMPROVEMENT WOULD THEY SUGGEST TO US. SO WE WILL USE, THEN, THE FEEDBACK FROM THE DISTRICTS TO HELP US CRAFT AND ENSURE THAT WE ARE PROVIDING A VERY MEANINGFUL EXPERIENCE FOR THEM. AND THEN, NIKKI, I BELIEVE YOU HAD A COMMENT OR QUESTION?>>YEAH, JUST LISTENING TO THIS– LIKE, NOT JUST THIS PRESENTATION, BUT OTHER PRESENTATIONS AND SORT OF SYNTHESIZING, KIND OF THROWING SOME INFORMATION BACK, BUT– SO THE– JUST A FEW QUESTIONS FIRST, BUT A.R.E., THIS ACCOUNTABILITY, RESEARCH, AND EVALUATION UNIT, AS YOU’RE REVIEWING 18 MONTH GOALS TO BE EVALUATED, AND TO JUST TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND FURTHER, THE GOALS WERE SET BY THE LOCAL DISTRICTS. THERE WAS A CONVERSATION AT THE TABLE, ALL STAKEHOLDERS. THE GOALS WERE LOCALLY GENERATED ORGANICALLY, IF THAT MAKES SENSE, RIGHT? SO AS WE EVALUATE THEM, CAN YOU GIVE US A SAMPLE OF GOALS THAT ARE BEING MET, GOALS THAT ARE NOT BEING MET, AND JUST SORT OF AS YOU EVALUATE THEM, JUST SHARE WITH US WHERE YOU’RE AT IN THE PROCESS. I’M ASSUMING THAT’S THE PLAN– NOT RIGHT NOW, BUT AS WE MOVE ALONG.>>ABSOLUTELY.>>OKAY, AND I’M ASSUMING THAT THE WHOLE FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT OF FUNDING, HOW YOU KIND OF, VERSUS GRANT, YOU KNOW, THE BLENDING AND BRAIDING, THAT THAT WILL IMPACT THE REACH OF THAT GOAL, THAT WE SHOULD OVERALL EVENTUALLY SEE THESE GOALS MET. HOPEFULLY, RIGHT? THAT’S THE GOAL OF THAT FUNDAMENTAL SHIFT. I’M JUST ASSUMING– BECAUSE I’M LOOKING AT THE GRANT DISBURSEMENTS, THE WHOLE CONVERSATION WE’VE HAD TODAY AND KIND OF TRYING TO APPLY IT ACROSS THE STREAM, SO IT’LL KIND OF BE A REALLY GOOD OPPORTUNITY TO SEE HOW THAT FUNDING STRUCTURE WORKS, RIGHT? I MEAN, I’M ASSUMING THAT’S LONG TERM, THE HOPE.>>THE GOAL IS TO GET THE EIGHT DISTRICTS, IF WE MET THE GOAL PERFECTLY, ALL EIGHT DISTRICTS, AFTER 36 MONTHS, WOULD BE OUT OF THE PARTNERSHIP.>>YEAH.>>AND THEN OTHER DISTRICTS, DEPENDING ON WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE NEW LEGISLATION, WOULD THEN BE IMPLEMENTED INTO THE PARTNERSHIP AGREEMENT PROGRAM. SO THAT’S THE GOAL, YES.>>OKAY. JUST PUTTING PIECES TOGETHER.>>ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM BOARD MEMBERS? OKAY, SEEING NONE, THANK YOU TO BILL, TO LaWANNA, AND TO DAN, AND WITH THAT, WE WILL RECESS FOR LUNCH, AND RECONVENE AT 1:00.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *