Coraggio Consulting
Fairfax County School Board Governance Committee Meeting, Tuesday, January 20, 2026

Date: Tuesday, January 20, 2026
Place: Fairfax County School Board, Virginia
Length: 2h 3m (video)
Official meeting video (YouTube): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=asix8A3MFDg
Official School Board page (FCPS): https://www.fcps.edu/about-fcps/leadership/school-board

Machine transcript (speech-to-text) produced by Coraggio Consulting. Not an official county record. Names and numbers may be misspelled; check the video at the timestamp before quoting.
Speech-to-text: whisper.cpp, model large-v3-turbo. Produced 2026-10-28. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

----------------------------------------------------------------------

[00:00:00] okay good afternoon the january 20th 2026 meeting of the fairfax county school board governance committee will now come to order at 4.05 pm we may have someone join virtually so clerks should we go ahead and vote that person in or we're not sure i have to say i am a little uncomfortable with possibly people joining or not i think it would be helpful in the future to know if we expect the person or not okay miss st john cunning has submitted a written request to attend this afternoon's meeting virtually due to a personal conflict as she has a family commitment

[00:00:36] and is attending tonight's meeting from Great Falls, Virginia. All those in favor of approving Ms. St. John Cunning's request? Myself, Mr. Frisch, Ms. Lady, opposed. Dr. Anderson. So that request passes and when Ms. St. John Cunning arrives we will check her audio and video. Okay we will now move to the approval of minutes, item 1.02. We will vote on the minutes of the January 6th meeting of the Governance Committee. Is there a mover for that? Dr. Anderson moves. And Mr.

[00:01:12] Frisch seconds. All those in favor? And that passes unanimously. It's a little warm. Okay, so on our agenda today, we're going to go through maybe 10 minutes or less about formatting of the policies. We've worked hard to try and get things in order. And then we're going to turn to some HR related policies and just a few more facilities related policies including one that we had put asked the superintendent to come back to in the last meeting and then with at least 30 minutes

[00:01:48] left in the meeting we will turn to a discussion about the new frontier of ai policy development okay so we are going to look at agenda item 1.03 the formatting of policies so madam deputy clerk Miss Brown do you want to speak to this it's pretty self-explanatory we're gonna get ourselves in order so what I have here is kind of I've been listening to all of the kind of ideas that people have had about the formatting and come

[00:02:24] up with and taken the previous regulation on formatting and made a template there were people can use this to make sure that not only do they have the correct formatting but they have the correct components and sections above Beyond this, I had added Regulation 1104, which is the formatting of directives.

[00:02:46] I did have one slight recommendation on that for consideration, and that would be separating the two so that we would have a regulation for policies and notices, and then we would have a regulation on regulations, so a regulation, regulation, as a lot of times, the way that the current regulation reads as a little confusing, as some things pertain to regulations, which are Dr. Reed's purview, and some things are the policies and some notices that are the school board's purview.

[00:03:19] And so I get a lot of questions on it. I just thought it'd be worth saying that it is my recommendation as someone who's been on the back end of these to separate out that regulation for the regulation regulation and the policy regulation. - Only becomes with a really good name like R squared.

[00:03:34] Mr. Frisch. I'm not sure I follow. For example, the philosophy section, right, is in the board wants a philosophy section in the policy part.

[00:03:51] Dr. Reed doesn't always have a philosophy section, nor do we necessarily need a philosophy section in regulations. So there's things like that where Ms. Brown was suggesting that we have a template for regulations and a template for policies so that things are even in the same right now we just have one template that's used for everything notices are also actually a little bit different and most notices don't include any of this so you could actually have a third template for notices so they are

[00:04:23] right so there's different ways that things could go um that's why we were suggesting that if dr reed has a template she wants to use for regulations that may be a little bit different than what the board wants for policies that we would separate them out did you get any of this

[00:04:55] before the meeting by chance I don't know if you have thoughts on it I didn't but I I think you know as we draft regulation clearly there are parts that we do not need in regulation that you want in policy I think I would want to go back to our struggle to fill them in ourselves right well and at the end of the day the philosophy drives the policy but the regulations really how we're gonna engage in the management to get it done so I don't even think it necessarily is appropriate right for a regulation I would like to go back to our team though to look at what our template for regulations because we've

[00:05:31] just gone through probably 60 or 70 this year and I don't know that I want to go back and rewrite all of those again so I think I'd also want to be clear to that it would be a moving forward thing but I do think separating them from the boards template makes a whole lot of sense for sure and and yikes that's really loud and as I said the it would be a separation of this regulation 1104 too so that your regulation for regulations would be a more aligned with your template because right now everything's kind of mashed into one and it's a little bit difficult to understand understand which aligns with

[00:06:05] which sometimes on the actual policy template I think it's great to have a template. Can you go back to the template really quickly? Thank you. The template on templates.

[00:06:23] There we go. Is there anything else underneath? I think it might benefit us to, I don't think definitions are something that are required in every single policy, and I worry that we might end up with competing definitions between policies. So maybe in red, next to the word definitions,

[00:07:01] you could put as needed or as warranted so that we know that nobody has to come up with things just to fulfill the template. I think that's bad policymaking. I'm comfortable with the idea of having philosophy and everything, but I don't want to be overly prescriptive on having to have different sections. I do think that the order matters, and so having them in there, even when they're potentially not used makes sense. I think what's missing after responsibilities is

[00:07:38] the body section. I don't know what that would be called necessarily, but the meat and potatoes of the policy. What is the actual policy? So I think it's worth having something there that shows the format for it. I think responsibilities also would be as warranted.

[00:08:03] Can I share that I think this is a good start, but I envision something more detailed, and I happen to have pages of notes about sort of glossary-type decisions.

[00:08:19] We agreed at the last session, you know, to say the Fairfax School Board believes that. So I think there could be more guidance, like, put in here, like Mr. Frisch is saying, even verb tense, you know. And philosophy and responsibilities, I think it interchanged a lot, and I commented on one of the policies about that.

[00:08:36] so I think we can do more to clarify, and I agree about what's the meat of the policy, and I actually went through last meeting's policies and color-coded them and said which one has this section and that section, so there's some more to do, but at least we've got a start, so Dr. Anderson.

[00:08:58] - Thank you, and thank you for getting this started, Ms. Brown, I do agree that it would be great if there was a very quick and easy way to separate regulations from policies, at least visually, so that it's easy just to notice.

[00:09:16] And I do agree that I don't think the regulations require a purpose. And I don't think you do a summary, it's just a change. So we know those two will be gone. And I do agree that this should be what both the policy and whatever changes to regulation should be moving forward.

[00:09:38] It's tomorrow's work, there's no retroactive work to this. We will never get that done, and I don't even think we should try. I do agree with some of the comments that were just made regarding components. There are some that are evergreen and will show up everywhere, and that's essentially summary and purpose and philosophy.

[00:10:00] I think those are the mainstays. All of the rest is kind of interchangeable because as needed. We've had definitions, we've had responsibilities, We've had procedures, because I've also been doing a little charting of my own regarding some of the headings that, you know, we've used.

[00:10:17] Even going through today's, they're all over the place. Authority, rationale. I think we need to give ourselves a bank of headings to be used as needed so that we don't stray away from the language. Because I could see it where I'm just pulling something.

[00:10:37] Instead of rationale, somebody could just write explanation moving forward. So having that as kind of some sort of addendum would be very helpful. So we know we're going to draw away from these topics in order to fill out the body so that we don't end up with way too many words that are inconsistent and misaligned.

[00:10:59] But other than that, I think this is really a good start. And so what I can do is, we only had two weeks since our previous governance committee meeting, but I can, I'll try it two ways. I'll try it my old school way and think about it, and I'll try it with chat GPT and see what it comes up with, but to create some glossary type things, and I think that will be helpful, and I'm happy to keep working with our deputy clerk on that.

[00:11:21] So that sounds okay? One thing I did have, this is a public-facing document. I just, sorry, I did have comments in there of when to use things and when to not, but I didn't want to add it in for this public-facing one. Mr. Krish? My only last comment would be once we do fill in the things that we've all kind of talked about here, it probably would be good to have a sample model policy, just something that we, it doesn't even have to be a real policy, right? Just an example. It could be something completely, yeah, a policy on pizza at lunch or whatever, like something, it could be silly,

[00:11:56] but it should show exactly what the policy format would look like in practice. Yeah, I think we need that right to let people know and then I think once the committee adopts it I don't probably something the board should look at at least for consensus maybe the the chair and vice chair can circulate it in the chairs notes with a poll and then we can just kind of march forward with it I think it's very close

[00:12:28] to being done great okay all right so let's go ahead and tackle some of the policies we are going to start with the human resources related policies so this is agenda item 1.04 and um so we have seven and um i wonder if there's any well we could just go through uh from 440 onward uh so why don't we start with performance assessments and evaluations dr anderson

[00:13:07] Yes, thank you. Minimal here. Two things. One is more substantive, and the other is just a semantics. For Section 4, I think somewhere, and I'm really comparing this with the sample from VSBA, we're missing, I think, some language that speaks to that this is applicable to all employees.

[00:13:32] Mr. Smith, do we have any employees that are not evaluated? Our hourly employees are not evaluated. Hourly part-time or hourly full-time?

[00:13:49] Our part-time hourly employees. Okay, and that's a small group or a large group? It's a large group, but again, they're hourly employees, so they're not a full FTE. They do not receive benefits. They're not part of a bargaining unit.

