Coraggio Consulting
Loudoun County School Board, Performance Monitoring Committee, Tuesday, December 17, 2024

Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2024
Place: Loudoun County Public Schools / School Board meeting (see BoardDocs / LCPS-TV)
Length: 1h 20m (video)
Official meeting video (Vimeo / LCPS-TV): https://player.vimeo.com/video/1040251503?rel=0
BoardDocs (School Board): https://go.boarddocs.com/vsba/loudoun/Board.nsf/Public

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 2026-10-20. Timestamps are [HH:MM:SS] into the meeting video.

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

[00:00:00] - Good evening everyone, welcome. I'd like to call to order this December 17th meeting of the Performance Monitoring Committee. My name is Arvin Estreffi and I'm joined by Chair Mansfield and Ms. Chernoff. I would like to start off and just ask one more time if we have any public comment for this evening.

[00:00:22] Seeing none, we'll move on to the approval of the meeting minutes. I'll entertain a motion to approve the meeting minutes. - So moved. - Motion has been made by Ms. Chernoff to approve the meeting minutes. Do I have a second?

[00:00:38] - Second. - Seconded by Chair Mansfield. Is there any discussion? Seeing none, we'll take it to a vote. All those in favor to approve the meeting minutes say aye. - Aye. - Aye. - That motion will pass unanimously.

[00:00:54] The meeting minutes have been approved. We'll move on to the information items for this evening. First one is 4.01 Performance Monitoring Committee Roadmap presented by Dr. Ellis. - Thank you, Chair Estreffi. So this evening our first item is the Performance Monitoring Committee Roadmap you have reviewed the past two meetings and we would like to share that we have updated this roadmap based on the feedback that you gave us at the last meeting including focusing on goal one of the strategic plan and weaving goal

[00:01:33] one throughout the months that follow we've also added communication and trust with the board we'll be talking about that this evening and I know that all of you were interested in talking about flexible staffing and school improvement and we'll bring we will be bringing that to you in January so I won't read the whole thing to you but just wanted to make sure you all saw this and had the opportunity to provide any additional feedback we won't be bringing this to you every month but we did make some pretty significant revisions and wanted to share it one last time thank you very much for members any discussion

[00:02:12] I just wanted to thank you for hearing us, and I was a little bit on the fence about dropping the other goals, but after seeing this trajectory, this is much more, I think, in line with what we definitely want to focus on, and so now I'm totally sold, so it looks like a good plan.

[00:02:31] Thank you. Any other discussion before we move on? Seeing none, we'll move on to item 4.02, goal one, data discussion, vowels and map data, presented by Dr. Ellis. Thank you, Chair Streffi.

[00:02:51] So this evening, we are bringing to you Goal 1.1, Core Academic Excellence. We are going to focus on VALS and MAP. And sticking with the structure that we used last time and received positive feedback on, we will present the data, talk a little bit about what the data means, what it shows.

[00:03:12] And then we have a team from Kenneth Culbert Elementary School. They were selected by the elementary ed office as an exemplar user of their data, and they're going to share a little bit about their story, and then we'll have an opportunity for discussion at the end.

[00:03:29] So with that, I'm going to turn it to Dr. Tyler to talk a little bit about the VALS data. I will also mention that I am surrounded by experts in various things, and so we hope to have all of the answers to your questions. If we don't, we will certainly get them to you.

[00:03:44] Good evening. As Dr. Ellis is preparing the slide deck, you'll see, and we have Catherine Neal, who is our elementary reading expert here, supervisor, to provide any context if needed.

[00:04:07] So you see from last year, the first full administration of VALS, we did have a slight decrease in their percentage of students identified as high, moderate risk from the fall to the spring. However, letting you know that there was an adjustment to the risk ban thresholds for the spring.

[00:04:24] So the idea that we didn't have a consistent threshold set for the spring being adjusted, being the first full year of implementation, I'm checking with Catherine on that. So this is just general data. We don't have general growth data or other information.

[00:04:41] This is just the start of the administration of this. So this is the data we have as far as the risk index. Next, you'll see here regarding MAP, I believe it's our eighth year of implementation of MAP. So the measure of academic progress has been around for 40 plus years at this point.

[00:05:00] It's been administered across many different divisions across the country. And it's a measure of growth that we administer in the fall, winter, and spring. And as you go to the next slide, the conditional growth percentile is a student's percentile rank.

[00:05:16] And we, I'm just imagining, I can't remember all the different times we've had discussions about MAP over the years, but it gives you an opportunity to actually have a student being compared to their peers who may be at the same starting point in the fall. If you have a third grader who's at the 60th percentile for readiness, their actual conditional growth percentile is based upon other third graders in a peer group at the same level of readiness and how much they grew from the fall, winter to the spring.

[00:05:45] So it really gives you not just a growth measure or metric, it gives you a growth metric for peer groups of students at the same level of readiness. So as you see in this example, a student may start in the fall at a RIT score of 225, which is the Ross instructional unit that places them at the 67 achievement percentile.

[00:06:05] The idea, though, is that if they see a decrease in their actual growth or their actual performance from a 230, a 225 to a 218, their actual growth percentile is the first percentile, meaning they were outgrown by the overlong majority of their peers.

[00:06:23] But a student who went from a RIT score of 225 to 247, that's the 99th percentile, meaning they outgrew virtually all of their peers. And then a student who had typical growth from 225 to 232 would be at the 50th conditional growth percentile.

[00:06:40] So it's two concepts of readiness. If you're looking at a snapshot of a student, this student is at a high level of overall readiness in the fall. But it also gives you a measure of how they grew relative to their peer group. And it gives you also an idea of their readiness at the end of the year.

[00:06:55] So that in mind, the last time we had a full administration before the pandemic, we had a conditional growth percentile of 54 for mathematics, meaning we were slightly above the national norm for growth. We're also a high readiness division. That's the data we have in another metric.

[00:07:15] But as you see in the four years leading through the pandemic up until last year, we're not quite at that level of pre-pandemic growth. As we rounded off the 53rd conditional growth percentile, we actually hit it two years ago.

[00:07:31] So the idea is that you see that there's some level of returning to the normal growth that we were used to with math, a little bit below what was typical. And you also see that there are differences in growth at the student reporting groups. This is important because if we see differences in readiness for one group versus another, and we see the same level of growth, we may see the same level of gaps as far as outcomes, which is why it's important for us to accelerate certain growth for certain student reporting groups.

