School Board Meeting May 15, 2019 Part 2

Directors please return to the dais.

It is five thirty.

Even if you are speaking with one of our esteemed former colleagues.

OK we have now reached 530 p.m.

We go to public testimony.

The rules for public testimony are on the screen or shortly will be given our tech issues and I ask the speaker be respectful of these rules.

Please note that the board does not and will not take public comments on items related to personnel or individually named staff per board procedure 1430 BP.

We have increased the number of speakers this evening from 20 to 25 due to the number of testimony sign ups that exceed 35. We have 45 plus on the waiting list plus the 25 slots in order to allow more individuals an opportunity to speak.

The majority of the speaker's time must be spent on the topic he or she has indicated when they called in they wish to speak about like to note that there is a two minute limit.

When you are on your last 30 seconds the yellow light will shine and need to keep that in mind and wrap up when the red light shines.

Please finish your sentence.

Ms. Shek will read off the testimony.

Speakers.

First up for public testimony we have Miles Grant followed by Alex Zimmerman and then Alicia Taylor.

Excuse me.

I'm sorry my script does not say what we have up here on the big screen.

No racial slurs personal insults ridicule or threats will be tolerated and all signs brought to the meetings are subject to the same ground rules.

Thank you.

OK.

Hello.

Hello.

My name is Myles Grant and I am a Franklin Quaker and that may mean something completely different to you than it does to me because I am a member of Franklin's own principal's cabinet.

Now.

The principal's cabinet was created to make sure that every facet of Franklin High School was heard to the staff to the teachers to everybody that made decisions in the school.

They could hear what the students were saying because that's who's being taught here.

That's the future that's being created here.

And we did that.

And not only did we do that but we went above and beyond having every voice heard.

We planned events we planned ceremonies to make sure that every single student at the school made sure that they felt welcome because that's important too.

Beyond the curriculum beyond the school's policies beyond that it's you have to make sure that every student feels welcome in the building.

We also planned.

An event you may have heard of called Power Justice Freedom.

That's an event that we hold every year to celebrate the social justice activism that happens around our building that happens around our community to bring people together underneath one large event and that event guest speakers workshops everything was student led and.

That was all students.

And really that's what we stand for here at Franklin is making sure that every voice can be heard because when we all come together to do great things great things can happen.

Thank you.

My name Alex Zimmerman I'm president of Stand Up America.

Sieg Heil, my sweet, lovely Fuhrer.

Fuhrer, yeah.

Sweet, very sweet.

Sugar.

Nazi garbage rats from animal farm.

I want to speak about agenda.

What has happened my first last time.

Guys I honestly I love you.

You did something what is very unique.

You bring everything in Seattle under fascism control.

I call this a Nazi.

I call me Nazi fascism.

It's exactly what's happened.

I don't understand why you treat these people these people like a slave.

You understand why only 25 can speak when everybody have speak.

You forgot who you are.

We elect you.

You work for us.

You are servant.

That's exactly what's happened.

And you acting like a fuhrer.

You can make rules what is you cannot change.

Why you cannot change?

We don't have constitution of US.

We don't have constitution of state.

We don't have open public meeting act.

And why you treat these people like a second or third class citizen?

And exactly because look who here.

A homosexual, a woman, a minority.

How is this possible?

So people like you you know who belong to minority bring fascism to life.

I demand what is everybody will speak in 45 people too.

Oh why you stop.

No I have 25 seconds.

OK I'm sorry.

So this is exactly what is I repeat again and again and I will come to every meeting right now.

You ask to everybody.

Stand up America.

Clean this dirty chamber from this crook who thinking this us master us Führer us bosses.

You work for us.

Are you forgot about this freaking.

Oh I don't want.

Thank you very much.

After Alicia Taylor we will have Eric Bishop followed by Chris Jackins and then Matthew Brewer.

I'd like to cede my time to fellow parent Bob Ettinger.

I am speaking in support of the amplify science curriculum as a parent of a first grader at Hawthorne Elementary School.

I have substantial experience with science curricula and the next generation science standards.

I was a middle school science teacher for eight years, including five years at Mercer Middle School.

During this time, I was honored with multiple state and national awards for science teaching.

Since then, I earned my doctorate in education leadership at Harvard and spent three years as the managing director of STEM for a network of schools in Washington, D.C. I love Amplify because it is really good fun science.

For example in a first grade lesson students learn how animals can defend themselves by constructing models where they use toothpicks and plastic tokens to protect a soft clay body from the attacking teeth of a plastic comb.

This hands on activity is not an anomaly.

The kindergarten and first grade units do not utilize digital tools at all and grades 2 through 5 use them infrequently.

The next generation science standards call for shifting the focus from learning about a topic to figuring out why or how something happens to motivate students to care about what they are learning.

So instead of having a unit where students learn about phase changes in general one middle school unit is centered on students figuring out why a methane lake on one of Saturn's moons called Titan has disappeared.

They investigate using hands on activities and also really powerful digital simulations where they design progressively more complex models for what happens to microscopic particles during phase changes.

My son Roger is six years old and he loves figuring things out.

He is always asking why.

Amplify science empowers and engages students to keep figuring out why.

This is the science I want for Roger all his classmates at Hawthorne and all the children in Seattle.

I hope you honor the recommendation of the parents and teachers on the adoption committee who voted to recommend amplify for approval.

Thank you.

I'm here to support the work of the science adoption committee and I cede my time to Ruby Jabal.

I teach at Dearborn Park International a Title 1 school in the southeast.

At my school our students are creative bright and eager to learn.

They are primarily nonwhite speak at least one language besides English at home and are low income.

My students all students deserve the best science education we can provide them.

My families do not have the loudest voices.

They do not complain often.

They do not ask for much.

They do not have schedules that afford them time and flexibility to attend school board meetings.

They care deeply for their children and they trust that we are doing our best to provide them every opportunity for success possible.

I view this trust as a responsibility and a privilege.

I approach my work with a sense of urgency.

My students must learn and grow and take pride in their developing understanding of the world every day.

I joined the science curriculum adoption committee from the same sense of urgency.

My students need a science curriculum that empowers and challenges them and their peers throughout the district.

They deserve rigor creativity curiosity and real world applications.

They deserve to feel like they are dipping their toes into what science truly is.

I experienced the integrity of the selection process firsthand constantly mindful of how much responsibility we were given to complete this work and how far reaching our impact would be.

We were thoughtful intentional and as scientific as possible in our work.

Our process aligned perfectly with board policy 0 0 3 0. We were and are committed to selecting a curriculum that would empower those who are disempowered offering meaningful access and opportunities to students who have not received the science education they deserve.

We thought about equity true equity at every turn.

We considered the rigor of the material in all dimensions and looked at which curriculum would provide authentic opportunities.

When it came time to select which curriculum I felt best met our criteria I voted to honor my students their families my colleagues and our entire community.

I ask that you honor our work and our conclusions and support our students in having the curriculum that best meets their needs.

Thank you.

My name is Chris Jackins.

Box 8 4 0 6 3 Seattle 9 8 1 2 4. On the science instructional materials adoption five points.

Number one consider an example of scientific reasoning.

In the TV show Let's Make a Deal the aim is to find the top prize behind one of three doors.

One door is opened leaving the top prize behind the other two doors.

At that point should a player change their pick.

One supposedly obvious answer is that it makes no difference.

The right answer is that they should pick again.

Number two this example is subtle enough to sometimes give pause to experts.

The board is empowered to give independent overview to curriculum adoptions rather than simply defer to experts.