[00:14:05] Okay, thank you. I appreciate that. I think somewhere here we need to talk about all employees. and also what I see that is missing on the second part is speaking or providing some guidelines for uniform performance standards. We have it here for teachers and principals, and it makes me wonder about the superintendent and central office staff, which document that they're using.

[00:14:29] And again, if you look at the VSBA document, it highlights teacher, principal, and superintendent evaluations. And thirdly, under philosophy, I think last time we were leaning into some other language that Fairfax County shall, and my proposal here, Fairfax County School Board shall require that written evaluation, written evaluations of the effectiveness of all employees.

[00:14:54] Oh, there's all, never mind that. I think I was looking at that for number four. I'm so sorry, I ran through this really quickly. Philosophy, my recommendation for philosophy is to change that language to the Fairfax County School Board shall require written evaluation of the effectiveness of all employees just kind of wordsmithing that a little bit because I think we started with adding Fairfax County School Board with a lot of the language that we use last time and

[00:15:29] then in the back I just also I'm thinking we need to refer to the other guidelines that are utilized mr. fresh thoughts yeah a couple things one I'm I'm hesitant to say all employees because just because they're part time and not receiving benefits does not mean they're not technically employees.

[00:15:52] So what modifying language can we use to indicate that we're being very specific about which employees we're talking about? Secondarily, I don't want to include the superintendent in this. If there is a need for a policy around the superintendent's evaluation, it should be separate because we do it separately.

[00:16:10] it's our it's identified in our governance manual uh so um just my two thoughts i think there's a very specific classification of employees um and i don't think that uh including the one employee well not the one but the the preeminent employee that we have direct purview over um in the same policy as everybody else makes sense okay may i just check is missing john cunning on is that MC is that her oh okay okay so yeah I don't think putting

[00:16:47] the superintendent in here is is something I'm interested in this is one where the philosophy and the responsibilities are kind of mixed like our philosophy is that we want to make sure that our staff are doing the job they signed up to do and if they need support within reason we're giving them support doctor you do you want to interject them I just think that mr.

[00:17:13] Smith and I were side barring for a minute I think we if we're gonna go with the suggested amended language we would want to say evaluated in compliance with statutory expectations because not everybody's on the same cycle and so I think it's a nuance but we would want to reflect that I think in the policy I think we'd be amenable to that I mean this was yours to bring to us so if you think that's what's best you know please put that in there from the start you know we're looking for the the advice of counsel to be sure that we're not stepping over the line with our collective bargaining agreements and we're not over committing

[00:17:49] to anything so it doesn't say anything about code is it are you suggesting we have something in there

[00:18:07] about code dr reed so do we evaluate all employees we don't evaluate hourly employees i no that's

[00:18:55] correct uh and we have anywhere between 11 000 and 12 000 hourly employees at any given time these are people who are in the hourly van position that you may have seen or may be familiar with performing a variety of functions. We have substitutes who are in that hourly category, all of those things. So those 11,000 to 12,000 employees generally, not generally, I'm sorry, those 11,000 to 12,000 employees do not receive an annual evaluation.

[00:19:24] Thank you. So this language does not say annual, and the frequency actually was something that I would want to see put in here that, you know, it says something about frequency.

[00:19:40] The frequency, at least for instructional employees, is defined in Virginia code. So generally, employees who are in licensed instructional positions need to be evaluated during their first three years because they're in a probationary term.

[00:19:55] And after that, they reach continuing contract status wherein they're evaluated once every three years versus our operational employees who are evaluated on a different cycle. So there is a little bit of nuance and difference there. Yeah, so, I mean, I just don't think this is accurate, or I'm not sure how useful it is.

[00:20:12] The philosophy is saying that we think that all employees shall be evaluated in some written way, but we're hearing that that's not actually what happens in practice. So that doesn't seem right to include here. And if there's other language, whether it's policy or code or the collective bargaining agreement, this is one of those policies where does it make sense to stand alone?

[00:20:37] should it be part of something, but that's a recommendation that we seek staff to give input on. So I'm not sure what we're doing with this policy right here. So outside counsel who worked with us, I believe Mr. Patel worked on this, reviewed all of the HR policies.

[00:20:54] I think that the statutes included on page two under the sections, and those have been updated to reflect 2020 and 2021, and the code of Virginia below responsibility, so the language is there and it would be fleshed out more in the regulation, those different cycles for different groups, so if that's helpful.

[00:21:16] Mr. Krish? Yeah, so I want to make a distinction between what we include under philosophy and what we include under general policy language. So what I've recognized, at least of late, is that when we have philosophy, it usually speaks to like some kind of a value of some kind, right?

[00:21:39] So if this was in line with that, this would be something about why it's important to have evaluations of employees. Generally speaking, I think that this could go through.

[00:21:54] I was looking at responsibilities, and I'm like, we would get into a mess if we tried to identify every single person who has a responsibility in the evaluation process, especially when you consider that there are different jobs that have different people who are doing the evaluating. Having the evaluator and the employee listed as the responsibilities makes sense to me.

[00:22:16] And then that is kind of described in our regulations and in state code, which are listed. As for the language under Section 4, I'm fine with that language. For philosophy, it could be something like whatever we decide.

[00:22:37] The Fairfax County School Board, require, the Fairfax County School Board affirms that employees benefit from regular, constructive, you know, something along those lines, right?

[00:23:10] Because that speaks to a philosophy and not just a regurgitation of what the policy lays out. I agree with you. I'm kind of thinking, I wonder if we should just put a pin in this one for a moment, because I think we'll have other questions on philosophy, responsibilities, procedures, right?

[00:23:30] We keep having to go back and check our format and check our understanding of these sections, right? Oh, Ms. Lady, sorry, I didn't see your thing up. Go ahead, please. Yeah, to Mr. Frisch's point regarding value, I mean, I think the value of performance evaluations is a belief in a strong teaching force, right?

[00:23:47] so we value um strength in our teachers i think also if you're going to try to you were kind of wordsmithing what i wrote down was timely and appropriate feedback right like there's a because everything's spelled out in regulation right so what we're trying to convey is we value strong teachers and we value ongoing we're educators we believe in the ongoing improvement right so if we don't have and again according to state code you know if but if this is a value statement i think you can make it a value statement um and i think as dr re pointed out all of the codes are there and the regulation which is which i is is lengthy i mean the regulation is nine pages

[00:24:27] long that accompanies this that breaks it down into who when where and why um so you know i think the way the philosophy is written right now is kind of you know purposey but anyways i do agree with wordsmithing that and if you want to be i don't know that we need to but if you want to talk about contract employees you could say employees um with a with a cba because that's everyone non-hourly i think i don't think there's anyone who gets evaluated on these cycles that's not in cba so what if we and then i'll go to dr arison so what if we inserted the language miss lady just

[00:25:06] said that the school board believes that timely and appropriate feedback you know is essential to a strong workforce teaching or whatever whatever language i mean i'm trying to think i don't know what language HR uses and its reports, you know, things that. Yeah, I don't want it to be too long, but I think at the end of the day, the reason we value performance evaluations is because they generate dialogue, they generate timely and appropriate feedback, they generate coaching, or they generate mentorship of someone else, right? You're an exemplar teacher, and so now we're going to have you mentor somebody who is, you know, maybe in a needs

[00:25:43] improvement category. Dr. Anderson? Yes. The other thing that came to mind is the procedures section. I'm wondering, do we need a procedures section if we have a robust regulation that lays out the procedures? Is that misnamed or should that be part of the overall philosophy? Because this is speaking to, you know, the basis. Why is this an important thing? So that would be my wondering there because procedures means a set of steps that are laid out for you to complete a

[00:26:23] particular task and that sentence is not it or those sentences is not procedural it's more part of the belief philosophy and so i i would advocate to perhaps marry that or rename it because those are not procedural mr prish i think it should be objectives i agree miss lady no i was just going say back to the earlier formatting conversation i think that that when we create an example policy

[00:27:01] it's like it may include these categories like we don't always have definitions we don't always have objection of objectives we don't always have procedures i think that we box staff in because i think they've been feeling like we want each of these categories and i think they're struggling too when they produce some of these red line policies i don't want to speak for staff but my sense is if If they're trying to fit into the box they think we've created, it's easier to have a toolkit of here are some of the category headings as this particular policy, which ones do we need to utilize to articulate this particular policy.

[00:27:37] So I agree. I thought there was going to be a little bit more discernment in this work, and it continues to be a bit more regimented than I thought we were communicating. Again, I have all these pages that I will go through and pull out exactly the stuff that we've been talking about.

[00:27:55] You know, as I look at the other HR policies to review in this meeting and think about the ones that we did a few meetings back, look about contractual employees and hourly employees, I would love if the superintendent and her staff could look at the whole bunch and say, does this all make sense? Are we talking about objectives for each of these policies?

[00:28:13] Or are we talking about requirements? Are we talking about procedures? like you are the experts, tell us what makes sense. And I think our philosophy part, I mean, in this policy in particular, the HR, I think a lot of it comes in the philosophy. The how probably won't be as much of the board's input.

[00:28:31] So what I would suggest for this policy is we update the policy as with Ms. Lady's suggestion about timely and appropriate feedback, change procedures to objectives, and remove responsibilities, and that could probably get us close enough for now.