[00:08:02] When we move to reading, we see that we're not at that level of growth that we had for reading before the pandemic. We're at the 46th conditional growth percentile. We actually had a drop from a couple of years ago where we were at the 53rd conditional growth percentile before the pandemic. So there have been a lot of discussions about what was typical before the pandemic, returning closer to that for math, not quite there for reading, and there are a lot of explanations behind that.

[00:08:29] The next slide, you'll see that we also have, I believe, the ability to look at the actual individual growth for students at different schools for reading and for math. We have presented this already in the student achievement update, so it's just kind of a reminder of we shared this data before. So at this point, I believe we have a school who's going to present on their journey and some of their successes with accelerating growth. Yes, so I'd like to just briefly introduce Monica Edwards, principal of Kenneth Colbert Elementary, and she has with her two of her

[00:09:04] amazing team members Stephanie Worthley the assistant principal and Michelle Johnson a third grade teacher at the school so I will turn it over to Ms. Edwards and team thank you Dr. Ellis so the first slide that we have is our conditional growth so that kind of goes in line with what Dr. Tyler just explained when you look at all of our students at Kenneth Colbert our conditional growth the top half there is all students so in reading it was the 60 63 percent percentile and then 69th in math the we also what we look at when we look at overall is we look at um the students that are

[00:09:42] in tier and tier two and tier three so if they started the year in tier two and tier three we want that conditional growth to be above the 50th percentile like dr tyler talked about because we're looking to close the achievement gap. So with the kind of conditional growth, I would say we are successful in closing that gap.

[00:10:02] And then our goal today is to kind of explain some of the processes that we have in place so you can understand how we use map data to get that kind of growth. I'm lucky enough to talk about our CLTs, which are our collaborative learning teams.

[00:10:19] And it's our grade level teams meet every week for 50 minutes in a dedicated space. and we're lucky enough to have a small classroom where we have arranged the desks so everyone is facing each other. We have everything teachers need, pens, post-its, highlighters, and cords for their laptops. So all they have to come with is themselves, their computer, and their ideas.

[00:10:42] At the beginning of each school year, on the bottom, teams develop their own team goal, which we reflect on throughout the year. All members of the grade level team, including the special ed CrossCat teacher, admin, and the district instructional facilitator are present for the meeting. And depending on our focus, the counselors could come, EL teachers, gifted specialists, reading specialists, just depending on what we're talking about that day. We're also lucky enough to have a specialist CLT and a special education CLT for our program teachers

[00:11:14] because we have six programs. So giving everybody the opportunity to collaborate as a team. And then The core structure of our CLTs is based on PLC Plus, the professional learning community, which is a platform for teachers to explore barriers to student learning, improving pedagogy among teachers, which is what the Plus is.

[00:11:38] Before it was just about students, but now we know the importance of improving teachers' crafts, having that professional learning, and learning from each other. We look at data to ensure all students are successful and recognize the path of how to get those students making progress looks different for each one.

[00:11:57] But I think our strongest takeaway for our CLTs is we're better together. We come together, we work as a team, we share our own knowledge, and we make better decisions for students. And then this is a sample of our CLT agenda. It helps structure our discussion and dialogues during the meeting.

[00:12:17] At the beginning of every year, there's a collaborative activity where teams develop a working agreement, and that's unique to each grade-level team. The norms of collaboration are universal, and they're just what high-functioning teams aspire to do during the time we're together.

[00:12:33] And we have a fun little activity at the beginning, connection before content, and team members take turns deciding what that will be. But it's just a quick, fun activity to get everybody centered and invested in what we're doing that day. And then our meeting focus each week is determined for the following CLT at the end so teachers can decide whether we want to look at data, whether they want to learn about something to help in the classroom, and we look at the five critical questions which are tied to the PLC plus and teams choose two to focus on for the next CLT.

[00:13:08] So for here, the next time we're going to discuss reading math data, and we have data walls for each grade level on students we're looking at in math reading and behavior. So then that agenda would tie to what it looks like when we tier students and we use map data I would say is probably one of the more significant data points that we look at this is Miss Johnson's third grade classroom and you can see that we use the map percentile but we also use vowels and other screening measures

[00:13:45] through fast bridge so we're not using just one data point we're using multiple data points so that it's a true picture of what the child can do in the classroom. And then we use decision trees that are developed by the content level offices, so the reading office, the math office, to make decisions about their data and put them into tier of the students.

[00:14:11] So students in tier two are receiving the intervention typically three to four times per week. And then if they need a more intensive intervention, that's when we put them in Tier 3. And you can see we will pick the intervention then and the frequency and then whether or not they require an MTSS plan. So, I think the key points of this is that we do this three times a year and that we are using multiple data points, but that map percentile is kind of the initial point where we look at that if their percentile is around the 30th or 40th percentile or below, that's when they end up start to be put on the data wall and we're

[00:14:48] tracking and monitoring their progress a little bit more closely. After choosing a tier for each student and selecting their appropriate intervention to meet their needs, then progress is monitored weekly. And so the intervention begins and we watch and monitor. We're looking to make sure that the intervention is working. So there's Bridges, which is a math intervention or curriculum that already has a progress monitoring component in it. Another favorite

[00:15:25] tool is FastBridge, as Ms. Edwards mentioned. It's a great one for reading fluency and reading comprehension and monitoring the growth in those areas. So when students then take the map again, we will look at those results along with what we're seeing in the classroom, what we're seeing in the intervention. And then we're able to consider any students who are ready to move

[00:15:52] tiers. And go to the next one. And then MAP provides some valuable reports from my perspective that help in planning instruction. So the first one listed there is the learning continuum report. It breaks down what students will be exposed to or may be exposed to on the MAP test so that we can, as a teacher, I can look and see what kinds of skills are they being asked to do, which then can help drive my instruction.

[00:16:27] I can group that report by topic or standard and look at specific things I want to focus on. And then when that gets paired with good quality classroom assessments, then I'm really able to make, I think, really informed decisions about my instruction moving forward, whether there's areas of need that needs further support or kids who are ready for more, and I can enrich their learning in that way. And then the second report, the class profile report, is a good visual to really group the

[00:17:02] students and see who's kind of in the same potential learning group that are ready for a similar thing. My favorite is the student profile report, which is a beautiful, colorful visual that I use with my students and my families the kids love to see when when we meet and we talk about what their growth is they're able to see most some of who have been in the county for a while where they were at in first second and now with me in third grade and they're able to see that growth and it provides some pride it provides some motivation for continuing to see that growth as

[00:17:38] they as they see the importance of hey when we're taking this test you're going to show me what you really know. And, and this is, this is how I get to see it. Um, and I also use that to, uh, meet with the students and set goals for what they're ready and what they want to learn next. And we use that in our student led conferences that we do at the end of quarter one. Okay. Thank you team. So with that, we, I will, um, just remind the committee that there are additional attachments in board docs

[00:18:14] with more data, in addition to all of the experts surrounding me. So I will turn it back over to you, Chair, for discussion and questions. Thank you very much for the presentation. Board members, any discussion? Yes, Chair Mansfield.