Number three do you believe that parents can use the material to easily help children with their homework.

Number four I have concerns that using online material may be a fad.

Darwin's book on the origin of species could be called out out of date but it is still a substantial text.

Number five I oppose any adoption that does not provide physical textbooks.

On the grant to South Shore five points.

Number one the grant agreement states that is effective as of 2017 which you just passed it.

Should that be 2019. Number two a private foundation appears to be buying the right to help select the principal.

Number three the foundation appears to have a veto over the membership of a committee that visits the school.

Number four the foundation appears to have supported charter schools.

Number five is the board only pretending to oppose charter schools.

Please vote now.

It's too late but you could change your mind.

Thank you.

After Matthew Brewer we will have Emily Alaski followed by Alexia Katsaroff and then Julia Ward.

Hi Matthew Wheeler teacher Washington Middle School acting member of the science adoption committee and I cede the rest of my time to Sabrina Slye.

Buenas tardes.

My name is Sabrina Sly.

I am a freshman at West Seattle High School.

I'm here to share my experience with amplify curriculum as a student at Denny International Middle School.

I am a current member of student student superintendent student advisory board and I'm here to support and I'm here supported by Spanish speaking parents from Denny.

Amplify is a great science curriculum.

It provides a highly organized system that helps students from different learning styles to understand and learn science.

It provides reading materials and simulations that are fun and engaging but at the same time informative and it helps connect lessons to real life situations.

It is a great way to learn how to use technology and all my classmates appreciated being able to learn in a modern way.

One of my main career options is to be a scientist.

Amplify has really pushed me to want to learn more in the science field regarding equity and the importance to make sure all students have access to science.

Amplify provides that opportunity for everyone.

I'm asking you to listen to students like me that have experience that have the experience of using amplify and to the great teachers that believe this is the best curriculum for us and our future.

Please do the right thing.

Thank you.

Hi I'm Emily Lasky.

This is my 11th year teaching at Asa Mercer International Middle School.

I teach 7th and 8th grade science and CTE.

A recent media story is called into question if the board was informed about the approval and use of Amplify Science waivers in SPS.

In the fall of 2017 all the Amplify Science waivers approved by the superintendent were given to the board C&I committee.

When I started teaching in 2008 the science materials were obsolete and didn't align to all the standards at the time.

We got new science standards the NGSS in 2013. I was horrified to hear from the district that there would not be a science adoption.

In 2015 I went to OSPI to write items for the new state assessment.

I came back dejected.

The materials we had were not even close to meeting standard.

The lack of technology in our school and even if our materials were aligned to NGSS our students would be unprepared to show what they know.

In 2017 on the recommendation of my science department our MRSA principal Chris Carter applied for an instructional waiver to use amplify science curriculum.

The waiver was approved by the superintendent.

Shortly thereafter I stood before you with my principal and several students to urge you to approve board action proposal for the purchase of instructional technology to support teaching and learning in core subjects.

The board's approval of this proposal provided historically underserved students of color across the district with access to powerful electronic resources Let's support innovative science teaching and learning.

Your decision provided for the first time in Seattle Public Schools equitable access to digital tools that will prepare students with the 21st century skills they need to be successful and closing the opportunity gap for our district's most vulnerable students.

In fact the school board's own policy number 2022 reinforces and underscores the importance and urgency of placing instructional technology in the hands of our students.

This policy reads the board believes that students need to be proficient users of information media and technology to succeed in a digital world.

Therefore the district will use electronic resources as a powerful and compelling means for students to learn core subjects.

When I heard last year that we were finally having

Hi my name is Dr. AJ Katsaroff and I'm going to cede my time to Hilary Nguyen.

My name is Hilary Nguyen.

I'm a senior at Franklin High School.

I am currently taking three AP classes while juggling a part time job providing child care for my family and being active in my school's community.

I cannot speak at the last board meeting because I was taking care of my nieces who attend Van Asselt Elementary School and I want them to have the opportunity to learn science material that supports them in their academic growth and instead of material that their mom had learned in elementary school.

Change should be made according to the recommendations of the science adoption committees for grades K through 12 because the pathway to science educate science education in high school begins in elementary school where the students learn core material needed for science in high school and beyond.

At Franklin some of our teachers and peers were part of the adoption committee for grades 9 through 12 and recommended new curriculum aligned to best ways aligned best ways to engage my diverse classmates in learning science.

As students we prefer engaging activities that allow that connect that connect the material to our own experiences especially for elementary school students like my nieces.

I have I have experienced that when my science teachers follow the storyline representing new materials to us they find ways to connect the material through phenomena where whether it is historical or something that occurs in our everyday lives.

It is more engaging and fun to learn.

Science is not just a bunch of concepts but a way of understanding our lives figuring out our figuring out our world and how new discoveries can lead to innovation and change.

The adoption of new science curriculum is important not only for us at Franklin but also our future students like my elementary school nieces.

Just because my community looks different does not mean that we are not the same in valuing high quality science instruction.

I know that our students are capable beings that can be pushed and when we are pushed we can excel in not only our individual academic growth but growth as a school and as a community.

Please honor and respect the recommendations of all science adoption committees.

Thank you.

After Julia Ward we will have Joshua Tashima Boyd followed by Christine Benita and then Melissa Westbrook.

Hi I'm Julia Ward and I teach sixth grade at Jane Addams Middle School and this is a floppy disk.

My students don't know what this is and the only reason it ever comes up is because the save icon on the computer is drawn out like this and it doesn't make any sense to them but they memorize it so that they can save their work.

It doesn't make sense.

Science and technology move awfully fast.

NGSS is not just a new lingo for old science.

It's a new way of thinking about how students learn and think scientifically.

Seattle needs a science curriculum that can keep up and amplify is that curriculum.

Amplify was written from the ground up to address the new standards.

Our students are preparing for careers that don't even exist yet.

Superficial updates to old textbooks just won't cut it.

Online curriculum does not mean computers are teaching the class or students are constantly staring at screens.

If this was a plug and play curriculum none of these teachers would be here supporting it.

They are here supporting it though because Amplify is scientifically authentic and engaging curriculum.

Online is good because it means Amplify can change.

in response to feedback from teachers and to keep up with the present.

Families have asked but what about hands on activities.

My kids want to dissect a frog or mix chemicals in test tubes.

I share the belief that students learn by doing but a hands on abacus is not superior to a calculator.

The simulations on amplify are interactive.

Students complete dozens of thoughtful investigations using computer simulations in less time and in more accurate ways than if they use tinfoil and Bunsen burners.

Guess who else uses software to conduct simulations.

Professional scientists.

I'm Joshua Toshima Boyd, and I'm a teacher at Franklin High School, and I want to talk about evidence and trust.

We live in a society today where it's acceptable to ignore evidence, where people can believe the earth is flat, a 20-minute Google search is equivalent to a doctor's opinion, and where fear-mongering blogs can completely derail this adoption process.

As science teachers we are familiar we are the front line of combating this shift from evidence.

So I feel it's important to say that this amendment is ignoring a lot of evidence.

HMH scored slightly above amplify in overall score for the first field test alone.

But breaking down the actual data reveals why the adoption committee voted for amplify instead.

First of all on the final rubric the summative assessment if you will amplify scored higher in all three categories review criteria field test data public feedback.

HMH had strong evidence for only one out of 10 components for field test.

Amplify had five.