[00:28:53] Mr. Fish? - I don't wanna leave the assumption out there that staff is not taking that kind of thoughtfulness to the policy. Dr. Reed, when you're looking at policies and you've got a group of policies that might feed off of each other, are you looking at ways to, when I say you, the collective you, right?

[00:29:12] Are you looking for ways to collapse things as possible or to refine things, generally speaking? - Yes, sir, we generally are, I think as a practical matter, staff is trying to match our work with your needs or desires as a board at this point.

[00:29:35] The regulations, right now we're in a situation where some regulations don't have a policy, some policies don't have a regulation, and that's been a historical long-term issue. So I think one of the things we thought this year, one of the, I think, really good ideas that we're working on trying to clean up everything so we're current and then i think we could go back and look at if we're going to consolidate what would that be right now i think the press is to really get current honestly and if we see i think we did sunset a couple policies and we've recommended i

[00:30:11] think there have been one or two along the line but um when there's a regulation attached we'd have to combine all of that and right now i think just getting things current and accurate probably is our number one priority for triaging mr. Frisch anything else no miss lady okay so my recommendation was that to adjust the philosophy to say the Fairfax County School Board affirms that employees benefit from timely and

[00:30:45] appropriate feedback we could just leave it at that for now even and then make the second Roman numeral four objectives and then get rid of responsibilities and that would get us farther along for now so what do others think mr fresh all of that i did think that the responsibility section made sense because it speaks to the

[00:31:24] collaborations necessary in the process without getting too in the weeds about different classifications of jobs and how they're evaluated which is spelled out in regulations okay i feel more passionately about philosophy so i'm cool with that um dr anderson and miss lady do you have any thoughts on that i agree because it is a responsibility of the person being evaluated and the evaluator i mean they're they're steps that both have to do and so they both have responsibilities in abiding by the code okay so keeping responsibilities in dr. ederson i agree with what miss lady just said but parts of me is feeling as if all of this is part of the

[00:32:03] objective i i it's not really identifying that um you know what my part is as the evaluator or your part is as the employee per se so it looks like he could all kind of be under the objective just to talk about that this is a two-step process that it involves both individuals but we all know we've been in schools law well not all of us but some of us have been in schools long enough to know that if the evaluator does not initiate nothing happens so and I don't think we're necessarily needing to spell this out here because that is spelled out in the

[00:32:42] regulation. Correct, Dr. Reed? Yes, ma'am. That's true. Again, it's not a hill for me to die on, but it just seems like... Let me say this. I do believe... It is still my turn. Let me just finish out my time. I just wonder, because if we look at the language that is right above it that speaks to performance assessments and the basis, what they are, we could also just pull that in to identify that evaluations are a collaborative process. Because typically when we have responsibilities we identify who's doing what and that shows up elsewhere here when we have you know

[00:33:22] with other policies that we'll see this does not identify who's doing what it is saying it is a shared task i think we could accomplish that under the umbrella of the objectives okay miss lady and then let's look to wrap this up no the only thing i was going to say and mr solomon can correct me But I do believe that, yes, the evaluator, I mean, if I'm under evaluation, I know in my PDE, I'm getting emails, I'm getting reminders, they're not directly coming from the evaluator, right?

[00:33:53] Yeah, so that's what I'm making clarification, Dr. Anderson, is that in our system, it's not just the evaluator who initiates everything, the system itself initiates it. I just wanted to put that clarification out there. So can we then, a bit of compromise, so remove the responsibility section but keep that sentence under objectives so that it still includes evaluations, evaluations are a collaborative endeavor, that will suffice?

[00:34:20] Okay. All right. So again, we're going to update the philosophy, we're going to change the procedures to objectives, we're going to have all those things up there, list the summary of change, and then include that evaluations are collaborative.

[00:34:36] without objection is this policy ready to be sent to the board let me look at the the governance committee send policy 4440 performance and assessments and evaluation as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption well mr fish will move and dr anderson roll second any comments comments no comments all those in favor i was going to do without objection but we are in favor all right 440 4440 goes to the board excellent okay all right next let's look at

[00:35:09] Grievance Procedure 4460. Dr. Anderson. Regulation that goes with this? Because I could not find one. 4460. There are two regulations that go with this. 4464 and 4465. That's what it was. I think I was looking for the exact number and that's why I couldn't find any. I'm sorry, can you repeat that again? 4460? Yes, ma'am. 4464 and 4465. Not to ask you, but I wonder why are they differently

[00:35:47] numbered. Do you have that answer, Janet? Ms. Brown? The answer to that is for $5. No, I'm just kidding. The $44.61 and $44.62 were the old ones that were related to the CBA. Until the CBA was ratified, $44.64 and $44.65 weren't able to take over as those. So those are the policies that are current, $44.64 and $44.65. This was just me missing that I didn't put the right one.

[00:36:18] so that regulation regulation yep 44 64 and 44 65 are the current ones it was just this is the old one before the CBA the new one is 44 64 and 40 I can clean it up right now no typically when we have because the way things work right If we renumber them, it's basically like saying the old ones never existed.

[00:36:50] We generally keep those numbers and we retire them so that if something were to happen, we would still have them. If legal needed them at some point, they would still have that it existed. So that's why we renumber them. So therefore, we have to give them different numbers because we can't replace the ones that currently or that formally existed.

[00:37:11] I will move on to kind of my statements. I thought this was a little bit more simple than what it's turning out to be. I just couldn't locate them, so I couldn't figure that out. Just a couple of things. Under purpose, I'd like to strike the words that there are, just so we end up with to establish grievance procedures for employees of the school division.

[00:37:37] So that's one. Under philosophy, again, being consistent with, we've been saying, the Fairfax County School Board, That would be what I offer there. And also, responsibilities, I also thought that that could be included as part of the philosophy because, again, we're not necessarily identifying what each of the individuals are doing because we have a procedure, I'm sorry, a regulation that is very clear.

[00:38:07] You will do this. You will do that. So that would be the third thing that I would like for consideration. Is that all, Dr. Anderson? So just a time check. We have 45 minutes to get through the remainder of the HR and the facilities policies.

[00:38:24] So I will say the philosophy is clunky. You should remove the word shall and the second time the school board and. I think the philosophy and the responsibilities could be flipped.

[00:38:42] I just, I don't know. are we okay with the philosophy statement and or the responsibilities moving that together i feel like the responsibility statement is more of a philosophy that we support employees right to discuss a complaint with the school system administration or to file a grievance i'm thinking of mr frisch's framing here um thoughts can you share that again what you just articulated well the responsibilities that seems to be more of a philosophy that we support an employee's right

[00:39:17] to discuss a complaint the philosophy is a clunky sentence and then we can edit that but i don't know that it adds value i'd be fine with making the responsibilities the philosophy but can we also take action on my um i'm sorry what was your who admit the three words under purpose that there are sure i agree with that objection to establish grievance procedures

[00:39:45] mr fish i assume we just did that without objection right we did the purpose without objection and the responsibilities one still yeah i think that um the sentence under responsibilities uh could be changed to the fairfax county school board of firms and employees write blah blah blah blah blah make that the philosophy the responsibility and then change um the number five to objectives

[00:40:19] and make number five uh the objectives but we're getting rid of philosophy so we get rid of a section I mean out of responsibilities right I don't so okay so the changes from the top would be under purpose to establish grievance procedures right okay I'll wait for you if you want to scroll to the top with me right okay and then the next one would be to remove yep remove the philosophy statement yep the Fairfax County School Board affirms and employees rights yep and then objectives

[00:40:58] and I think that would be it does that look good to everyone just one point of classification last time we met we had the sentence we used three different sentence starters it was Fairfax County board believes and there were two others that are escaping me shall recognize recognizes that we like confirm that because I think supports is fine I'm not a big fan of that's fine I had captured it I so captured it where are we forward so it wasn't that's what we're supposed to do that's what i thought too so you know i guess without objection we'll have the

[00:41:38] clerks make it we said the fairfax county school board shall adhere the fairfax county school board shall and the fairfax county school board recognizes those were the three things that this committee agreed on two weeks ago that was the understanding that that's what would be put in here as the philosophy yes the fairfax county school board recognizes and employees right okay

[00:42:12] Okay. Is this okay to go then? I think it's okay to go. If we do without objection that the committee send policy 4460 grievance procedure as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption. Are there any objections? I see no objections. So 4460 will go to the board. Nice. Okay. The next one is

[00:42:38] employee certification procedure 4520. 4520. I did not have anything substantive on this. Dr.

[00:42:55] thank you under purpose to establish the requirements for being a certified employee or I think it should be to establish the requirements for designation as a certified employee organization so that's one same comment about philosophy and responsibilities well let me pause here and ask is there a regulation that goes along with this policy? Yes. Listed in

[00:43:34] the minute. Yeah, I have that. Because again, I think I'm raising the same question about responsibility.

[00:43:52] If we have a regulation that's going to outline, you know, who's supposed to be doing what, I wonder if we can bring this all in under philosophy. Well, it's sounding like responsibility isn't really the best fit for the HR policies, right? Because it varies with different groups of employees.