[00:18:31] No, that was surprising. So, that I had a question. So you talked a lot about MAP. I didn't hear much about VALS. Are you using it for all the same kinds of things because you have the learning indicators and the instructional implications.

[00:18:52] So vows is of a particular interest of mine, primarily because I was on the state board to get it put together. So I see that the subtests and the band risk and scale score, and they only have letter sounds, beginning sounds, phoneme, real word, pseudo word decoding and encoding.

[00:19:18] And so that's what they decide is the band of risk. So are we looking at any of the others? I mean, are you looking at RAN at all? And how are you reporting that? So the band of risk is calculated based off of the code-based subtests.

[00:19:40] So the ones that you just listed are the ones, that's how they get the scaled score from those results. The other subtests do receive like an instructional indicator. So they would receive like an asterisk if a student needs additional support there.

[00:19:56] As far as the RAN goes, you can see in some of the documents, they do talk about how that is something to help monitor student progress with rapid automatized naming, but that is not something that we would necessarily teach to or intervene on during our instruction.

[00:20:15] So I know that you wouldn't instruct on it or you wouldn't intervene, but it is something that if we don't take note of there are those kids about 15 and up to 40 percent of poor readers had only a ran deficit in kindergarten and so are we even looking at that at all because that does have implications for fluency later yeah we're definitely having conversations about that especially with um you know as we meet with our reading specialists every month and so forth and

[00:20:51] talk through what some of those different indicators mean in addition to that there is also some you know supports that are provided as far as understanding what RAN means during their VLA training so all the teachers are going through that module training and that's also part of the components that's part of that training too so that teachers are aware of what that data is that's being collected. So I guess I'm wondering also, thank you for that, because RAN is one of

[00:21:27] the things that I know as a dyslexic mom, that is a huge indicator and you can get it when they're about three years old. So that's a huge red flag. And then that would make us know that, okay, we need explicit and cumulative instruction for the rest of their days because we need to boost up everything else around them because their RAN is not going to change. So I am wondering about the instructional indicators. Are you guys giving these to parents at all, like a list of what they have

[00:22:01] and what they are lower in? It looks like it's a student summary report. Are you giving that out to parents and talking about that? So for the sake of this presentation, we were just focusing on MAP data, but we do use the VALS assessment in that whole process, and I know we do pool those reports and look at specific students, specifically those that are in the high-risk band, to look at those different components to drive their intervention and their instruction,

[00:22:35] and the parent reports are loaded into ParentVUE and given to all parents when the assessment window is concluded. Okay, so they have, in ParentVUE, they have the, it looks like, I mean, I downloaded all of it, but it looks like a subtest, and then the scores and what they could have, like the two different, yeah?

[00:23:02] I'd have to look specifically at what the report is, but it is the parent summary report that's loaded into ParentVUE. And do we have this actual VALS instructional implications and everything on our website? We do have on the assessment services website a landing page for VALS.

[00:23:24] I can check the resources that are there. So if there's anything, additional references, we can include that. But we do have a VALS page on the assessment services website. So I'm also wondering for us, for the school board later when we're looking at assessment scores, I mean, I think for me, I'd like to look at VALS a little differently.

[00:23:46] I'd like to look at grade levels as well as reporting groups. Because for me, I want to know if across the district we're having problems in kindergarten, first grade, second grade, or are we bridging the gap in third grade?

[00:24:06] That's something that I would like to look at as a school board member. And maybe that's something I have to look at personally. I don't know in Dr. Ellis' office. But I think that's important information.

[00:24:25] Okay, I think that's pretty much what my thoughts about it. Thank you. I'm sorry. I'm like a VALS. It's just really important to me and the instructional indicators and things like that.

[00:24:41] Thank you for your passion, Ms. Mansfield. We can certainly provide the committee with the VALS information by grade level and reporting group. And can we also look at how we're looking at RAN? Because honestly, speaking personally, missed my kid.

[00:25:02] So just as an update, one of the attachments in board docs has it broken out by reporting group for the fall and spring administrations is by risk level. And you're saying you would also like to see it broken out by grade level as well? Right, grade level as well. Yes, please.

[00:25:20] Thank you. Any other discussion? Yes. Poor Mr. Streffy has to deal with the two of us on either side. I have a clarifying question about VALS. You mentioned that the thresholds changed.

[00:25:38] And, man, do I miss being in the loop on all this, but cannot anymore. But what does that mean? Does that mean our high-risk numbers would have been higher or lower? Which way did the threshold change from fall to spring? And also, why did they do that?

[00:25:54] I'm sure you don't have that answer. So if you remember last year, we were part of the soft launch. Right. So as part of that, we were, I think there were 16 other school divisions that we were part of that they were collecting. They were in this data collecting phase.

[00:26:12] And so it was my understanding that in the spring, as part of that data collection, they adjusted how they determined high risk or which students fell within that band of risk. We were not, the school divisions were not shared, like, what was maybe that range of what indicated a student was going to be high risk or not we weren't given any of that information last year this year is the first year with the fall scores that we actually had that scaled score like those ranges that we could use to compare where a student actually fell within that band

[00:26:52] of risk and so I know in talking with reading teachers we were able to really look at you know where students were falling within that range because sometimes you want to know like how close are they like a high risk are they bubble are they yeah how close are they getting to moderate risk or you know what other um you know where where do they fall so that was part of the question but um we we just didn't have that information from the state last year to really know why the scores were changed we just knew that they had been adjusted okay and then to that end based off of the numbers that we had now if i guess i'm just asking like is this deceiving in a positive way

[00:27:31] or a negative way based off of the change like would we have maybe have seen more or less does that make sense anecdotally and talking to schools that were impacted like they there were some schools that saw more students in that high risk band but then other schools did not so we really couldn't figure out a pattern if it would have been a bigger gap or not right exactly okay and then just a pulse check i know there was so much feedback that was collected through i don't it wasn't really a pilot but it was like a test run maybe we'll call it was it a pilot was a pilot

[00:28:08] calling it a pilot cool um so during the pilot i know teachers were giving lots of feedback there were committees that were formed um so just sort of a pulse check this year i know there was a lot of angst last fall in terms of delivering that and the different sub and maybe this is a question for you all too the subtests that were not timed and kids just sitting there you know at length waiting for timers to run out because they didn't know they couldn't respond to the question so just is there a better feeling about vowels this year and how it's being administered is it more time effective are kids less frustrated just kind of general sentiments from year to year i can only

[00:28:47] speak for my grade level that's what i was trained on because i know that in the in the younger grades They have more subtests to do than I do in the third grade. But I would say if I was to take the temperature of how everyone's feeling about it, it gives such valuable information that some of that tediousness that they probably experienced in the beginning as we kind of switched from what we were doing before is worth it.