Amplify student growth for far outstrips HMH 23.8 percent higher growth for first grade and 42 percent higher growth for fourth grade compared to HMH 10.4 percent more students felt like they could do science and amplify with amplify and teachers had a higher positive response.

Why are we discussing a curriculum that taught 42 percent less information.

This brings me to my second point.

Trust.

You all have said multiple times you could wish you wish you could be in the schools more often.

You're not the ones teaching this content having to pass the WACAS to graduate.

You're not the ones in the classroom.

So you have to trust those who are.

The adoption committee has presented amplify as the first choice because the data and evidence supports this as the best option for engagement learning and teaching.

Not picking this option is saying that instead of trusting the analysis of the committee you'd rather have our students using inferior curriculum that does not align with standards.

Finally screen time is a critical part of society and digital simulations are extremely valuable in science education.

Amplify has been mischaracterized as being computer based trust that teachers know how to balance the active with the digital.

This amendment shows no trust in the teachers the non biased adoption committee nor in the teachers properly implementing screen time.

Please focus on the evidence and approve the first and most supportive option for our students.

I cede my time.

Thank you Christina.

My name is Debbie Bermette and I teach first grade at Sacajawea Elementary School.

Five years ago I was on the elementary math adoption committee along with Director Burke.

Our committee like the current science adoption committee was composed of a broad range of educators and community members.

Together we did a deep dive into the common core state standards for mathematics which is the guiding framework for what students should learn.

After much research our committee recommended a curriculum that the school board declined to adopt.

Instead they chose a curriculum that is significantly out of alignment with the common core standards.

The math department is caught in the middle of adhering to the school board decision and supporting teachers to do our job which is to teach the common core.

As a result classroom teachers such as myself have been scrambling and piecemealing materials together to use.

The results are that we have less time to polish our lessons and math instruction varies greatly from classroom to classroom across our district.

Some PTAs in more affluent neighborhoods have funded new math materials for their students that are aligned with the Common Core.

This creates a huge inequity.

This disparity could and should have been avoided had the school board listened to the committee they commissioned to do the work of adopting math curriculum.

I implore you not to repeat the mistake with the science adoption.

Please listen to the professionals who are on the science adoption committee.

They have done their homework and they are the experts.

Thank you.

After Melissa Westbrook we will have Brad Shinaka followed by Jen Fox and then Lisa Boving.

Good evening.

Points to consider on the science adoption.

You are not supposed to be curriculum experts.

The hardworking people on the committees are but your policies must be followed and you should know all the costs.

If one curriculum is computer based I see in the bar that the numbers have already changed and yet it isn't even highlighted so someone would know that it happened.

Your own policy states that on adoptions, input should come from any form, and yet the committee only took input from their own online form.

You know, via your own emails and phone calls, that there are many more people involved.

I note that I am the co-chair of the Information Technology Advisory Committee, and we have never discussed the need for more computers for middle school.

I have questioned why, though, at almost the end of the school year, there are millions of dollars sitting there in the budget.

Now I think I know why.

How is it equitable to choose a mostly online curriculum for kids who may not have computers at home.

As well the FAQs say that better off PTAs have helped their school's science needs and Title 1 schools can't.

And yet in 2016 Hamilton Middle School PTA probably mostly white parents instead of having a science fair paid for all the science teachers to go to a science conference where they all went to amplify training sessions.

So I ask you, does that fall into the good PTA category or the bad PTA category?

It's interesting that PTAs get shamed when it's really the district's fault that every single science classroom is not fully equipped.

I believe the Amplify adoption has been mishandled.

How many stories have you been told about how Amplify came through on the waivers.

Three.

Three is too many and it's unacceptable.

Amplify's own proposal for adoption says in part over the past two years Seattle and Amplify have built a strong alignment across teams and support to promote adoption and continuity.

So I guess the district's been working with Amplify to promote that adoption because that's exactly what Amplify says as well.

Amplify did not score the highest in the K-5 section.

The rubric in the bar is the one that shows that HR HMA scored higher.

So I'm thinking directors Burke and Pinkham know how to do math did the math and since the committee gave them no explanation as to why they picked Amplify over HMH.

Thank you.

I cede my time.

Hi my name is Nahoma Alamayo.

I am a junior at Franklin High School.

I was a member of the high school adoption team.

I think the process was very organized and I am proud of the proud of our conclusions as a student member of the team.

My voice was respected and honored.

I was also one of the four case study students when I was in biology.

We we use carbon times and I was selected to give my input regularly during the year.

I believe the researchers took my ideas seriously and cared about my learning.

I did all of this because I think that everyone should have the opportunity to learn science and this new curriculum is more inclusive to all students than the old one.

I think that starting with a phenomenon that we figure out and talk talk about our ideas with our peers is very important to learn.

I also am here to represent my brother who is five years old and starting to get interested in science.

I think he should feel like he can do and he can do and learn science that he has a choice to be a scientist if he wants to.

The way he learns science is very important because part of the things that shape his future.

happen in school.

In biology class I was lucky enough to be in science classes where I have learned a lot of things that apply to my life outside of class and solved problems.

Saw myself as a scientist.

Believed that I could do science too.

And I want this for my little brother my friends and the students in Seattle Public School System.

I am urging you to choose a curriculum that is aligned to the phenomenon storyline and storyline curriculum that teaches kids in a new way how to learn science.

I know the K-5 alignment team worked as hard as the high school team to find the best curriculum.

I hope you honor the work of all adoption committees.

Thank you.

My name is Lisa Bovang and I'm here to give an elementary science historical perspective.

I have been involved in elementary science both in the classroom and at the district level for 27 years.

I have seen lots of changes over that 27 years.

Some 20 plus years ago we had an elementary science curriculum adoption.

I was on that team.

Along with this came a large NSF grant.

At this point we had cutting edge curriculum.

We had eight full time science curriculum specialists.

Science teaching was equitable across all elementary schools.

Times and standards do change however although this curriculum was very hands on it had several missing components.

We as a team added a science writing component component assessments and upgraded the curriculum to meet state standards.

More changes happen.

The NGSS began and then were fully adopted in 2013. Our curriculum does not match these new standards as you know.

We tried several several curricular ideas to try to accommodate this.

For example PSEP which is Partnership for Science and Engineering practices and alignment team.

In addition alignment team was formed and we partnered with UW to launch some new curriculum that met the standards.

Although some great curriculum and ideas resulted from these moves this was not equitable because not all teachers had access to these materials.

A lot of excitement came with the news that we were getting a new science adoption and adoption team was chosen.

Research and evaluation took place and in the end three different curricula were field tested.

After many hours of hard work a recommendation to adopt amplify science was made.

I have had the opportunity to teach some of these units and was very pleased about that decision.

Equity for all students is important.

We owe it to all of our students to teach the highest quality curriculum available.

I feel it is critical to move forward with the adoption committee's recommendation for Amplify Science.

Thank you.

After Jen Fox we will have Rosalyn Shea followed by Rosemary Arneson and then Yolanda Jones.

Hi my name is Jen Fox.

In my 19 years of teaching in Seattle Public Schools I've gained a unique perspective of all the science teaching in our district.

I've taught biology at Roosevelt High School.

I've served as a high school science coach and I currently teach biology in the HCC program at Hamilton Middle School.

I served on three high school science adoption committees.

I participated in 2001 for biology, 2010 for chemistry, physics, and physical science, and the current adoption.

The latest process was by far the most comprehensive and thorough process I've participated in.

I urge you to support the adoption as our high school curriculum is outdated and is not aligned with the next generation science standards.