[00:44:09] the ones that we've done so far so that's one thing i'm hearing the other thing is you know while i did not have any changes when i reviewed it earlier you know this is about collective bargaining and this was a really big deal that we brought this forward and so i'm wondering if we want to again put more in the philosophy about that um and maybe come back to it mr fresh can you repeat the three phrases that we've used for the philosophies yeah so they each start with the Fairfax County School Board shall adhere shall and recognizes and actually not the school board

[00:44:48] affirms its belief I have been read so shall adhere shall and recognizes okay I would like to suggest that the philosophy read that the Fairfax County School Board recognizes the importance of an orderly process for the certification of employee organizations the Fairfax County School Board recognizes the importance of an orderly process for the certification of employee

[00:45:21] organizations. Mr. Fish, would you want to say anything in there about the board's role to do the certification? I don't know that we have a role. We certify the units. Those are, I don't, I think these are two different things. This speaks to the non, so we have a group of employee organizations that still exist that are recognized. They are folks that folks that don't have their own uh units etc so we have specific things that speak to collective

[00:45:58] bargaining and then we have this uh this was something that was uh talked about a little bit when we talked about um disbanding the uh 45 10s right um because for some people there still existed a framework for them to continue meeting with staff while others did not because they were now covered by collective bargaining so not a view okay so this is still

[00:46:36] necessary to have something like this okay it would be good if it said you know this does not include the collective bargaining units I don't know again these are if it's fine it's fine I just well it's the board policy I think that might be helpful to communicate because they'll be future boards that don't have the opportunity to have all of this background it's already in here So I think that makes sense to add that kind of background.

[00:47:03] And I have a question. I thought 4510s were entirely disbanded. So these groups that are seeking certification, what is their platform for solution, for solutioning? So this is a unique situation.

[00:47:21] The groups, two of the groups in question here, comprise FEU. So FEU is a separate union, but FCFT and FEA are certified organizations, and so that's an example of two certified organizations that have come together to create a union, and in the absence of the ability to have these certified organizations, we would run afoul of the board's resolution identifying FEU as the exclusive representative.

[00:47:50] Right, so I think my question is still, has not yet been answered. What's the platform for communication? Because I believe we sunset 4510s, like those monthly meetings are not happening. We did set, so those are separate. The 4510 meeting, those were disbanded.

[00:48:09] This is a separate group for those certified organizations so that they can exist, FEA and FCFT, being able to exist to create FEU. So it's only for those organizations, not like the Hispanic associations or there were like 17.

[00:48:28] So those are separate. Those are not all certified, board-certified employee organizations. We have associations and organizations. So this is only applicable to FCFT and FEU. I'm sorry, FCFT and FEA.

[00:48:44] Those were two examples. I don't have the exhaustive, but those are at least two examples. Okay, I think I'm more confused. Mr. Fresh, did you have a comment? So it seems like we could use some more information about this one I'd like to set it aside because it should be distinct and it should be meaningful And if we're not even clear on who this is covering and how they even get certified I don't think we're ready to move this forward. So can we at least well, can we put it aside for now?

[00:49:15] I don't know if we'll get to it in 35 minutes, but Mr. Frisch, Miss Lady, do you agree to putting it aside for a moment and yeah, Miss Lady? I don't have a problem with it, as is, but I'm okay setting aside, too. Okay. All right. So let's just set that aside.

[00:49:32] Okay, 4630, payment of personnel supporting community use of facilities. I was okay with this one.

[00:49:49] So, Dr. Anderson, comments? My comment is about definition. Where's the definition? I don't know what we're defining there. Because typically, when we have definitions, we have a term and we have language.

[00:50:07] What is the term that is being defined here? well it says it defines personnel then I would just say let's write the word personnel and then identify that it's persons who are working in support of community use why are we defining personnel I guess that's what that leads me to and I wonder if this would be better to be rolled into the community use policy itself there was also that because there's like not much here but

[00:50:46] this speaks to payment and making I'm not against that I I just want this to make sense. If it's better rolled up into another policy that's going to be more robust, let's do that and sunset this. But I would actually lobby to just cancel the whole definition section because personnel is not a term that we would define. We define things that are a little bit more explicit and I just don't, well not even explicit, they're a little bit more challenging to understand the context and I don't think that meets that threshold here. But would this make

[00:51:23] sense rolled up in a larger policy mr. Solomon do you have thoughts don't know that this makes sense to roll up into another policy only because when we're talking about community use and the costs associated with it one of those costs is the payment of personnel one of those procedures that we have to follow is the payment of personnel who are working be it over time for staff members who are working above and beyond their 40 hours and or flexing their time, hourly staff members who need to be available to support that community use, all of those things.

[00:52:03] Dr. Ernstine, do you have further comments? I'll locate it. The regulation that cross-cuts this policy is likely the same regulations that talk about payment of staff, essentially, so salary guidelines and things of that nature.

[00:52:23] Okay. Okay. Ms. Lady? Yeah, I just would agree with Mr. Solomon. I would not roll this in. I think this is distinct, and I actually had to read it twice to grasp community use, community use, community use, because it is a differentiator than all the hours we need to be there for school activities, which is the majority of our time, but then there are community use and you have to have the proper custodians, other supervision, et cetera, so I think it should be a standalone policy.

[00:52:53] Okay, so how are we feeling about what's there now? We have, there was a suggestion about the definition. Is there a proposed change exactly then? Other thoughts about that to remove the definition of personnel?

[00:53:19] Okay, it seems like we're okay to do that. And to have the philosophy be consistent with the language that we just talked about. The board recognizes. Recognizes. Okay.

[00:53:41] So without objection, the government's committee shall send policy 4630, payment of personnel supporting community use of facilities as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption. Any objections? None noted. Okay. Way to go. All right. 4640, payment of salaries.

[00:54:09] Dr. Anderson. Just a couple of questions. I know this is speaking to just pay. Is there an assumption here regarding stipends and after school work? Because I know very often an example that I could think of is math and science Olympiads for which some of the schools are provided with funds to pay teachers to do that where would that fall that kind of payment well that kind of compensation we have regulations that specify salary supplements and stipends so that would be separate and distinct so there's

[00:54:46] a separate policy that speaks to that as well I will verify that but there are definitely separate regulations that speak to it I wonder if there's no separate policy and I don't know if one does not exist would it make sense to have it be here as well if one does not exist or even if it does exist I'd love to kind of evaluate to see does it make sense to separate so that's one and then you know just kind of some language issues under responsibilities clearly there's some things there for financial service and office of payroll management

[00:55:20] to be responsible it's just responsible for pay of personnel I is it is that the word that we're looking for because they're not you know necessarily paying them they're doing the logistics the administration to make ensure like checks are cut so i wanted to share that and then kind of going back to what i said earlier if there's a regulation with this that is super clear in terms of who's doing what should this responsibility be as we've talked about before

[00:55:56] which is the superintendent will ensure that this is happening it doesn't necessarily have to be these offices. So that's a wondering, Ms. Marin. And then I guess the last question, philosophy, do we really, okay, I don't know if my philosophy is that everybody be paid on a bike weekly or monthly basis. It's just so that they are paid. How does this fall into with what was started a couple of years ago, Dr. Reed, which is the, or maybe it doesn't, and tell me if I'm mixing apples

[00:56:35] and oranges where we were not able to give more frequent paychecks to certain groups of employees. Part of that was connected to the, I don't want to call it the ancient, but I think I can, HCM system, right?

[00:56:51] So as we're updating our HCM system and HR and business, we're going to have more flexibility to look at more flexible pay schedules. But my understanding is that it was very directly related to the software system. And Mr. Solomon maybe could comment further, but I suspect that that was really one of the big drivers.

[00:57:13] We weren't able to do that manually. That is exactly correct. It's our older systems that in the current state are not industry standard that we've had as a school division for about 30 years that make it difficult to achieve that. Just to add to that, I will say that as we were planning and preparing to implement the HCM, staff were surveyed and overwhelmingly shared that they want to keep the pay structure, monthly pay for contracted staff such as teachers and others, and then bi-weekly pay for our bi-weekly staff such as hourly employees the same.

[00:57:43] So staff were surveyed and given the option to provide input and ultimately opted to keep it the same. So it's not a matter of individual choice. It's whatever the collective is supporting, that's what we're doing. Is that accurate?

[00:57:58] - We're going to keep it the same. When you say individual choice-- - Could I decide as an employee that I wanna be paid monthly? Somebody else says I wanna be paid bi-weekly. - The reason I'm going to say no is because introducing that level of variation and not having a set structure for employees exponentially increases risk and opportunity for error.

[00:58:22] - Thank you, and I think I'm waiting for your answer on the regulation that goes with this, thank you. Mr. Frisch. So I had similarly striking the responsibilities. I think there's an assumption that the superintendent's responsible for effectuating the work of our policies.

[00:58:42] I don't think it needs to be spelled out here specifically, especially when a department could be retitled at some point. For the philosophy, I had written the Fairfax County School Board shall pay FCPS employees on a biweekly or monthly basis according to the established schedule.

[00:59:00] You can just delete up to the word pay. - And remove pay employees at the beginning that you wrote?

[00:59:19] - The regulation is 5610. - Yes, that's the one that goes with policy 4640.

[00:59:42] - So we still think it's a good idea to put in bi-weekly or monthly. - I didn't hear any reason not to. - Or just leave it out altogether or, yeah, yeah. Dr. Reed. - Thank you, Ms. Marin.

[00:59:57] I wonder if it's just on a regular basis. - How about this? - Because I think some people are paid at the end of a season, some people-- - The Fairfax County School Board shall appropriately compensate FCPS employees.

[01:00:15] - Appropriately is subjective on a regular schedule. - I do think we need to identify schedule, but I do agree that it doesn't have to be very specific for the reasons that were just stated.