[00:29:12] And so I think we're figuring it out. Would you say the same, Catherine? I would. And just to add to that, for the younger grades especially, they did impose or develop some stop rules in cases like you described so that students aren't sitting there because they don't know how to answer. Like you get to a certain point and you can stop and move on. That's encouraging. Those were tough days. I appreciate that. Thank you. I want to pivot a little bit to map if that's okay um i am thankful so much for the data i participated in many a plc plus and i'm

[00:29:52] glad to hear that you feel like you're getting to the plus because i think sometimes there are just those pieces that go on and on and you never get to the okay so what you know and now what's that implication for me and what am i going to change about my teaching so i was wondering if you could share some of the strategies that you use to ensure that you get to that end plus piece all right so for me it's hard to really pare down exactly how it happens i feel like all the structures that are in place through what we do with our clt allows me to get all of the nitty

[00:30:31] gritty in and then i and then that's all part of our conversation of is okay and also and let's look at like right now one of the um pushes that we're trying to do as a staff is really increase the rigor. And I'm applying things that I've learned in my QTEL training and in my letters training and the deeper learning stuff. All of that, I feel like I'm now applying because I'm able to not only differentiate for the groups that need that extra support, but I'm increasing their rigor along with those who are ready for more of that enrichment. Did I answer your question?

[00:31:10] Yeah, absolutely. And I actually answered my second question because when I see these higher percentages obviously you have kids that are ready to extend and go deeper so you answered that I was going to ask what are some ways that you're doing that so unless you want to add more but that seemed like a nice list I would also because in looking at it globally I think when we get to the plus or when we get to that more meaningful learning it's when the teachers are really establishing their own focus for their CLT meetings so it has to be meaningful to them And if what we're talking about is meaningful to them, then they are taking something back to their classroom.

[00:31:46] So it's how do we then empower teachers to make these meetings theirs? They develop the meeting focus. They develop, I mean, obviously within parameters and within the structures in place. But I think that's the piece where then you get the, when the learning is meaningful and the topic is meaningful and driven by them.

[00:32:04] Yeah, that makes sense. My next question is about your tiers. do you feel that you follow the traditional model of the five percent are in tier three 15 are in tier two and then 80 in tier one did i say that right yes i think i did i'm not a math person thanks john i would say it's dependent on the school year we also have a lot of special education programs so sometimes we have a lot more students in tier three because of their specialized instruction but i would say typically yes we run around those percentages um we do have that a lot

[00:32:42] of tier movement i would say by the end of the school year where we are moving them into tier two or tier one yeah i um i'm glad that that's the case uh that is not the case in all of our schools and i struck this is an area that i've really struggled with and i you know talking about where's your where's what does this mean for us as a school board something that i'm really focused on is how do we address these ongoing challenges when you have inverted pyramids right when you have a lot of kids in tier three and tier two that are you know outside of that and

[00:33:18] you're pumping them into a multi-tiered systems of support system that literally can't support those kind of numbers whether that's staffing or resources and so I feel like it is my due diligence to say it yet again but I I worry when I look at some of these numbers in terms of conditional growth percentages and seeing how many schools are falling below the 50 percent and we have always for tier two and tier three had that goal of 60 or higher because we do need to close those gaps so we're we have you know schools here that aren't even we have 32 out of our 60

[00:33:57] elementary schools that are not even hitting the 50 as their average. And so that's concerning to me. Middle school is a whole nother story. I mean, there's 17 out of 18 in reading. So that's 94% of our schools that are not closing those gaps. And so that to me tells me that in multi-tiered systems of support that is designed to support those kids, that we have to beef up the staffing, that we have to beef up the resources in order to make that happen. Obviously, high quality instruction and professional development get played into that and having strong collaborative learning teams. But I'm glad that you can support that. I think that that's wonderful and that should

[00:34:36] be the focus. But when we don't have that, I do have concerns about how we can make those gaps close. And, you know, my last comment, I promise, in looking at the numbers, you know, even with the VALS data, this is why it's so important to me that we are focusing on reporting groups. And I often say like the the reporting groups are hiding underneath and i don't mean that the division is hiding it and i think that that's been misconstrued and so i want to go on the record and say that um i don't think the division is hiding it but what i mean is it masks that overall number so

[00:35:10] when you look at vowels and you look at just the fall high risk you know 21 percent is overall is at high risk and but you start to break it down and you have almost 50 percent of hispanic students And almost 50% of English language learners, almost 50% of students with disabilities, it's getting tucked into that overall number as 21, but it demands attention and a focus.

[00:35:33] And so I hope as a school board we can remain locked in on that priority because until we start to put those supports in place, which I believe happened in our budget, that's one of the main levers that we can pull, that we will not get there. And so I'm just, again, beating the drum, but it is something that is of concern.

[00:35:55] But I thank you so much for being here and sharing your experience and love that you have turned those meetings into productive dialogue because I think a lot of schools could learn from that. Okay, one more. So for the vowels, do we have any idea when we're going to get that technical report to see whether this is a valid and reliable screening measure?

[00:36:19] Thank you for asking that question. so I'll ask Ms. Neal if she has an update, but she has been very diligently reaching out to our friends at UVA and at VDOE, and I don't think either of them have given us an expected date when we might receive that, and I have no doubt that Ms. Neal will continue to inquire until we receive it. Do you have any updates? Just that I received an email from the VDOE yesterday, and they said that they will get back to me on it. So, you know, they've received our inquiry and

[00:36:55] you've probably seen on the side, it says coming soon. So, but we haven't been given any indication of when that'll be. So knowing that, that we don't know if it's valid or reliable, and we're looking at federal guidelines, ESSA, all the rest of that about screening measures. How are we being able to, I don't know, meet the requirements of what we're supposed to do with our kids, having valid and

[00:37:29] reliable assessments for screening? I think that's a valid question. In all seriousness, it's a very important question, and I think that's a question that we also need to pose to VDOE and have conversations with them about. They need to provide that answer for us.