New curriculum is urgently needed to attend to these standards and bring a consistent science experience for all students in Seattle Public Schools.

In 2010 science teachers from across the district rallied to support the science adoption.

We were excited about the prospects of materials and resources.

Teacher look for teachers looked forward to the professional development that which accompanied the adoption to collaborate and share student learning.

Unfortunately the adoption was not passed due to budget constraints.

So we had to keep our old materials.

At this time I saw how the failed adoption affected schools in every part of our city.

The outcome fractured our science teaching community and left us with no resources and no professional time.

Many teachers who were at the table in 2010 have been reluctant to come back to do this work because they felt so let down by the process.

When teachers do come and collaborate they strengthen their understanding to meet the needs of all learners.

If we fail teachers and learners again I'm afraid we'll never have a full team of high school science teachers to do this important work again.

Teachers will always work hard.

To get the job done.

But having no curriculum just really makes our jobs a lot harder.

Some schools have purchased materials with the collection of collection of science fees and funding from PTSA while other schools were left with nothing.

This led each school to interpret the standards themselves and the students experience is vastly different in every school across our district.

This is not fair to our teachers or students.

Please adopt materials today.

I cede my spot.

Hi my name is Teresa Alsept and I teach science at Eckstein Middle School and I'm speaking today against the adoption of amplify.

Two years ago when we were told about the waiver our science department at Eckstein decided unanimously not to be part of the pilot for amplify.

We did so for the following reasons.

After listening to the Amplify rep checking online resources we decided there was just too much computer time and not enough hands on lab time for middle school students.

We thought the students would spend too much time reading or watching simulations about science instead of actually doing science.

Also because it was not a board supported adoption the department felt we would be taking too big of a risk with our students.

Since that time our department has learned much about amplify that tells us that we made the right decision.

There are very few experiences for students to be scientists solve problems and collect data themselves which means that students discussions are not about what they saw but what someone else saw.

We also have seen the formal assessments are very weak.

The pre and post tests are the same.

There is very little higher level synthesis or application questions.

Also the assessments themselves cannot be modified by the teacher which adversely affects all our special ed students ELL students and the students most at risk.

The lesson structure of amplify is very repetitive with simulations being revisited too often.

Which makes it.

Which is what makes it so boring for students.

The curriculum might be good for teaching literacy skills.

However it is not a good curriculum for teaching middle school science skills and science.

To all our students.

Finally I would like to say that I am not against changing curriculum as some have implied.

From what I have seen the TCI curriculum seems very good and I would be happy to see it adopted.

I'm simply against the adoption of amplify because I think it's a poor choice for middle school students.

Thank you.

I would like to cede my time to Sophia and Ruth.

Hi my name is Sophia Martinez and I'm from June Adams Middle School.

I would like to talk about amplify and how it benefits us.

The sims help us engage with others and the difference between using sims instead of textbooks is it engages us.

We only use computers about once every week or two weeks.

We do activities where we go outside and we get out of our seats and we learn.

Also in one of our.

Units we got to go outside and play roles of things like prevailing winds and ocean water.

We have a lot of class discussions to present our thoughts.

Amplify is so important and kids like it.

I think school isn't just about learning but showing learning can be fun and pushing us to want to learn because we will learn so much if we so much more if we want to learn.

Without Amplify I believe class will be less engaging.

Amplify is so important to us.

Amplify is so much more than just being on a computer.

And even the small time we are we're very engaged and mostly discuss things that matter.

Hi my name is Ruth and I'm here.

I'm happy to be able to tell you how much Amplify has helped me grow as a scientist and how much I enjoyed it.

Amplify changes science class to a hands on activity which interests us to want to learn which I believe helps us learn even more.

My favorite time was when we got to go outside and act like molecules.

It gave me a new perspective of how molecules worked.

Science is what motivates me to come to school every day and give it my best.

Thank you for listening to my ideas.

After Loranda Jones we'll have Brian Bushwitz followed by Emily Bramwell Churkin and then Robert Firmanio.

Hello my name is Yolanda Jones.

I am a second year teacher in Seattle Public Schools and I also had the privilege to be part of the high school adoption committee for science curriculum.

I'd like to take a moment to recognize a number of the voices that we will not hear today because so many of us want to talk about science adoption that want to acknowledge white supremacy in this community in this district because that is why I am here.

When I think about science.

Director DeWolf spoke at a study session a few weeks ago and said that teaching old curriculum could be construed as racist.

And I'd like to add that teaching old curriculum that is wrapped in new cellophane could also be construed as racist.

The question comes to are we actually serving our students.

If you listen to the voices of the students you listen to the voices of the teachers that have come up here that are in the field tests.

It's pretty clear how students and how teachers are feeling about amplify.

I'm getting excited hearing that that's an experience that students are going to have before they come to my high school classroom.

Because they will be prepared to have storyline driven phenomena driven science.

That's what NGSS is.

And if curriculum isn't NGSS.

Sorry if curriculum isn't phenomena driven then it isn't going to be standards aligned.

We need to have a curriculum like amplify that is standards aligned to make sure that we are preparing kids our youngest learners starting at five years old so that when I get them.

Nine years later 11 years later.

When I'm talking about a phenomena I'm talking about a storyline.

They know what I'm talking about and we can get to diving in to science.

Thank you for your time.

Please adopt amplify.

Hello my name is Dr. Brian Buckwitz and I'm here to support the K-12 science instructional materials adoptions.

I'm wearing a few hats tonight.

I'm the father of two children at Gatewood Elementary School.

I am a community representative on the high school instructional materials adoption committee.

I have a Ph.D. in molecular and cellular biology and I'm a biology lecturer.

As an instructor myself I'm especially interested in evidence based inclusive teaching strategies that help all students learn.

I encourage the school board I urge the school board to adopt the recommended instructional materials for K-12.

These materials are aligned with standards.

This is important not only for testing purposes but because the standards represent consensus as to which concepts and which skills are most important to learn.

Importantly these materials also use a phenomenon and a storyline to engage students as scientists.

So many students come to college thinking that science is about memorizing facts rather than being empowered to ask questions about their world or to apply knowledge to problems.

In addition by adopting these strong materials you would provide an equitable foundation across the district to support all students.

In addition teachers could build upon that strong foundation.

Our adoption committees reviewed the instructional materials in several stages with many eyes on the materials.

I especially valued the perspectives of the teachers to hear field test teachers describe how these instructional materials help them to be even better teachers was powerful was inspiring.

Please honor the work of the adoption committees and vote for strong equitable science instructional materials.

Thank you.

My name is Emily Cherkin I'm a former Seattle Public School student myself and a former incoming Seattle Public School parent.

I am strongly opposed to the adoption of the amplify science curriculum in public schools for two very specific reasons.

First real learning occurs during messy three dimensional hands on experiences in the context of real life relationships.

Real learning is difficult and carves new neural pathways in growing children.

Real learning does not come from remotely monitored bite sized screen based lessons.

Curricula like amplify will do our children a tremendous disservice and rob them of critical skill building and relationship honing opportunities skills that will matter in the future.

Secondly where is the long term evidence that technology based curriculum is more effective than well-trained well-supported teachers.

To quote one committee member.

We want students to be engaged in conversations around evidence and using evidence to draw their conclusions.

We have decades of research about the value of relationships between students and human teachers the foundation on which all other learning occurs.

If scant evidence exists to justify a nine year nearly nine million dollar tech based curriculum where is the justification to implement.

I am hard pressed to see how amplified science will benefit all students when minimal research exists to suggest that it can.