[01:00:31] Some people are just once at the end of the season. I imagine that meets coaches. And I don't know how these stipends and those other things that I've raised are working. So I think putting in a regular schedule will give you a place to go to to identify what that schedule is.

[01:00:49] do you know if we have a policy on benefits a similar one likely because benefits falls under right now financial finance the 5,000 series yes ma'am got it okay okay so I would say to remove appropriately okay with that mr. fresh yep okay any other comments on these changes no so for so the philosophy has

[01:01:28] been updated to be the Fairfax County School Board shall compensate it's really its employees, according to the established schedules. We've heard of that. The responsibilities, we do cite the office, although we were going to get rid of that and keep it to the superintendent's jurisdiction.

[01:01:51] Okay, and then are we okay to leave the payment structure that explains monthly, biweekly, optional deductions? We also had seasonal procedures, but it doesn't mention the seasonal folks, Dr. Reed, So should we add something in there?

[01:02:21] Is this accurate still, I guess? I think I'll defer to Mr. Solomon, in part because those are categorized as hourly and not, you know, I think there may be a distinction here, but I'll ask Mr. Solomon to respond.

[01:02:46] Correct, and in looking, there are policies and regulations that speak specifically to salary supplements, completely separate from this, which is salary compensation for employees who earn a regular or receive a regular salary. So do you suggest we leave it in there as is?

[01:03:03] To answer your earlier question, I'm suggesting that salary supplements and stipends for coaches doesn't need to be included in this policy. It does not. Where is that included in here? The reason you don't see it in here is because there are separate policies and regulations that govern supplements.

[01:03:19] So are you confirming that leaving what's in here under payment of employees is accurate and appropriate? Yes, ma'am. Okay. So we've updated the philosophy.

[01:03:40] Shall we go ahead and pull that up? So the without objection, the government's committee send policy 4640, payment of salaries as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption. Any objections?

[01:03:56] No, okay, so 4640 goes to the board. Okay, we've got two more HR and then three facilities. 4920 workplace diversity. And colleagues, if your placards are up, then we're okay.

[01:04:13] Dr. Anderson? - I had a lot of questions on this. I feel like this should be related to a lot of other policies. And I also would like to understand how does this dovetail with our non-discrimination policy?

[01:04:35] - So this policy is specifically talking about and affirming the board's commitment to workforce diversity writ large, right? So those other policies related to making sure that employees are in an environment free from discrimination, harassment, and bullying, as an example, have completely different policies and regulations that govern it.

[01:04:54] this policy as I'm reading it is essentially saying the school board values a diverse adaptive and supported workforce okay thank you for that so given that under philosophy if we could just change to the stock language that would be helpful and I also feel like the rationale is part of the philosophy if not should be the philosophy so bringing that up I think would be important um and responsibilities again i'm teetering here um i'd be fine with it but i'd

[01:05:32] be fine if it was not there but the rationale i think needs to come up to philosophy i agree it seems like there's a lot of sections that are trying to say the same thing um anyone else

[01:05:46] with comments on this are you okay with combining some of these things um mr frisch so to confirm

[01:06:51] the philosophy sentence would be stricken and then the rationale section will be stricken and a lot of that language will come up and that language though is the fairfax county school board recognizes this is under the um philosophy recognizes that diversity not only promotes equal opportunity in employment but also results in the highest quality of education for students it'll be easier for you if you just copy the yeah okay so and then are we striking

[01:07:30] responsibilities as well i feel like responsibilities is not just responsibility the program managers well hold on the philosophy um is is not quite there um sure so it's the fairfax county school board recognizes that diversity not only promotes equal opportunity in employment, but also results in the highest quality of education for students.

[01:07:58] Is that it? I got that. Okay. And then responsibilities, we've talked about that, about being... We have a robust regulation on this, correct?

[01:08:17] Is there a regulation on this, Mr. Solomon? I'm looking for it now. Okay. Because if there's a regulation on this, then I don't think we need to have that responsibilities. And I would also say goal of the workforce diversity commitment, we could just change that to objectives.

[01:08:34] because that's been the language we've used thus far. I think that's a good suggestion to change goal of the workforce diversity commitment to objectives. Okay, so we have the change in philosophy. We are going to remove responsibilities.

[01:08:51] We'll change the last section to objectives and remove rationale. Dr. Anderson, yes, the regulation is 4920. Can you give us a quick, like, does it say who's doing what?

[01:09:08] Does it identify program managers or anybody else in terms of bringing this to life? Yes, it outlines the responsibilities of the division superintendent, human resources, program managers, et cetera. Then we certainly don't need it here. Thank you. Okay, so without objection, the Governance Committee will send Policy 4920, Workplace Diversity as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption.

[01:09:33] I see no objection. Okay, final HR Policy 4950, Sexual Harassment. Mr. Frisch, did you? 4950.

[01:09:50] Dr. Anderson. The purpose needs to be reorganized to state the policy. Again, I think we have been a little bit better about that, unless I haven't caught it elsewhere. Philosophy, I think, is fine here.

[01:10:10] The responsibility, I had a question, and this is how I'm reading it. The Title IX Office, in conjunction with the Office of Employee Relations, is responsible for implementation and monitoring of sexual harassment complaints. What are they implementing?

[01:10:25] They're not implementing sexual harassment complaints. Is it implementation of training? What are they implementing? I believe it's implementation of the policy and then monitoring of sexual harassment complaints.

[01:10:48] Then we need to add that because it looks like they're implementing sexual harassment complaints. And just some wonderings about Section 5. Should we retitle that to be more in alignment with what we've done so far?

[01:11:10] Which section, Dr. Anderson? Five, Prohibition of Sexual Harassment. And I don't have a good working title because objectives doesn't really sit here well. Yeah, the title of this policy is just unclear.

[01:11:28] It's a title about sexual harassment. Is it preventing it? Is it having a procedure for when it happens? Is it the prohibition says, you know, we want to avoid it, but then it also, the last sentence says that we will take appropriate action when complaints are received.

[01:11:47] So maybe the purpose itself needs to be outlined first. Is the purpose is to establish a procedure, or it's to denounce sexual harassment, or is it both? Because the statement doesn't lead us anywhere. I'm sorry, the purpose doesn't lead us anywhere.

[01:12:06] I would recommend that. So it sounds like this is going to need a little more work, I think. Not a lot more. And I do want to try and we have those three facilities policies left. So, yeah, I'd like to say let's come back to this one, please, just given the time, see if we can get through our facilities ones.

[01:12:35] And then because it's unclear if this policy is about a statement saying we do not tolerate sexual harassment and or is it a policy saying that we are going to have a process for if it occurs, it will be addressed. Right. Those are really the two distinct things.

[01:12:52] Okay. Return with clarification of whether it's about preventing it. Okay, all right, so 4950 is going to remain for review. Okay, facilities policies, we've got three.

[01:13:14] Maintenance of physical facilities, 8560, we had asked that that go back to make it more encompassing using that phrase public school facility assets. We had value engineering, and then we had wireless telecommunications facilities.

[01:13:30] So why don't we go to maintenance of physical facilities since we've already had a bite at that apple. So 85/60, 85/60. Any comments to kick us off?

[01:13:50] Mr. Frisch. - For the philosophy, the Fairfax County School Board recognizes that school buildings, grounds, and equipment should be preserved in an optimum condition by planned and orderly methods.

[01:14:09] For the revisions elsewhere, inclined to not need a responsibility section because it is driven by the superintendent and regulations and it does depend on what it is that's being done right there are things that are the responsibility of the school to request

[01:14:34] there are things that are done from central office so there's that it could be expectations okay so we clear what needs to be recognized okay is there

[01:15:11] anything else to be captured Mr. Frisch I think this covers everything that we talked about okay any other comments very quickly I agree with philosophy comments is expectations going to be a new a new term that we're introducing to the bank or is there any space where this could work under either procedures

[01:15:43] or objectives which section you're looking to replace there's philosophy responsibility for maintenance probably just responsibilities would be more in line so making it responsibilities that's the standard one yeah okay all right okay so we're good with these changes and we reviewed it quite a bit

[01:16:18] last time so without objection the government's committee send policy 80 560 885 60 maintenance of facility physical facilities as discussed and revised to the full board for adoption don't see any objections so 85 60 goes

[01:16:39] okay value engineering 82 75 do that one 82 75 okay you have a question about that one the heat is kicking back in again so okay now we're determined to be warm your feet are frozen oh boy okay I can't find my value engineering page one

[01:17:14] of my wonderings here regarding value engineering and again not knowing what the regulation is that goes with this because I'm just looking back on the debacle that was value engineering application at Falls Church High School where this project was presented and then went back and value engineered and pieces were taken out and the presented project was already it resonated and people were married to it they wedded it and it became an issue should we be speaking as to the state like I again I don't know if this lives

[01:17:54] here because I have no idea what regulation looks like but I'd like to ask the question in terms of when is value engineering going to enter the the process is it going to be done before anything is introduced to the community because after is disastrous yes ma'am I understand and agree mr.

[01:18:19] Gordon, do you have a sense on the value engineering timing? So the answer is it could be. I think in best case scenario, if we know that you have a bid bust or a project that doesn't come within expectations for, you know, costing, then yes, you do it prior, but you're going through a design process.