[00:37:59] Thank you very much. I don't have any questions. I have some general comments. One is piggybacking off of Ms. Chernoff's drum beating. I think it's, as she's stated it in many different ways and forums, I'm trying to understand how we can utilize this committee to really zoom in on that and whether that's bringing in a team of folks from schools who are in that inverted situation and even if it's folks outside,

[00:38:39] Just bringing research and information from outside the division and expertise that we can pull. So, I mean, just utilizing everything that we have, because, yes, it is a budget discussion, but we kind of need to understand how are we tackling that issue.

[00:38:59] And so I feel like I still have, obviously, a lot of us have this gap of what are we actually going to, what's our direction, what are we going to do? and how do we see ourselves making a dent.

[00:39:14] So that's one comment. And then the other comment is how much I appreciate you all sharing all of your insights in relation to the CLTs, because that to me, and I've heard this in a lot of conversations, that that is really the linchpin behind a lot of how we innovate and make a dent and move the needle, especially as it relates to students who are in these groups.

[00:39:41] So just, I am thinking about other ways in this committee that we could look at CLTs and practices and the discipline of it, what's working, what has worked in different schools and kind of share more knowledge related to that process.

[00:39:57] That's generally some of the thoughts that have come to mind in this conversation. - Can I add a couple of thoughts? So I'm making connections, Mr. Estreffi, with what Ms. Chernoff said as well.

[00:40:12] And I think that, well, a couple things. I don't think there's a magic bullet, so I don't think there's one distinct answer for your questions, and I know you all know that. I do think the conversation around the school improvement process and flexible staffing and differentiated staffing is going to be key to starting to answer that question, though.

[00:40:35] So I'm really looking forward to that conversation and committee in January because I think that is going to start connecting the dots for the committee in terms of the data that you're seeing, the stories that you're hearing from schools, and then the supports that you all can provide as a board.

[00:40:51] I would like to ask, I'm taking a risk here. I think I know the answer. Ms. Edwards, can you tell us a little bit about the additional supports that you get from the division? For example, do you have a division instructional facilitator assigned to you and anything else and how those roles support you in what you do at your school.

[00:41:13] I do have a division instructional facilitator this school year, and it is life-changing. So from a principal perspective, I feel like the school improvement process is so much more meaningful and something that I touch weekly versus something that is more quarterly or more when we're looking at monitoring comments, just to be completely transparent, and I do feel like that support does also lead to our CLTs and what we're focusing on, so we're looking at data as it relates to what we want to improve on

[00:41:50] specifically. Thank you. So I knew I was safe answering that question, asking that question. So I think that the changes, and I appreciate your comments about the school improvement process, because we have made significant effort to shift that process and make it more of a process instead of quarterly check-ins or simply just a binder on the bookshelf, which is what I think it used to be.

[00:42:17] And so that process is sort of the foundation for all of these conversations. So all that to say, I hope that in January you'll start to see connecting the dots and getting closer to answers to those questions. Well, thank you all very much.

[00:42:35] Appreciate you taking the time to be with us tonight. So with that, we'll move on to our next item, 4.03, measuring and improving communication and trust in LCPS. And we'll hand it back to Dr. Ellis.

[00:42:50] Thank you. And I'm going to invite our guests who are not in this next conversation to leave. I know it's a very late night, the last week before the break. Thank you so much, everybody. And I would also like to introduce Natalie Allen, our Chief Communications Officer.

[00:43:11] She is joining us virtually, so she's on the screen. And Miss Allen, just make sure to jump in, because I'm trying to make sure I see you and watch for your waving, but please feel free to interject.

[00:43:28] So this evening we are going to, hold on, I did this before, let me share my screen. In response to one of your inquiries around communication and trust, we have pulled together some information and some research on communication and trust with school systems and school boards.

[00:43:52] We have also shared some information about communication and trust that we currently measure in our system, and then we hope to have a conversation about some of the recommendations in the communications audit. That's why Ms. Allen is here, and potentially questions that we ask in our annual surveys to make sure we're capturing how people truly feel about communication and trust.

[00:44:17] So this is truly a collaborative effort, obviously with the Department of Communications and Community Engagement, the research office, and the school board, and others. And you will probably hear from all of us here and Ms. Allen. We'll start with really defining trust and communication, providing some examples from the research and best practice that Dr. Tyler and Dr. Blakelock have pulled together.

[00:44:44] And then we'll talk about the audit and how we currently measure trust and communication. So I'm going to start with, I think, Dr. Tyler. Hello again. So in board docs, you actually see a summary of some research, and we actually targeted research from practitioners, meaning school boards and division leadership working together to not only build communication and trust strategies they utilized.

[00:45:12] So on slide three, you'll see this is actually a summary. Use a little artificial intelligence on this because we had a lot of research out there. So you see the key components from the research from other school boards, other divisions working in partnerships, strategic communication, two-way communication, clear role responsibilities, and you see how it's summarized.

[00:45:33] And in actual board docs, you see links to the actual source documents. But this gives you an idea of what has emerged from the research as effective strategies in the communication. And we didn't separate school boards and divisions. Sometimes it was school boards and superintendents working together.

[00:45:51] Sometimes it was school boards in particular. So there's the summary of the key strategies for communication, for trust. On the next slide, you see listed transparency, just kind of highlighting effective leadership and equity. So these are summary concepts here.

[00:46:09] And there are some impressive resources there because some of them are research-based and some of them are just hands-on, practitioner-oriented strategies, lessons learned, even mistakes, learning from mistakes as far as how maybe going on the wrong path for building communication and trust.

[00:46:25] So we thought that this would be very helpful for school board and for division leadership. So communication and trust highlighted, and I guess the next slide goes to how do we currently measure communication and trust? Sure, so I will turn this over to Ms. Allen and then Dr. Blakelock to talk about the net promoter score, but we currently measure communication and trust in a couple of ways.

[00:46:50] As you all know, we had an audit conducted, and there were recommended actions that came out of that, and I'll let Ms. Allen talk about those briefly in just a moment. We also have recently started calculating the net promoter score that Dr. Blakelock will talk about, and we also administer annual staff and family stakeholder surveys.

[00:47:11] We have pulled out some key questions from those surveys that really try to capture communication and trust and how families and staff feel about communication and trust, both at the school level and at the division level. And I'm sure there are ways that we could continue or expand on capturing this.