To improve equity in student experience put nine million dollars towards hiring more teachers supporting those teachers decreasing class sizes and finding a quality science curriculum that uses real hands on experiences.

This seems a vastly better use of resources than a high risk roll of the dice on a educational screen based tool that benefits few beyond those in the industry who seek to profit off our struggling students.

I urge you do not outsource the teaching of science to a bunch of screens.

Thank you.

After Robert Formano we will have James Monson followed by Dr. Katrina Reardon and then Patricia Bailey.

Hopefully you have this handout in front of you.

My name is Robert Femiano a former Seattle school teacher of 30 years.

I have two concerns.

Number one is the district in financial debt to Amplify Corporation and number two has the partnership between Amplify and Seattle schools impacted the selection of Amplify science.

Senior staff have admitted the vendor amplify gave the district free goods but was everything really free.

Exhibit A is a list of purchase orders to amplify including costs but notice the invoice column says zero dollars and quote still to be invoiced since 2015. Does that mean the district is on the hook for over four hundred thousand dollars in these orders.

Where is the agreement saying the pilot costs were free.

Notice at the bottom of the exhibit it says 9,000 subscriptions were purchased August 2018 for a little over $50,000.

Two points, A, the board had been previously told that all subscriptions were paid for by Amplify.

So which is true?

And B, this vendor request falls squarely during the Amplify period, which would seem to be a conflict with RCW competitive bid rules.

Notice in the February 2018 that 37 units of first grade physical science were ordered for a penny each.

Exhibit B shows the true cost is $1,200 making the total over $44,000.

Exhibit C from Amplify shows that quote they worked in concert with the district unquote citing quote SPS leadership provided key insight and feedback on future Amplify products and curriculum redesign.

It says the goal all along was to offer quote support to promote adoption.

In short it seems the district helped Amplify develop their product who then apparently either gifted or loaned it.

The pilots back to us with plans for an inside track on the adoption.

I ask you to delay until the questions are answered.

Thank you.

Next up we have Dr. Katarina Katrina Reardon.

After that we will have Patricia Bailey and then Dominga Mendoza.

I work at Fred Hutch Cancer Research Center and I'm a resident of West Seattle where I'm raising my sons.

I cede my time to Heather.

My name is Heather and I've taught second and third grades in Seattle Public Schools for over 20 years.

Why do we have adoption committees to make the best choices for kids through a collaborative process that is informed from data.

I am frustrated that a few individuals can completely disregard this work our dedication and expertise.

There have been two other recent adoptions with very different outcomes.

For math the recommendation of the adoption committee was not honored.

HMH math and focus was adopted.

It is not at all aligned with Common Core.

Several elementary schools have waivers to use other curriculum.

and have to pay for it from the building budget.

The math department now works on alternate units pulling resources from other sources resources creating assessments that align with Common Core.

I use math and focus less than 20 percent of the time which is true across my building.

The textbooks gather dust on my shelf.

This is clearly not aligned nor equitable.

The reading and writing adoption committee's recommendation for CCC was honored by the school board.

This curriculum is being widely used across our elementary schools.

The reading and writing department is concentrating efforts to support the implementation of curriculum through lead teachers coaches and professional development.

This is very different from what we have experienced around math curriculum.

This has been a successful rollout and it was recommended the professionals were trusted.

I served on the science committee and I want you to know that this process was thorough very thoughtful and took place over the course of many months and hours.

It was not based on the table of numbers that is in your amended proposal.

It was based on deep rigorous and important conversations representing the stakeholders across our district students parents scientists teachers and principals.

In these deliberations we shared ideas challenged each other and came to a conclusion based on an anonymous vote.

After listening to all members carefully I support this recommendation that comes from me and my peers and I urge you to vote for the amplify science recommendation before you.

I'm Patricia Bailey a retired Seattle teacher.

It is evident to those watching the unfolding of the science adoption.

That there are so many underhanded dealings it's difficult to keep track of them all.

We see the gifting of huge sums of money from Amplify Corporation without the required board approval.

We see the illegal implementation of pilot programs without the required board approval.

We see the hiding of pilot data from.

Board oversight.

We even see violations of.

State law.

And much more.

Because the skullduggery is being exposed the argument switched to insinuating that board members are engaging in racism if they reject.

Amplify's science program.

Quite the opposite is true.

Low income students were performing much better before the use of this program.

As you have seen from data already presented.

It is the accuser.

Who is engaging in racism with callous disregard.

For the achievement and interest of minority students.

Race baiting is a groundless accusation of racism to push a different agenda.

The individual using such a tactic may apply appear socially conscious as a facade.

But they are cynically using race to manipulate the board to promote.

A big business venture.

Board members should ignore individuals who stoop to such cynicism and who disdainfully dismiss citizen input.

As.

Noise.

This is intolerable.

In a democracy.

Imagine the precedent set.

If Amplify is adopted supported by these kinds of tactics.

It invites corporate predation on children and representative school boards everywhere.

This situation requires a thorough.

Investigation.

Thank you for your hard work.

And oversight.

Dominga.

Mendoza.

Jennifer Goldman.

I'm Jennifer Goldman.

I teach ELL biology physics and chemistry at Rainier Beach High School.

I'm ceding my time to Katie Kressel.

All right.

Here we go.

Hi I'm Katie Caressel and I have the privilege of teaching eighth grade science at Denny International Middle School.

I have a master's in teaching from UW where I was trained in ambitious science teaching practices that directly align with NGSS.

I also proudly call myself a product of Seattle Public Schools.

The last time Seattle adopted a science curriculum was when I was in middle school.

We need science education for this generation.

I believe to do that we need a science curriculum that allows all students access to science content.

Not all students want to learn science.

Just for science sake.

Students become engaged in science when they see how it connects to their lives to the real world.

Amplify provides this opportunity with every unit.

It centers its units on current and real world scientific topics while following a storyline.

Instead of doing random experiments students engage in a variety of lessons that allow them to collect evidence they need to ultimately explain the storyline the phenomenon.

I understand that it's a concern that students may be doing less hands on lessons or spending too much time in front of a computer with amplify.

That's a valid concern but amplifies curriculum does include labs and hands on activities as well as a wide variety of other learning opportunities.

Bad teaching back when I was in middle school was our teacher giving us a textbook and telling us to read it for the entire period.

Today.

Bad teaching.

Is sitting students in front of computers all class.

Many of our science teachers in Seattle are doing great things with their creative curriculums and partnerships but we cannot adopt individual teachers.

Amplify provides us an opportunity to have a strong collaborative effort around common curriculum thus supporting every teacher in providing a strong science education for all.

Thank you.

Christopher Lausted.

Good evening.

My name is Christopher Lausted.

I am the parent of two students at Ballard High School and I was a volunteer member of the High School Science Curriculum Adoption Committee.

I work at the Institute for Systems Biology a research arm of Providence St. Joseph as a research engineer.

And one of my great pleasures is working with our high school interns.

We have semester long and year long internships every year and we also host the Logan Center for Education which is involved in curriculum development and professional development and has always been involved in the development adoption of next generation science standards.

And now it is imperative that we adopt a NGSS ready curriculum.

So it was very interesting to be involved in the board and to meet the.

The students the teachers the parents the community members the professors who all contributed especially the students.

You heard some of them tonight.

These students are amazing.

They spent weekends and evenings inside going through piles and piles of materials texts labs.

you name it and look giving real feedback based on their firsthand experience and telling what really helped them and their friends learn.