[01:18:36] Typically, value engineering occurs. You go through a design process, you bid the project out under the old procurement method, right, design, bid, build. You bid the project, and you have a bid bust, and you have to go back to value engineering or something out to make the project a wordable project. So you're saying it could happen before and after?

[01:18:54] Yeah, depending on what you know about the project at the time. Now that we're going towards a CM at risk where you bring in an owner's agent rep in that helps you with the development of the construction documents in the project, you eliminate some risk of having a cost overrun.

[01:19:15] And so you would know more on the front end before you fully present. So I think now that we're heading down with 8240 with a procurement method of seeing them at risk, I think we'll know more on the front end than we have in the past. But it doesn't remove the risk entirely, or not the risk, the potential to have to require value engineering after...

[01:19:39] That's correct. Okay. So given that, I'd like to make sure that we are super clear here because our policies, it's a communication to the public as well as directives to the superintendent what happened is false church is nobody knew that this would happen after the fact so we have to find some way to articulate the language here that this is in various stages of the process where could that live because our public is not going to look up the regulations but they're going to look up the

[01:20:17] policies i think the implementation and i don't know if it's highlighted because we're changing the title term or not but indicates that will that really every single construction project needs to be value engineered as a standard practice and my understanding is that's been there period i think the question you're posing is what is the timing of that and um i think

[01:20:52] wouldn't that be part of the bid process too eric um but maybe some clarity around once the projects have been provided the community unless there's some huge compelling reason we would want to you know keep our commitment so I'm just curious about your thoughts on that it for sure ma'am so it's you know two parts if you're you know see at my risk that we're currently go through with a new procurement method I think we'll know earlier on if there's a issue with the cost and we have to take something out we also have a component where through our CIP process where we over the last year or so two years where we're actually

[01:21:32] going out to the community and giving updates via the project on the front end is something that's uh i think we've gotten better at over the last year and a half two years where we're communicating with the community on the front end uh during and throughout the construction process i'm sorry i just want to be a little clearer because we saw the disaster that was when a project was presented to the false search community and then they went back and value engineered and components were taken out people were very upset to say the least if this is going to be something that is likely to

[01:22:06] happen even if the likelihood of that is very low we need to communicate that here clearly because i think what you're articulating is not quite matching what mr gordon is saying which is the risk is going to be lowered but it could still happen we just need to say this to individuals because it came across as a very as a big surprise and people felt some kind of way about it so where in here can we say that value engineering could be occurring at any stage it looks like col was drafting something because he's never heard of value engineering either well and i think you're

[01:22:42] both correct right we had covid we had cost escalation and budget concerns so but i'm sure mr frisch i can feel it has the answer well he raised his hand so that was the hint mr fresh pardon me under implementation i would suggest that it read the division superintendent shall establish regulations and procedures requiring that all school construction projects be value engineered as standard practice and that value engineered outcomes remain aligned with community expectations wherever possible with the community engaged and informed throughout the process

[01:23:18] you want me to read it faster okay that's exactly what i was just thinking is my reference point all right sure i'll also reread it just so people have it the only thing i think it's missing is they'll be informed throughout the process which is good but they have to be forewarned that it could happen at any point in the process can we add some language that's a little bit more explicit

[01:23:49] there just a moment um so despite the valiant efforts of mr frisch to edit on the fly do we

[01:24:41] want to come back to this one because we're also wondering if there are changes that could be put into whatever policy talks about the engagement process around renovations because we do talk about that but also it's 5 30 and i want to leave us time for the ai conversation so would we be okay with um capturing mr frish's recommendation which have we done that mr frish not yet because of dr anderson's comment oh well at least the part of it but then there's a second part too

[01:25:14] so um okay so let's pause on the 82 8275 value engineering and let's also come back to 8335 wireless telecommunication facilities. If anyone did have comments about 8335, if you could, you want to send them to me, I'll shepherd them so that we can get that policy closer to where it needs to be next time. Okay. Does anyone want to take a break? Stand up real quick. I want to stand up and stretch. Okay. Are we ready to innovate? All right. So we

[01:25:53] are going to do something that we've never done before, which is create a policy for which there is no template so we're gonna start with the discussion today in talking about you know first of all we have some lessons that we could we could look to we've done the comprehensive boundary policy change the grading policy so we know about you know how we want to engage and the kinds of things that we want to be you know doing we might have thoughts about the engagement process how do we want to engage the board the public but also a lot of us are

[01:26:30] coming to AI with different experiences and so thinking about what information that we want to know more about as a board as individuals you know we have our meetings planned from now through May 19th and so if we want to get something to the board to approve you know May 19th is that last scheduled committee date we could certainly add meetings but so here is meant to be thinking about how we've approached large policies before and how we want to do that as a committee engaging the board engaging the public providing in this conversation some direction to the superintendent to say we need more

[01:27:09] information about you know XYZ again this could be reflective of past policy creation work or knowing that this is a new area that we're still learning about we can talk amongst ourselves around the categories we've heard lots of different things you know workforce development data security lots of you know we could throw out those buckets and start to talk about what would we want to see a policy include what does the board need to understand to develop a strong policy so again our superintendent has put some work out there but now this is the time to really say you know in order to do this policy

[01:27:48] we really need to know you know this or that here from an expert what should we even be doing for the next month as we prepare for february 17th meeting and then again what is it that we're even looking to implement in the new school year what about this policy is going to come through in students and staff experience in time for the school year yeah dr mr fish did you have your placard up so i appreciate the want to be fulsome in our considerations here um all of

[01:28:24] the mentioned previous efforts though started with the draft do we have a draft policy of any kind for it? We are going to start with a conversation rather than start with something. We want to start with something of our own creation. That's fine. From the ground. We're using the royal we for all of us. Sure. Well, I want to start with the conversation with where you shared a draft from somebody. I was given a draft that I didn't realize I even had. I don't know how I even came to have it. And I haven't looked at it because I think it's important for us to come with this with a fresh mindset because it's the board's policy and we only get to do this

[01:29:03] one time with all due respect we can't say this is the board's policy and then put high expectations on what the superintendent is supposed to think about in bringing it to us at every single one of these meetings if it's the board's policy it's always the board's policy and we shouldn't be asking the superintendent to go out and do work for us i don't think that's where we want to end up as a board because we get tremendous value out of the superintendent's work to help develop suggestions that we then mall and kick the tires on i would appreciate it if we were at least forwarded what was shared with you sure i honestly do not know how i i was looking in my google drive

[01:29:40] and it came there so i really don't know and i said to the superintendent the governance committee needs to consider a lot of different perspectives and i think we deserve the opportunity to just talk a little bit before going right to the superintendent's recommendations so i'm happy to to send it to you I wanted to give us the chance that we can't do this fresh after tonight so yeah dr. Anderson I know when we had the grading policy we kind of went around and around and around with the draft that was in front of us and at some point we kind of paused it's like what is it that you're

[01:30:18] looking for this to have and that was a very helpful exercise for me particularly same thing with the boundary policy there was a not and I wasn't even on governance but that was how I recall the first meeting going which is what are the big buckets that we want to have included in here and those big buckets were shared and it went on to just inform the policy so I think there's some value to just kind of thinking out loud a little bit because what I think it avoided is missing the mark entirely because when we're writing about and this is brand new so we don't have you know anything per se to kind of already talk about or

[01:30:57] to think about but sending the superintendent on a wild goose chase is never a good use of time so even a very preliminary conversation in terms of these are the things that we're thinking about these are the things that our constituents are thinking about I think it will be very helpful to kind of at least have that that data dump for a lack of better words just to help with a draft that we could look at at our next meeting so I appreciate the opportunity This lady?

[01:31:30] Yeah, I too, because I've asked before to Gautam, do we have a draft? And I was told we were, so I was surprised not to have it as part of this discussion. So I'm not sure I understand.

[01:31:50] I mean, here's the thing. Like, we have an IT department who has a specific expertise, just like we have an IS department. Instructional services has an expertise. So I guess I'm not sure why we wouldn't let them help guide the work. I'm interested in the conversation, you know.

[01:32:08] I think we can do that. But I guess I just want to reiterate what my colleague shared, which is that, yeah, I would like to take a look at whatever's been drafted. Because I'm sure that even though maybe it's a shell, it's being drafted by someone who's immersed in this every day, all day, and I'm not.

[01:32:27] So just, you know, welcome the conversation, too, but I'd like to see the draft. So it is a bit disappointing that my attempt to be innovative has been grounded. I think we all come to the AI work with biases.

[01:32:43] We all have it. And what I've heard, while our tech staff may have expertise, our families also have lived experiences that they've been sharing. And so I thought it would be valuable to come with more of not having expectations for what should be in the policy and reflect on what we've been hearing, which i don't even want to you know color the conversation but there are different opinions and the superintendent has one opinion and backed by a lot of expertise but our community also has

[01:33:18] opinions and feelings and so i thought it would be a good idea to approach it in a more pure way so um yeah dr anderson i i i'd like to play because i i'd like to just jump in because we We could talk about the talk, or we could just start to talk, because it is 640.

[01:33:42] I'm sorry, 540. I know one of the things that has come up quite a bit that I was thinking about as we were listening to parents, that seems to be a huge piece. So I'm hoping that the policy can be reflective of privacy issues, safeguarding information.

[01:34:01] And I don't know who's taking notes for us on this. Jared, are you taking notes for the superintendent? Okay. And is getting into AI optional for students? Like, can I, as a parent, opt out of that?