[00:47:30] So this slide is regarding the communications audit, and I'll just ask Ms. Allen if she has anything she'd like to talk through regarding these recommendations. Yep, absolutely. Thank you, Dr. Ellis. I think as the board knows, we have already completed a couple of these things and continue to work through the audit recommendations.

[00:47:53] Number one, we have expanded the strategic communications roadmap into a comprehensive communication plan that I believe that you all have access to. and what we've done there is make sure that we are targeting you know individual community groups in different ways to make sure that we're expanding outreach and expanding two-way communication having the family and community engagement division under the department of communications and community engagement has been truly invaluable and the work that they

[00:48:27] have already started to do is just absolutely wonderful. And I think we're going to see that office really continue to help us bridge that kind of communication gap as far as being on the ground with families and trying to help them navigate. I mean, for example, even tonight, there's currently a student success talk going on where we're getting real-time feedback from families and giving them opportunities to sort of work with us on how to make sure that their students are successful. And we want to make sure that we're

[00:49:03] offering multiple channels in which to do that. And I think that, you know, over this last year, we've tried to really amplify that. You all, as our school board and Dr. Spence's new division leadership, we've heard over and over again, has helped to rebuild trust and confidence already.

[00:49:21] And I think as we continue outreach and continue to communicate with the community and allow for that two-way communication, that'll just continue to grow and thrive. I think we have improved our communication infrastructure and we've started to develop communications briefs and communications processes internally to help when any new information is going out to make sure that there is a structure for that.

[00:49:50] As you all know, we're continuing to combat mis- and disinformation, and we revamped our new mis- and disinformation page already on our new website, so you can search by subject, which I think is really great. And we also have our podcast that launched just a few weeks ago, and that is another place that we'll be able to talk through and combat mis- and disinformation.

[00:50:15] We have worked really hard to develop stronger, more proactive media relations. with members of the media across all platforms by going to them and meeting with their producers and news directors and those kinds of things. And we'll continue to do that. We've been pitching stories to them and to individual reporters instead of just sending out press and media releases, which I think has been really helpful. And it's really trying to build relationships with our media partners there. And I do think with, you know, how we're leveraging ThoughtExchange and let's talk we continue to try and strengthen that two-way communication in lcps and the family

[00:50:55] and community engagement division is doing that as well and then as it relates to implementing tactics to engage local residents with no personal connections to schools we've been placing ads in the loud times mirror and in loud now which we know many local residents read so that they know understand what's going on in Loudoun County. And of course, you know, as you know, we have expanded our communications channels to try and reach more folks in that regard as well. But I think that's one of the pieces that we'll continue to expand on and try and continue to do. Thanks,

[00:51:35] Ms. Allen. Thank you. And now I'll turn it over to Dr. Blakelock to talk a little bit about the Net Promoter Score. Thank you, Dr. Ellis. Good evening. Net Promoter Score is a concept borrowed from the business world, which is used there as a metric to capture customer loyalty and engage a business's reputation. In education, it can be used to measure a family's perception of both a school and school division's reputation and how connected they feel to each of these. Similarly, with employees, it can actually be also, in addition to that, be used as a proxy for employee

[00:52:07] engagement. So how is net promoter score calculated? You have probably seen this question a hundred times where you receive a one question survey that says how likely are you to recommend insert concept here to a friend or colleague with a scale from zero to 10 with zero being not at all likely and 10 being extremely likely. I'm going to unpack what happens to that after that response comes in. So you have the zero to 10 scale and if you see on the far left hand side there you've got the zero to six. So people who respond with a zero to six are considered to be

[00:52:42] detractors, as you can see by the little frowny face underneath it. Next, those who select a 7 or 8 are considered passives, as you can see as kind of the neutral face there. And then those who give it a 9 or 10 are considered to be promoters, as you see by the smiley face there. So this kind of gives you the breakdown there. So ultimately, the overall net promoter score is calculated by subtracting the percentage of detractors from the percentage of promoters. And so this gives you this overall aggregate score that gives you this sense of how connected people feel to the division, employee engagement, how likely they are to say nice things about you in the community as opposed

[00:53:22] to not so nice about things in the community. And there's a one-pager attached in here as well that kind of speaks to some of the use cases for it as well. So that's the concept of what net promoter score is. If we could go to the next slide, you can see here how it breaks down with both the family and school-based staff stakeholder surveys.

[00:53:42] This is a question that we have on our annual survey that we ask. Typically, nationwide, you'll see families and staff members feeling closer to the school than they do to the division. Literature supports that as well. But you can see that it operates on a range from negative 100 to positive 100.

[00:53:59] So obviously, you would like that score to be positive. And the higher the positive, the higher the magnitude is. There are several thresholds that are out there in the literature. It's like how to interpret it as far as like what's good, what's great, what's excellent. So that's ultimately the net promoter score.

[00:54:15] You can see that. And we started capturing that score two years ago. And I have it last year. It has increased from its inaugural year quite a bit. And, well, I can have those metrics available for you at some point as well. But overall, you'll see the net promoter score staff with division at 18 to their school, 43.

[00:54:36] family to the division 24 and school net promoter 32. The other thing you can do is you can look at some of the overall changes that happen in the division over time and see how that connects to the net promoter score as a whole. So I'm going to pause there and we want to go to the rest of the survey data. Okay, excellent. So every year we do our annual stakeholder survey. We have specific questions on both the staff, school-based staff number one, and the family one that speak to communication, trust, those sorts of concepts, both with the division and with the school.

[00:55:13] So on this slide, you can see some fairly favorable responses. This is a combined percentage of agree and strongly agree responses. But basically, the teachers and school-based staff feel pretty good about their communication with the families. They support that, as well as that the communication is, the LCPS, the division is communicating information to them effectively.

[00:55:39] If we go to the next slide. And here on the annual, on the family side of it, you see some fairly consistent concepts there with that communication. So the school, you can triangulate the school and the family ideas that the information coming out of the schools is, you know, fairly well received.

[00:55:56] Where you see a little bit of a dip there is the idea of being, working directly with a staff member about, you know, their child's education as well as having an individual adult or person at that school that they feel connected to that they can go to if they have a problem or concern.

[00:56:12] And then similar to what we saw in the staff data with that communication of important information from the division level, you see an 87% agreement there, which is fairly solid. All right. Thank you both for all of that information.

[00:56:31] So I think at this point it might make sense to turn it over back to the committee. We did pose a couple of questions that we were considering, any questions or additional information that you think you need. What else might you be thinking about in terms of ways to measure communication and trust?