Now old fashioned curriculum like I had when I was young works for a minority of students.

NGSS is designed to help all students and looking through all the curriculum most of what we saw is still very old fashioned with maybe a few pages inserted here or there to pay lip service.

to NGSS.

Fortunately there was one option one combination of materials that would be NGSS for physics chemistry and biology.

It's in the report.

Please read that all.

I strongly urge you to adopt this.

Thank you.

This concludes public testimony this evening.

Thank you.

Thank you to everyone that came down both to see public testimony in person and those of you all that prepared your public testimony spoke your truth from your heart.

Thank you ever so much.

We go back now to board comments who would like to speak next that hasn't spoken as yet and then we'll circle back around on comments.

Director Pinkham.

Qeˀciyéẁyéẁ Good evening.

Thank you to all the public testimony tonight.

You know this is I think a decision that's going to have to be I have to take in everyone's input.

You know that there are people here that are supporting it and also the people that have some concerns and questions about it because that does unfortunately raise some questions in my mind as well that I hope will get answered and addressed as we go through this process.

Also got to trust the process and so believe me if we have questions you know hopefully we'll get them addressed and we'll see which way this will fall.

I guess for me when I think about this I am concerned about access to technology for our low income students.

And so that would be a question I need to ask our committee.

How are we going.

Is that addressed in that as students go home will they be able to get online or.

If they don't have that what tools are going to be available for them.

So those are kind of questions that I have still in my mind and hearing some of the people come up and it sounds great.

Those that have commanded the science curriculum on their own seems like they're able to supplement amplify but there's still some teachers out there that may be struggling a bit with it and they're relying maybe a little bit too much on the curriculum and need their expertise.

So the professional development training also needs to be in there but we got to.

I feel like I have to make sure we're being fiscally responsible as well when we look at the cost for this.

So I still have some questions and hopefully we'll get them answered as we address them as it's being discussed tonight and again I want to thank you for your input as well because that gives me more questions to ask and.

Hopefully we'll get things worked out.

Want to thank first Gabby who was here earlier sharing her her inputs and views and perspectives of what it's like to be a student at Franklin High School.

The John Rogers choir that was here earlier for those that weren't here and definitely a treat to hear them sing and sorry we missed the teacher appreciation week.

So again the teachers that are here.

Thank you for all the work that you do and working with our students.

I also want to point out that the partnerships that we also have out there.

The Seattle Public Schools Seattle Public Library is recently working with our Urban Native Clear Sky Youth Council where they had an environmental equity service.

So I encourage you go to the SPL.org website type in the environmental equity series and look at the Clear Sky what they've been doing in partnership and helping students find their voice through a project oriented.

Project or project driven learning versus here you got to learn reading here you got to learn science.

But when they had that project orientation they learned some reading learned some science learned other ways.

You know not just.

Focused on one particular subject they were able to broaden bring in other subjects with that.

So I appreciate what they've been able to do there.

So excuse me we have.

Our list of.

Presenters are.

Pretty long.

I wrote down some comments here.

Miles Grant.

Thank you for your presentation showing how well students can have a voice at a Franklin University that power justice and freedom.

Sounds very interesting and I'll see if I can get out there and see some of your student led events.

To.

I do not have any upcoming community meetings or community meetings planned unfortunately.

I am going to try to join.

Director President Harris here because she has one this weekend.

So.

She's joined a couple of mine so I think I owe her that to be out there for her community meetings so that's.

Look out for me there if anybody needs to keep in touch.

Or.

For my district.

Also.

I don't know if people heard.

I will not be running for re-election so.

Just want to make it finally.

People have been asking but just.

OK.

No.

OK.

No PEC.

Never mind.

But thank you all Qeˀciyéẁyéẁ for being here and stick around for the discussion that we're going to have on the science adoption.

Thank you.

Director Mack please.

Good evening.

I remember the first time I came down here to testify and how much time and effort it took to prepare my comments and thoughtfully speak in front of the board.

on an issue that was incredibly important to me at that time it was around the boundaries and capacity and here I sit today as a school board director working on the same issues later.

I have the utmost respect and appreciation for all of the folks that have been participating in the adoption process over the last few years with.

Having having the state adopt the standards many years ago and us not starting an adoption process then and actually moving towards getting curriculum has been challenging and here we are today with with challenges around that.

I appreciate all of your comments and concerns.

I think there's a lot of things that have been raised here.

I'm not going to talk more about my perspective.

We'll be asking questions and having more in-depth discussion around the specific BARs as they come forward.

But please know that any questions around process has nothing to do with the complete and utmost respect for the experts in your perspective.

I have I know everyone puts so much time and effort into this work and how much you care about it and how much it matters.

And we all have the best interests of students at mind.

And I just really want to as Director Geary expressed express a lot of gratitude for all of that effort.

I also want to acknowledge the folks that are in the audience that didn't get a chance to speak because we are so focused on this adoption process.

I there's a number of topics here that I wish we would have heard from and I'm disappointed that we don't have enough space to do that.

The white supremacy in Seattle Public Schools I'd like to hear more about what we're talking about there.

There's a number of folks that were bringing that up and I'm curious to get more information on that.

So I encourage you all to send e-mails.

We do read them even if we don't respond.

The Dearborn Park Elementary enrollment was on the list.

Washington Middle School was on the list again and then curriculum environmental ethics and climate change.

Number 46 was is on there which I.

find personally really interesting my undergraduate degree was environmental and social system studies.

So I'm disappointed that we didn't get a chance to hear from these other folks and hopefully we can get folks to take the time to send an email and let us know what their concerns are because it does matter and it does impact our thought process.

I forgot to mention that on June 5th we're having another work session.

This is another hot topic likely.

Student assignment plan and boundaries for the 2021 school year.

Did I get that right.

Yes.

1920 because we've already settled that.

But on June 5th we'll be having kind of the initial conversation about what potential changes are in line.

I think there's well I know there's the Licton Springs Robert Eagle staff that whole area.

Wing Luke and I I can't remember all of the topics off off the top of my head so I apologize for that but that'll be a really helpful work session to to get a sense of.

what issues are going to be coming up that we'll be deciding on in the fall.

And with that I apologize too I have not been able to set up a community meeting the last one I held no one showed up to.

That might not have been true this this month but unfortunately it's it's difficult to find the time on the weekends.

Because frankly we spent a lot of time away from our families for this work and I have to preserve that as I know y'all have families as well.

So you might understand that.

With that again thank you for coming.

I look forward to the future conversation.

We've got other issues today and that's all I've got.

Director Patu.

Good evening.

It is always a great thing to actually to be here and be able to just come and share what communities bring to us and just looking forward for.

the various issues and comments that are brought up and hopefully that as a board director that we can actually be able to look at some of those issues and be able to work work it out so that we can be able to say that progress has been made.

And a lot of comments that are actually happening.

I think that you know we take it very seriously because we're up here to represent all our children in Seattle Public Schools and.

It's a very important thing that we make the right choices in terms of the education of our students.

So thank you for coming tonight and sharing with us your comments and and it's you know or complaints.

I mean that's what a board director is supposed to be to take the good and the bad and hopefully be able to make the best of everything that goes on because my job as a board director is to make sure that your student get the best education that Seattle Public Schools can provide.

So it's always a wonderful thing to be here tonight.

As I was sitting here I was thinking OK and I also that June 26 will be my last day on the board.

I'm going to be stepping down.

But at the same time it has been an amazing journey being on the board of Seattle Public Schools because you're actually making choices in terms of the education of all our students in Seattle Public School.