[01:34:18] So I think those would be important things to articulate, as well as, again, this is not my space, but I am learning a lot, and I have read a lot, and I need to know more. We need a very robust definition segment.

[01:34:34] I think you've said it yourself, Dr. Reed, that when people say AI, we may not be working with the same definitions and what does it mean to be concerned about large language models what does it mean like what how is that the chat gpt that we have different from the public chat gpt so i would love for the definition section to really highlight what is it that we're looking for here um and of course the responsibility section this is a space where there's a lot of

[01:35:06] different parts some of it is Gotham's department where it's just the logistics and much I think much of it is going to be with the instructional department like how is this going to get to kids I would love for us to be really explicit about our instructional plan how are we going to boost up our digital literacy because what we've had so far, you know, it has served our purpose of physical tools, but I don't know if it is as clear as it needs to be for the tools that will be

[01:35:45] available with AI. Yeah, and also what kinds of AI are we going to be using? What kinds of AI are we not going to be using? What is the expectation of teachers? Because right now we're in the space, and Dr. Reed, correct me if I'm wrong, where teachers are opting into the pilot?

[01:36:09] So there are a number of different activities currently occurring. As I shared with Ms. Marin earlier today, our Lighthouse Schools Project was one of our, it's now, I believe, we're three years into that, and that's our partnership with ISTE and ASCD.

[01:36:28] And one of the, obviously, it's to be a front-facing innovation lab, right, incubating new ideas. So the Lighthouse schools were opt-in for those schools and staff within those schools.

[01:36:46] There are also, if you're referring to the current OpenAI chat GPT for educators, that's also opt-in. And we did meet with all of our T-specs and SBITs, our school-based technology instructional and technical staff, so they can also be resources.

[01:37:07] And we'll be meeting with principals as well on that topic. But it's currently opt-in because it's in the adult learning space exclusively, the OpenAI Chat GPT pilot. The Lighthouse School's work is something, like I said, that's been going on now for three years.

[01:37:24] Sure. So that's another piece that I think we could have some robust language around. Where we are currently is not necessarily where we'll be in the future. So this has to be a policy that speaks to kind of that timeline, where do we want to be and how we get there, whether it's opt-in this year, mandatory next year, that's the regulation work.

[01:37:47] But I think those are the pieces that I'd like to see. And also a communication and community engagement component, I think, would be important. What can the community expect from this? How are we going to bring them along as well?

[01:38:02] Because there's an education that I think is important there. And clearly, when we had the December meeting where person after person who came to speak to us spoke about AI, How do we ensure that those kinds of concerns are embedded in here and addressed?

[01:38:23] So I'll pause here and hear from others, especially since my time is up. - Thank you, Mr. Prisch. - Excuse me, a couple of things I think about. On the data security front, it'll be good to know how our current data policies and trust policies, which are, trust policy rather, which are agnostic to the technology, it's specific to the data security.

[01:38:47] would play here I also think that something you know looking at how our professional development policies might come into play here I think the resulting policy should be platform agnostic and not lean too specifically into the technology aside from definitions otherwise we're going to be constantly redoing this policy to keep up with the technology which is something that congress has grappled with in terms of its tech policy I think there are things that

[01:39:24] naturally become thoughts about our work here that don't necessarily belong in policy but do belong maybe in a follow-on that is proposed along with the policy in other words like a note on implementation right and that could include what kind of engagement we're expecting from the community you know how the community is informed of this rollout, etc. So that's my initial thinking. I appreciate the

[01:39:54] the want to pursue it in a more creative fashion. Some of us just benefit from, you know, benefit from having something to spark our thinking. And the royal me, one of us may have told community members that the typical process is that we get a draft of the policy and so I'd be looking forward to that and I don't have anything to share them from this meeting even though I told them that

[01:40:30] that's typically what happens so that's my advocacy there was that I was expecting to be able to provide something to members in the community have it shared an interest and it also helps ground my thinking and the types of things that we should be thinking about I think there's a lot to this conversation that does not belong in policy and you know I think it's essential that we have guardrails for students guardrails for staff how that impacts the SR&R and other aspects of the school division I think needs to be

[01:41:04] discussed as well there's been a question about costs you know so making that when we are communicating with people they're aware that we have specific policies about the types of contracts that the board has to review and that there can't be some secret thing where oh it was almost nothing at first but because it had you know different provisions in the contract eventually it went over the price that the board has to approve and the board didn't get notified that's all covered we've already thought about those types of things in the past so this is some

[01:41:41] some initial thinking. There's a lot of policies I'd like to drag into this conversation that are tertiarily related. But that's my initial thoughts. Cool. Ms. Lady. Yeah, thank you. So I guess when you think about buckets, obviously a major bucket is teaching and learning.

[01:42:02] I think about, I'm also, to back up a second, I'm a less is more person, right? Because, you know regulations detail things um and policy sort of you know creates the guard wheels and the framework so uh one particular bucket could be like data privacy security and ethics um and then this concept of like ai for all which would mean like all students all staff and families like a

[01:42:35] three-tiered approach to understanding um obviously academic integrity and how we redefine our work another area that I think about a lot is instructional differentiation and personalization but I think that people need to understand that the need for the human in the loop for example this would never replace teachers we will always have highly qualified teachers who are going to instruct our students but these are people who are going to be trained to leverage technology

[01:43:14] work smarter but differentiate the other buckets I've talked about I think that like high stakes decisions like obviously grading or the writing of IEP goals things like that you know you could use AI for data collection you could use AI to sort of augment and help you but ultimately those are human decisions right like you know humans write IEP goals and adopt them humans are going to you know do the grading and you know disciplinary recommendations etc and then obviously this has been outlined a lot of articles but you know the other human element of this is the time it saves

[01:43:51] teachers um you know a tremendous amount of our teachers are are utilizing teachers pay teachers and i i think that what we're doing at fairfax is which is not you know um they're they're finding that as a means of working smarter and not harder because they're in essence using their own funding to purchase materials that are produced by other people but that's not what should be taking place in our collaborative learning teams right like what we've the way I understand the work that we're embarking on in this county is that we're creating the framework and the guardrails that

[01:44:29] we're all going to operate within that all teachers are going to operate within and so as to not have teachers doing those things on their own and again when it first came out I certainly understood it because of the time it takes to um you know lesson plan and and and also it's like run out of ways to innovate yourself as a teacher so sometimes you're tapping into that because you're you've got an idea but you don't have to flesh it out you know i see ai's helping support

[01:44:58] that so i'm out of time so i have a few thoughts and um just you know from miss lady you know hearing as usual your expertise on how teachers work and how learning happens you know that's something that I don't have as intimately, and so I just wonder, is that something that, you know, we all should learn more about so we could really see, like, what does it look like to transform a teacher's work and save their time? Like, I can envision what it looks like on an IEP, you know, to do that, but not maybe the collaborative learning team. So I just wonder, like, how much

[01:45:34] do we need to know about what's happening now and where it could go so that we can see that vision? Some of the thoughts, actually, it's interesting, the comment about the money. So, you know, our board has a policy that we review contracts of half a million dollars and more.

[01:45:52] But we don't have any policy about reviewing partnerships with entities that are valued at that or billion or billions of dollars. And we currently do already have such partnerships. And the board didn't have a role in reviewing the agreements or even knowing it.

[01:46:09] And so I think the policy has to have something about, you know, recognizing that business is business, technology is business, and, you know, they have some great, great things, but our mission is to educate kids, and that's not the mission of business.

[01:46:25] And so we can partner, but we have to, I think, acknowledge the risks, and I think the board does have a role in reviewing, you know, something, so I'd like reviewing partnerships of a certain size and being briefed on them. was thinking about like what does it mean to lead in this area and maybe leading in this area isn't necessarily doing all the things first to make it happen in classrooms it's thinking about kids health and safety because what I hear a lot and when I looked at the Brookings report that I shared with you all last week it's a big warning bell about the danger to children especially

[01:47:04] with generative AI and I want to learn more about that and I haven't heard that talked about a lot so far in public meetings it's been about yes we want to be human-centered but I think it's important to perhaps to put in the policy this is a slide from our October 7th work session where there are three types of AI and conversations and ed conversations future readiness of students so that students know how to you know how to use this the tools with AI in them that maybe we don't even recognize that the AI is in there and And then there's the AI tools to support adults.

[01:47:38] And so I'm most comfortable talking about the AI tools to support adults because I feel like we can have sort of the most, I don't want to say control, but influence. We can require sort of professional development. We can check for quality control because I am concerned about if people are just developing their own things, well, who is checking to make sure that it's equitable and anti-racist and normed with state standards even.

[01:48:06] I'd like to know more about the role of professionals, like, and do we have an advisory committee? Maybe the board needs to have, you know, people advising us, not just technology professionals, but other professionals in different areas.

[01:48:22] So I'll pause there, and let's keep the conversation going. Dr. Anderson. Yes, just very quickly, Dr. Reed and Mr. Smith. I wonder if this is one of these policies that the regulations should be evolving along with because I remember when we used to have our meetings back here when I first got on the board, policies and regulations, they kind of worked in tandem.

[01:48:48] It's just a wondering. You don't have to answer it right now, but I think it kind of makes sense for us to know if it's not here, then it lives here because as I've asked Mr. Solomon today, what do we have in the regulations, then we don't need to reinvent the wheel in the policy. That's been very helpful. This could be one of those spaces if you had the bandwidth to help develop the regulation as we go along. It's been informative when we've had that opportunity. Do I have some

[01:49:20] other thoughts? I think I gave the residency. I think I'll stop here. Ms. Leidy. Yeah, I was looking for the email that Dr. Reed sent.