[00:56:51] How would we use those results? And how, from your perspective, should we be measuring progress or success in this area? And we are happy to gather additional or different information, but really interested in your thoughts.

[00:57:06] Thank you very much for the presentation. Board members, any discussion? Sure, I'll do. I want to thank you for all of this, and I really want to thank you for the research that you provided.

[00:57:22] I enjoyed reading it. I spent a lot of time kind of combing through, especially when I think there was an analogy in one of the articles that talked about if you go just one step off track but you stay in that trajectory, you can lose so much trust so fast, and it was just a minute thing.

[00:57:41] But if you like double down on that, I'm not going to be able to tell you which article it was, but it was one of them. I did also use AI. I plugged all these into AI and said, what is the number one word that came out of all that was repeated the most?

[00:57:58] And it was relationship. And the second highest was stakeholder. And so for me, thinking about communication and trust, I think that even though it came from AI, I really do think that that does sum up what we need to be focused on.

[00:58:15] And that is not always so tangible and measurable. And that's the part of this that I really struggle with because I do sometimes feel like we are in this sort of vicious cycle where we know trust is needed and that you need communication.

[00:58:33] So then you have the communication, but if the communication is something you don't trust, then you're back to square one. And so getting practical at that level, I don't envy the work in this department, and I do thank you, Ms. Allen.

[00:58:49] And I think moving the family and community engagement piece into that together was a very tangible step in the right direction. I think those are things that maybe the public won't necessarily see or feel right away, but it's just that all-encompassing view that this is a community issue and this is something that we need to address.

[00:59:08] One thing I was kind of looking for, I'll own my own bias here, in the research as I read it and went through it, was I didn't see a lot of mention of what if you don't trust the people who are communicating?

[00:59:26] What if it's not about the communication itself? And in that instance, sometimes I feel like it doesn't matter how savvy the communication is, how many methods of communication you have, but if you don't actually trust the people that are delivering it are trustworthy, that is a bigger issue.

[00:59:50] And I don't think that this is everyone in Loudoun. I think it's a small subset of Loudoun, and I do think it is a symptom of what has happened here over the past years and we don't need to rehash all that because we have moved forward but I do feel accountable to people that don't feel that trust with us as a division or as schools that we're hiding or holding back and I don't know how we would measure that. I think the bottom line is

[01:00:25] for me I have to take an ownership approach and I know that the division I think I can speak for the division in this too, is that we would talk to anyone. We would answer your questions. And so if anyone from the public is listening, I think that we have worked really hard to be very open and to say, we'll sit down with anyone and have any conversation. And I think I can speak for the division as well, that we're working on enhancing those communication avenues so that you know who to talk to, who has the right answer, and you can have an honest and real conversation if the trust

[01:01:00] is fragile um but i do think that there's also a lot of context in a large division that doesn't always get put out there i've certainly learned that this side of the job i had a lot of assumptions about how things worked that over the last year i've been reflecting on um where i just didn't have the full context i just didn't have the knowledge and to understand what the motives were or what that decision was and so I would be very curious to see how our net promoter score is evolving over time I think a comparison would be really helpful for me personally

[01:01:37] and also then a question of follow-up is if this has changed for you like if you felt distrust or a lack of communication and now you don't or you feel better about it what changed was it turnover of leadership was it you're getting a text message to come to student success talks was it school board member newsletters was it more openness from the division in terms of a communication flow chart and you got your answer faster is it ombuds um i would really love to know i would like to

[01:02:11] target the people where they have felt that has changed and where the reverse is true also where maybe you had a lot of trust in us and where it was where it was lost and so that we can look at those missteps and we can address them I'm all about the why and I think here it's very delicate and I know we may never please everyone but it these are people's children and this is our community and so this is important to me that we we continue to analyze this and so I thank you for

[01:02:43] bringing the topic very much any other discussion real quickly and I know you've already looked at this data, Ms. Chernoff, but for anyone who's potentially listening to your point, I think it's important to look at the data that we collected in our communications audit, because there were questions about trusting the communication, feeling informed in those kinds of things that I think were good baseline data points for us. And, you know, something that we

[01:03:17] can kind of move forward from and potentially look at asking on stakeholder surveys moving forward so that we can compare those things. So getting out to your point, how people are feeling about the communication and accuracy and such.

[01:03:36] And I think it's also important just to say out loud, at least in my experience here, there's sort of this local narrative versus a state narrative versus a national narrative about Loudoun County public schools that I would be remiss if I didn't point out.

[01:03:54] And the further away you get from Loudoun County, like the kind of worse the perception of trust and those kinds of things gets. And so at a local level, hearing from parents and those kinds of things, we have a tendency to see a lot higher scores related to accuracy and trust and, you know, us going in the right direction, which I think is important to note.

[01:04:17] Yeah, thank you, Ms. Allen. I appreciate that perspective. And I also think that one of the measures for me with trust has been people's willingness to be open. And I think that there is a sense, at least in my experience, in talking to educators and principals and community members and even students, people are very open here about how they feel. And that may be also a symptom of the past. But I think that that is something that is positive, is that they're willing to tell us what they're struggling with or what they need. And so in this case, I do think more information

[01:04:55] is better, but I agree. I feel that over the last year, I have felt that openness and I felt that that willingness to come alongside and work together with leadership. I would agree completely and have to say that we can't quote unquote fix things unless we know what's going on or how people are feeling and have that sort of baseline to improve. And we're always open to feedback and improving and um that's part of you know at least from a communications and community engagement standpoint we are a service department right like we're here to serve the families and and students

[01:05:31] and staff and we are always going to be open to feedback and are always going to be willing to improve and be open thank you very much um from my perspective also echoing what mr and offset is in terms of the measures of trust really trying to figure out um what's working right in terms of both the perception and the reality.

[01:05:55] I think that's something that I'm eager to discover as well and how we can kind of uncover some of that. I think to say something that maybe hasn't been addressed in previous comments is I think as a board and as a division really being deliberate about where we spend our time as well.

[01:06:20] So going back to some of the research related to what makes school boards effective and school leadership effective. Focusing on the things that will improve student achievement I think is something that, you know, I think what this committee was created for is we were looking for how do we put our, you know, focus or finger on moving the needle.

[01:06:46] So staying focused on what's best for children and keeping the conversations around that, I think will only enhance the relationships that we have and our ability to break down some of the barriers here in this division. And so some of the words that I think about when it comes to my role as a school board member is just being responsive.