So thank you for actually coming in and letting us know your thoughts supporting us in many ways and hopefully that we can continue on to do the best that we can to provide our students in Seattle Public School the best education that we can.

Thank you.

OK.

Last but not least.

to do is announce that I do hold community meetings every Tuesday morning at Soka on Blakely just north of the U district from 8 to 9 30. I post them on Facebook but you should check before you go because if there is a family emergency then I may not show up.

So just before you leave the house check Facebook to see if the event is still there.

If I don't make it I will post that I won't.

be there.

We've had 10 surgeries in my family over the last month.

So who knows.

Right.

So but I think I'm good for the next few.

Thanks.

OK.

Last but not least Director Patu we are going to miss you something fierce.

We will have.

an appointment process set up in the next few days in order that it is a transparent appointment process.

It is my understanding that the appointment process will mean that we appoint a director until the November 20 21 school board election.

These are the laws as explained to us by legal counsel and King County records and election and sometimes the laws are awfully darn inconvenient that we will have a fair and transparent policy or excuse me procedure to set up director Patu's successor until that November general election and I say successor because there is no darn way you're going to replace Betty Patu and all the years that she has given to this district both as staff and as an elected board member and I for one am going to miss her greatly.

Events.

We have an opportunity to go to Garfield High School tomorrow night at I believe 6 p.m.

to talk about the anniversary of the board.

Brown the Board of Education.

I saw our esteemed colleague former board director Stephon Blanford in the audience earlier.

I don't know whether he's left or not but he'll be part of a panel and as well Cece whose last name I am forgetting Nathan Hale high school student who is doing a documentary on ethnic studies and is going to do great things.

We just hope we get to rehire her when she comes back from Pacific Lutheran University.

You've seen her down here testifying and she's she's one of our bright stars.

And also at Chief Sealth International High School this weekend on Saturday is a race and equity youth and family racial justice summit 10 a.m.

to 3 p.m.

It's on Facebook.

It's out there quite a bit.

Seattle schools NAACP youth group are helping co-sponsor it.

Please get registered so they have a food count.

Other.

Gatherings of this kind have been profound and powerful and I cannot encourage you to take even more of your free time from your family to attend.

And should you have more free time than that would like to invite you to.

Casa Latina next week May 23rd from 6 to 7 where they will be awarding Chief Sealth International High School's Proyecto Sevor program that's been in effect for 20 years and I for one living up the street from Chief Sealth International High School have too many siblings that are alumna and including my daughter is an alumna there.

That's something to be extraordinarily proud of.

If you have additional time.

And you like lasagna you have a 50 percent chance of getting lasagna this Saturday from 3 to 5 at the Delridge library.

There are those in the audience that have tasted it and can attest that it's worth it.

And then on June 20 2015. June 15 2019 at the Southwest library from 3 to 5 a next community meeting and July 20 3 to 5 again a Saturday at the West Seattle library.

There are thoughtful discussions.

We welcome you and it sounds like I'm going to have at least one other board director attending and my hope is staff will attend as well.

We have a couple of other announcements to make but I think they're more appropriately put into the science adoption intro item which now will bring us to feedback on any topics not science adoption that we heard testimony from from other board members.

Seeing none then we move to action items.

There were three things taken off of the consent agenda.

The minutes were taken off the consent agenda for the April 24th partnership work session and give me a moment while I bring up while I bring up my corrections on one paragraph where we asked about professional development for since time immemorial the statutorily required curriculum to be taught in our schools and asked whether or not it was true that the STAR mentor teachers and the Seattle residency teachers had not taken advantage of professional development for STI.

Gail Morris manager of Native Education suggested yes in fact that was true but efforts were being made and I believe that I've sent out the corrections.

Mr. Boy acting chief counsel will those corrections do it.

Can we use that as Scrivener's.

Ronald Boy I believe it would be best if we read those into the record would you like.

I have to find them in my e-mails my computer is not working.

I know we've been in and out.

Technical challenges.

And I had them up on mine and the Wi-Fi dropped out.

Let's move on then to number five from the consent agenda and let's bring up a motion On number five and that's the amendment to board policy 2024 online learning repeal of board policy number C 16.00 acceptance of correspondence or college courses for high school credit came before C&I April 23rd for approval.

Motion please.

I move that the school board amend policy number 2 0 2 4 online learning as attached to the board action report and that the school board repeal board policy number C 16 dot 0 0 acceptance of correspondence or college courses for high school credit also attached to the board action report.

If the motion is approved the changes would be effective starting the summer term of the 2018 19 school year.

That motion please.

Second the motion.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues.

Director Geary did you want to lead off on this.

We've had some e-mail traffic about clarifications.

Yes.

So a couple of things.

One this was passed through for approval and I am not at this point suggesting to my colleagues that we shouldn't approve this.

This particular policy I've had we've had some e-mail correspondence and I did have somebody come visit me.

And it isn't the policy in and of itself that appears to have any that I have concerns about.

It is the superintendent procedure that is attached to the policy.

We as a board don't necessarily we don't approve the superintendent procedure but in an act of transparency it was included.

So for us to I feel to have gone and just voted on it on consent without further discussion about that distinction would have left people feeling unheard with regard to their comments about some potential problems in terms of the language in the procedure as it may apply to special education families and their entitlement to a free appropriate public education.

We've discussed that.

It's my understanding and it has been we are and it is my understanding that the district is willing to engage in further discussion around the superintendent procedure to make sure that the change in language that have happened.

can be vetted against some specific scenarios so we can make sure that we're not having any unintended consequences.

The purpose of the policy change and the superintendent procedure fundamentally was twofold and one was around consistency in its application across our district.

This is important under our new strategic plan because we want to make sure that our operations are consistent for our families.

And so that was part of what what brought about this and to make sure that there we are not inadvertently creating opportunity gaps by allowing certain communities to act one way under the procedure and other communities to act another way.

So.

I just highlight that in approving this policy there may and should probably still be some scrutiny in terms of the procedure.

Did you want to add anything.

Chief DeBacker.

Diane DeBacker chief academic officer and no Director Geary you said it very eloquently.

We believe that the policy is ready to go forward the procedure.

We need to make a minor change to that but that is why we actually wrote some language into the procedure to take care of situations exactly like the ones that were surfaced in the last couple of days.

And then we had some questions.

Do you want to ask your question.

Oh around.

Oh OK.

So 1599 the new law that came forward you looked at that and determined whether or not it would impact the policy.

We do not believe that 1599 impacts this policy.

It does impact the next one that you will be discussing but not this one directly.

Thank you.

Director Mack comments questions concerns.

First gratitude for all the work that has gone into this and the responsiveness.

A couple of kind of technical things that I just noticed and I appreciate that Director Geary kind of discovered that the procedure issue and that that's been publicly corrected.

The question that when I was reading through the BAR It says that says something about the fiscal impact of running start that because the limit of four credits it's going to actually cause fewer students to take running start.

But in the policy it specifically calls out that running start doesn't count in this count.

So I'm so I because there's so much there's kind of confusion around like.

There's four credit limits.

But what what are we talking about when we're limiting that.

And it explicitly states in the policy that running start is excluded from that that that's part of our district program so you can have more than four credits in running start.

It's not going to be limited by that four.

Correct.

Correct.

Thank you.

I just I just want to kind of publicly clarify that because the BAR has a fiscal statement saying something about running start.

Which I think is probably something that got a little confused there.

I don't think I just want to.