[01:49:37] I read the Brookings article that you sent to me, and I didn't. I actually thought we were aligned with it. So it's interesting we can both read the same thing but come out with different impressions, right? I mean, I think the concerning thing is the safety, given the percentage of our kids that are currently using AI as a companion, and their parents are not aware of it.

[01:49:59] Like, I don't think our parents understand that. So part of the work we're doing will be to create, I think, Dr. Reed, some kind of parent hub or parent community, a way to teach parents around AI safety, because, you know, the second you hand a child this, which they all have done, they're going anywhere in the world without a parent's supervision if they don't know how to put things on their phone.

[01:50:23] So as a former school counselor and a counselor at heart, it's essential that we teach about safety around AI and that piece of it. And that was noted in the article, is the number of people. But Dr. Reed, I think it was Friday that you sent us the study that had some other data in that.

[01:50:41] I can't find that particular one, and I didn't get through it. It's very meaty, and there's a lot of information in there. But I appreciate that you did send that. So, you know, again, I think we all have the same concerns.

[01:50:57] And I think that education is essential for everyone, parents, our students, our support folks, our teachers. But if we don't get moving, with every day we don't have a policy, with every day we're not trying to teach parents, we're putting more kids in jeopardy because they're accessing this with no supervision, no guardrails.

[01:51:28] So we've got to get, I believe we have an obligation to do good by our students and teach them responsibility. Um, I think another benefit to the, you know, us not having cell phones in schools is that our kids are actually learning to look at one another and engage in conversations. Um, they're, they're learning to be social and in ways that, that went, you know, underground, if you will, um, as a result of being isolated during COVID and then coming out of COVID and then being masked and then being comfortable being unmasked. I mean, we had lots of kids continue to wear masks just because they were, they'd rather not show their face out of insecurity than

[01:52:06] maybe for a health risk. But we need our kids to develop self-esteem, strength of character, all the things that make them strong humans emotionally, but we also need them to learn how to engage with one another. And I do think we've turned the corner on that, certainly with our cell phone policies this year. But we've got work to do, so I appreciate the conversation, and there definitely are some buckets that we need to look at. Thank you, Mr. Fresh.

[01:52:36] Ms. Lady's comment about families made me think of something that I share regularly in my newsletters, at least I did when we were initially considering the cell phone policy, about steps that parents can take immediately, right, to control their kids' cell phones. You know, how do you disable all of the features of the phone except for texting a parent during school hours, right?

[01:52:59] Like, it's left on the school division to police that, even though every parent who provides their kid with a phone has the ability to rein it in themselves. And so I do wonder as part of this, and it doesn't necessarily have to be in the policy, but one thing I'd like us to think about is how do we help fill the void of information about this, not just about what we're doing in FCPS, but, you know, what they need to know about their kids' use of AI.

[01:53:31] Kids are using it. We know that. Adults are using it, too. Even long before we partnered with OpenAI, students were using AI and faculty were using AI, maybe not in a structured or condoned fashion, but it's happening.

[01:53:48] It's happening in every industry. So how do we demystify what's happening, what the rules are in FCPS once we have a policy and whatnot, and ensure that parents know that they have a role in this too? because there's only so much we can do, especially on the companion part during school hours.

[01:54:14] That leaves a heck of a lot of time for talking to a companion outside of school when potentially less policing is happening with their devices. So I'd like to noodle on how we might be able to assist families with more information.

[01:54:34] - Thanks, so, oh, is it six o'clock? Okay, I'll just finish up then with the second last turn. So as I've thought about this, and I've thought about cell phones and our approach to rein that in, and I think about violence and bullying, it really all comes down to the same thing, which is the pedagogy that is used in schools.

[01:54:59] How do we teach kids? How do we teach kids to think critically? How do we teach them to have social-emotional resilience? I don't see this as any different. And so we need to talk about the things that make kids strong enough and sharp enough to make good decisions about AI and choosing it. But like cell phones, the technology is designed to be enticing and to keep you coming back for more. And children also have, their brains are developing differently. I'm actually wondering what the effect of AI is on literacy. I sat with

[01:55:35] my son at his 504 meeting, and we're going over his accommodations for dyslexia, and one of them is predictive text. Well, does that help someone with dyslexia or not? Because we moved away from that style of reading, of, you know, suggesting things, you know, there's no research yet. And maybe he'll be okay, because he's 12 and a half, and he's overcome a lot of the dyslexic barriers.

[01:55:59] But what a first grader who's just learning to read. So I would rather see us talking about how, how are we ensuring that the level of what our adults are using is consistent and of high quality. And everything that I've witnessed since August, since I first read something in an infogram, it has been very optional. And this is when Dr. Reed says, are we a system of schools or a school system? And when I think again about literacy and how on one pyramid I had one school with 12 teachers trained in Orton-Gillingham and one school that had zero trained teachers,

[01:56:35] how are we going to ensure that the quality of what is being used is high? And so I think, you know also but the professional development is optional and it's also the professional development provided in early January was by a company it was by open AI so what are we you know what do we expect our school division how do we marry the business part of it with what we know is pedagogically and developmentally appropriate for children and then add on trauma English language learner disability none of that has we don't know those answers yet so

[01:57:14] I'm not saying sit and wait but I think you know focusing on the adults is is really the way to go and I think it needs to be much clearer it's just been too much information coming in spurts and fits and starts and I'd really like to see the superintendent and board working on this together so however the policy can speak to that work and again I think it comes to us approving things that's the way we get things in front of us so i will leave it at that miss lady did you want another comment well i just want to say that in terms of you know we're a huge school system right so i'm thinking back to you know when we were first getting a student information system that

[01:57:52] was electronic right um i remember i forget maybe it was cis that woodson was one of the schools that piloted it right because one of the reasons that you do this and you and you it's choice to opt in because it's extra work is you're trying to determine it's sort of two steps forward one step back right like if they rolled out sis to the whole county the way that it was packaged it would have been a colossal train wreck and so i am very supportive of the idea of piloting things because it's it's it's a learning by doing but it's also protective because it's it's you know

[01:58:28] We want to make sure we understand with fidelity how this, when implemented correctly, all boats rise, right? Like all students are accessing learning and all those things are taking place. So I think there's a timeline every time we engage in these things.

[01:58:46] It's just like piloting a course. I mean, McLean High School piloted AP pre-calculus in a vacuum and then had high scores in the country. And now every school has that. So I think that part of this will always be continued. I don't ever want to see us roll something out to 200 schools like this.

[01:59:06] That's just my hesitancy. I think that would be reckless of us. I think we have to dip our toe in things and let certain people who are early adopters perhaps work with it and provide feedback to IT, feedback to IS, feedback based on interactions with families, concerns.

[01:59:23] I think we grow from that. Okay, Mr. Frisch, you want to wrap it up and know we're done? okay so let's be clear on our next step thanks for oh sorry thanks for the few extra minutes okay so for February February 17th is our next meeting and let me just look here so we'll come back to the four policies that we touched on today but didn't get through we'll continue with the AI policy and you know we can obviously Dr. Reed please send your draft out but also we'll gather the

[02:00:00] notes so that we can it can continue to inform well I don't know if you want to send the draft out now or if you want to reflect on it given what we've just provided with the further you know thoughts and directions if that's all you know that is all captured in your policy but can we be clear about that and what we want then I want to make sure that we're proceeding in a way that everybody wants to. So for the AI policy, do we want to have the superintendent consider what we shared today, revise her draft, and send it to us, you know, as soon as possible? Do you want to see

[02:00:34] it now? What are your preferences, Ms. Lady and Mr. Fresh, since you're here? Yes, and I think both are fine. Yeah, and I think that, you know, again, I appreciate the exercise today, and I think that whatever notes we have i mean if they're archived and shared with dr reed and staff maybe they look at their draft and then maybe incorporate some of the dialogue and then you know share a draft i don't know just a thought okay so we will very soon after today receive everyone will receive

[02:01:13] the draft so dr reed will send it to the committee please all of us um and we can get you the notes from today. Then we also have a few other things, policies that are due on some other items and back to the groups of policies that we identified way back that could be tweaked and some that could require more. So there's really no shortage of looking at this. But the focus is the AI policy and that's what we'll start with the next meeting to really start hammering it. But I hope that we can keep talking, you know, among we board members to figure out, you know, more of what we even want

[02:01:50] that February 17th conversation to look like just you know what kind of questions we might have and is there information we want to get and look into more so I will work with the clerk team to get all of our materials together and I do have copies of a few of the Brookings pieces including an eight-page handout that they had as well so yes doctors I'm sorry if I missed this but you may have covered it but if not here's my question I remember when the boundary work just started one of the things that the chair of the governance committee at the time tasked the group with is to go reach out to other board members just to preliminarily

[02:02:29] get some feedback are you looking for us to engage in a similar activity it sounds like a nice collaborative idea I think it's always encouraged well why don't we let it simmer a little bit and then excuse me we'll get the draft out we can certainly divvy up I mean we thankfully haven't a whole another month

[02:03:06] before the next governance committee meeting this was a bit hectic since we just had one two weeks ago so um yeah all right well with that at 608 the Governance Committee is adjourned

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Coraggio Consulting · aguyonx.com