[01:07:07] I mean, I think you addressed some of these comments as well. Being open, visible, accessible, and just reflecting on some of the frustrations that I've seen kind of manifest from families is when they felt that there was no way to, you know, they were knocking on a door and really just couldn't get through.

[01:07:26] And so that accessibility and being heard. So I think about that, and then I think about all of the mechanisms that we already have for people to, you know, resolve their issues and just feel heard, including, like, ombuds and all.

[01:07:41] So I think for me it goes back to how do we figure out what is working and what's not in terms of folks' perception. I guess one last thought, conversations I've had with Dr. Blakelock.

[01:08:05] Very careful, if you will, correlations between sentiment of our public, our stakeholders, and certain practices. To what extent can we align trust with having an adult in the building you can go to if you have a question, if you're a student, and also if you're a community member?

[01:08:23] So ways to do a careful analysis of correlations, and we have to be careful with perceptual data. but are there certain practices that align at an individual school or at the division level with higher levels of trust that can be more action-oriented? So that's one idea we've had and ways to do that in a way that's careful, this is perceptual data, we want to get our response rates up and get kind of a nice robust response, but ways we can look at correlating behaviors with actual perceptions and things that we can act on and maybe see correlations of change in actual perceptions.

[01:09:00] Have you thought about looking at policies that we've passed, like, let's say, diabetes policy or student permission, and how, and because we've been doing a lot of huge work lately at the school board level, and, you know, and I'm wondering if at the top, if we are focused on our policy making, and, you know, appropriately, if that helps with perception at all, because that's good governance, right?

[01:09:35] And so I'm wondering if that has anything, being more efficient, has anything to do with people's trust in us. Just a thought. I love that thought, Chair Mansfield.

[01:09:52] I am wondering, when you said that, if sort of a gauge of how comfortable or how knowledgeable people feel about the work that happens in a division. So understanding what a superintendent's role is versus the school board and what that partnership is like, how policy is developed and put through committee.

[01:10:13] I know it's one of the things this year we've really worked on in the Alliance of Families Advisory Committee is just educating on the process and how to get involved. So maybe a baseline too of just some understanding about where can we do a good job, a better job of helping people to have access not only to how to communicate, but when and when that that's appropriate.

[01:10:40] Because sometimes things are fully baked, I like to say, and people are really upset and they're like, I didn't even know. But there are so many steps that go into that process. So I'm thinking off the cuff here, but that's making me wonder about, you know, do people even understand and know, and how can we help with that to just enlighten them to the work that's going on?

[01:11:03] And, you know, if there isn't a focus group that's created or, you know, a certain, some of our policies, we really take the time to do that outreach. But there are smaller things that happen that I think do have impact that maybe we haven't been able to quite measure what that trust is. I just think about, I've explained to so many people in the community how that public comment period works between a policy getting revised or written and that we have this amount of time to receive public input and that just being something that nobody really, even it took me multiple explanations of how this actually works for people to really understand

[01:11:43] that they could weigh in on how we develop our policies and what the process is to get a policy approved. So that, just that, you know, just reminded me of that as well. The only thing I'll add that may or may not be related to this point is the relationships and the trust that's within a school building.

[01:12:08] And I think we talked about this a little bit, but we have a lot of inputs. We have data that we would receive to make sure that there are no red flags, But there's a lot that happens in school culture and climate, whether that's with our educators and folks in the school, students or administration.

[01:12:33] And I'm just really I think it's important to have a separate conversation around trust and relationships in this at the school level and how they really impact all the way down to student achievement. right um and so where we get it wrong and where we get it right that's just a note on that so one thing that i know helped with a or i think helped with a perception of increased trust and i'm going

[01:13:04] to use seac as a as a um as an example something that was happening was that they weren't being able to give their input in a timely manner because they didn't have a list of policies beforehand to go through and to understand what was coming up and what they might want to do because they go through all the policies. And we changed that, right? And are we perfect? No.

[01:13:35] Things come up? Yes. But overall, I think generally that has built trust and a better relationship because they were being able to, they were able to know when their input was appropriate, or it's always appropriate, but you know what I mean. And I think it would be interesting to know from the committees if they feel more engaged because they're in the committees,

[01:14:05] LEAF, MSAC, SEAC, and how they feel being, or equity, being more, are they more involved? And does that involvement increase their satisfaction and trust? And you could also say that for the building level division you know for the building level too pta or whatever committees that they have there it's been a long time since i've been in an elementary middle or high school so um and and that would be you know we want to engage the community and that's a that's

[01:14:45] a great way for the community to be involved in policy making and providing their their voice i think by time public comment it's kind of been we've kind of like we've kind of fully baked things at that point so earlier anyway those are just some of my thoughts sorry do you think the sense of belonging survey and some of that work that we're going to do later on in the pmc could be sort of a tie back to this i would i think this should i don't want to make everything a thread i feel like i'm always making like can we tie this in but i'm wondering if that would address

[01:15:24] the school issue i mean i know some people have even we focused on schools that really retain their staff and and the different things that they're doing i think that that survey kind of helps us with that is that am i understanding that correctly yes i i was i think i was forming the same connection that that you just described um i think that and i'm also making connections between miss mansfield's comments and the work that our department of school leadership does with schools and when they receive their staff and family surveys they look very closely at that data

[01:16:01] and specifically how they are their their family's perceptions of the school their staff's perceptions of the school and they use that data to to work on school culture so i think having it having a conversation and and some examples of schools that are doing that well would be really helpful and then also tying that to student's sense of belonging in the school as well.

[01:16:28] So you're talking like if they're in a club or something and they have a sense of belonging, how that affects their perception? Is that what you're saying? Or just as part of Dr. Spence's post-entry plan, he really would like to dive into a student's sense of belonging in their school, and that probably is connected to involvement in things like clubs or after-school activities, having a trusted adult in the building, there are multiple factors that would increase a student's sense of belonging.

[01:17:02] And so how we are talking through and we'll, after the winter break, start talking with principals about how we measure that information, how do we get a sense of student's sense of belonging, and once we know that, how do we foster it if it's there, and how do we develop it if it's not there like would that be a sense of empowerment too yes I yes I think you could also use that word because if students feel like they belong in their school then they're empowered to participate and ask

[01:17:34] questions and take risks thank you all very much I think this is an amazing discussion we okay to move on to new business all right so with that is there any new business seeing none we'll now adjourn this December 17th meeting of the Performance Monitoring Committee. Thank you all very much.

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