It's important that folks understand that that Running Start doesn't have a four credit limitation.

The other thing I just kind of caught is that the policy title is no longer online learning.

The policy title is out of district credits and credit recovery.

In the previous policy it did have some statements around our values.

There was a statement around value of not having too many online courses something around that I can't remember exactly what it was but there was a statement in there that statement is no longer in this policy because this policy is actually more globally focused around out of district credits and credit recovery.

And.

My question about the title change is that the motion and maybe this is not for Ms. DeBacker but for Mr. Boy the motion language says online learning but the new title is actually out of district credits and credit recovery.

I'm just from a technical standpoint I want to make sure that the title of the policy is actually correct in the motion.

Ronald Boy I'm looking at the recommended motion right now and it indicates I move that the school board amend board policy 2020 for online learning as attached to the school board action report.

Yeah it doesn't it doesn't I mean is it appropriate to actually have the motion read and change the title to.

I feel like for clarity because the actual the motion to amend that policy that is correct because that's the correct language.

And I believe it might be appropriate if we amended the motion to include just language that the new policy will be titled as attached policy 2024 with the new the new language.

So we could add something if you wanted to make a motion to amend the motion a motion to amend that we just had some language on just to be perfectly transparent.

The new policy 2024 will be titled out of district credits and recovery.

Can I can I make that motion to amend.

And can I ask you to be the one to read that statement properly into the record of the motion.

Yes and I believe that I have to do something else.

If you could let the other conversation come to a pause and then go back and pick that up so that you can get the value of your colleagues input prior to making an amendment.

Oh much appreciate.

Certainly.

OK.

Was that the only issue you had here or did you have other issues that you wanted to continue on.

I don't want to break up.

No I appreciate.

No that was actually that was the other the other question around the four credit limit was answered and then and running start and then the online learning and the title change was my only other question.

And then Director Geary talked about the 1599 aspect.

So yeah I don't have any further questions.

Other questions comments concerns will circle back around.

Director Burke.

I want to thank my colleagues for their attention on this and the other similarly numbered policy that I constantly confuse as well.

And then just around the naming.

I don't know if it's a if it would be appropriate to call it a Scrivener's thing just to amend the school board amend and rename board policy blah blah blah.

Or if you actually have to state the name.

I see acting chief counsel shaking his head up and down that I think that works for him.

Yeah.

OK.

So now my question folks is so we're going to clarify the procedure.

How do we get that out there in a transparent fashion.

The procedures have caused us some trouble in the past and we're looking to learn from our past and how do we how do we get that out there so that everybody feels comfortable that we are in fact being transparent.

Should potentially come back through C&I committee.

It would it would just as a report with an attachment would that work for you all.

I see consensus.

OK so we've got a Scrivener's error.

Let's do a roll call.

on the motion as amended with Scrivener's error to the title amend and rename.

Roll call please.

Director Burke aye Director Geary Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye Director Harris aye.

This motion as amended has passed unanimously.

OK.

Number six from the consent calendar amending board policy number 2 4 2 0 high school grade and credit marking policy came before C&I December 11th for approval.

Motion please.

I move that the school board amend policy number 24 20 high school grade and credit marking policy as attached to the board action report.

From the motion motion.

We should make her sing it.

OK.

Questions comments concerns from my colleagues.

Director Mack you removed it from the consent calendar.

Please tell us why.

Thank you.

Yeah I don't have any opposition to the current changes that are being made and I understand that there's been a lot of work going into them.

I just wanted to daylight the fact that the legislature just recently passed 1599 which is likely to impact this policy and a lot of other things that we have going on so that this policy might come back in the not so distant future again.

And so I just I wanted to invite staff to kind of daylight that for the public and clarify what those changes might be.

Yes Diane DeBacker chief academic officer.

You are correct in the passage of House Bill 1599 and the governor signing it just last week.

It will impact this policy.

We are still receiving guidance from OSPI but we do know that it will be impacted.

Just to remind you this particular policy has been sitting to the side for several months as we.

finished up 2024. So the only thing that has changed with this is the passage of House Bill 1599. So we will be addressing that as we receive more guidance.

It will impact it.

OK.

Roll call please.

Director Geary.

aye Director Mack aye Director Burke aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye Director Harris aye this motion is passed unanimously.

OK and let's go back to amending and correcting the minutes.

Acting Chief Boy will you help me out here.

I think I found it on my phone at page 4 paragraph 4. I'd like to amend the first sentence that reads in part of the second sentence Director Harris ask about since time immemorial and training for STAR mentor teachers.

Ms. Morris reported STAR teachers have not yet been trained and since time immemorial period.

The substitute language then and I sent this earlier this afternoon and encourage everybody if they want staff's assistance and if you spot something Heads up get it out there.

Director Harris asked Native Programs Manager Gail Morris whether it was true that STAR mentor teachers and Seattle teachers residency STR teachers had not taken this since time immemorial professional development question.

Ms. Morris reported STAR mentor and Seattle teachers residency teachers had not taken the offered professional development period.

So I make a motion to amend and correct the minutes as follows do I have a second awkward making my own motions.

I read it on e-mail I second that.

OK.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues seeing none.

Roll call please.

Director Burke aye Director Geary aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham

Since I was not there I'll abstain.

Director Harris.

Aye.

This motion has passed with a vote of 5 to 0 to 1.

OK.

See number one approval of annual highly capable program plan came before C&I April 23rd for approval.

Motion please.

I move that the board approve the highly capable program plan as attached to the board action report for submission to OSPI for school year 2018 19 to support highly capable services and the district's gifted eligibility identification process and that the school board authorize the superintendent to apply for the allocation of funds from OSPI.

I second the motion.

Comments questions concerns from my colleagues that may not have been brought up with a thorough conversation during introduction.

I'll make a comment.

This is the first time I think that I have indicated that I will vote in favor of same and it is my pleasure to do so because I think we've made some progress and how we report and how we communicate.

Other comments questions concerns saying none.

Roll call please.

I see acting chief boy at the podium.

That's not necessarily good news.

Just to be clear it appears that we approved the amended minutes but we didn't actually approve the amendment to the minutes by vote.

So busted busted.

So I think we.

OK.

So can we approve the minutes as amended.

We did the amendment.

Just let's fix it while we can please.

Thank you.

Motion to approve.

Can we do a motion while we're in a motion.

So we just want to be clear with you.

Did you feel like you approved the the changes.

Yes.

OK so then we need to.

So then we need to approve the full body of the document as amended.

I skipped a step.

I was so excited.

So should we call the vote on the motion that is active and then return to that one.

I'd like to get the other vote done now please.

Thank you.

Chairs prerogative.

I don't want to step in it twice in a row here.

OK.

So that essentially looks like I move approval of the minutes from the April 24th to 2019 oversight work session and the May 1st 2019 regular board meeting as amended.

Second.

All those in favor please excuse me roll call please.

Director Burke aye Director Geary aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham abstain Director Harris aye.

OK now we go back to the roll call vote for C1 approval of annual highly capable programs plan.

Having seen no comments questions concerns from my colleagues roll call please.

Director Burke aye Director Geary aye Director Mack aye Director Patu aye Director Pinkham aye Director Harris aye.

This motion has passed unanimously.

Yeah let's let's take 15 minutes to stretch and I would suggest to the folks that are in the audience this will be posted on YouTube in the morning and we've taken our public comment so you can get home to your families.

And and or watch the latter part of this if you're interested given all you're all's investment in this process and you can have a meal while you watch 15 minutes we're in recess.