- This topic has 14 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 3 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
Item D2:
Can I get clarification on “A Trustee who has a graduating high senior in 2021 has requested to add her signature to the high school diplomas”? Trustee Harrison was the only nominee for Board Secretary at our 19 Nov 2020 board meeting and was unanimously elected by all of us. The board secretary signs the diplomas. I can’t make sense of this agenda item.Item D3: Adoption of Resolution for Retention and Incentive Payment Due to the COVID-19 Pandemic and Amendment to the Round Rock ISD 2020-2021 Compensation Plan
I appreciate this item being placed on the agenda for consideration. It seems to me that part of this discussion should include an explanation of the cumulative total (cost) such an expenditure would result in and where that money would come from. This explanation should be made clear to us and the community. Am I overlooking that explanation? I don’t see it in the background info in Board Docs nor do I see it in the proposed resolution. Please help.Item D5: Student Recovery Plan
In reviewing these six slides, I see the administration doing the best they can with a vague resolution passed by this board (in a 5-2 vote) from the 17 Dec 2020 Regular Board meeting. These slides demonstrate why I did not vote for this resolution which states the following: “Develop a recovery plan to support students and teachers to counter the effects of COVID-19 on student outcomes and social and emotional learning.” At that same meeting, I favored, supported and even seconded a different resolution, one put forward by Trustee Bone as it is more meaningful and would have provided our administration with actionable direction. Bone’s resolution stated, “The board directs the district to start a recovery plan to support our students and teachers as we move back to traditional in-person education.” Disappointingly, only she and I supported her resolution.I am horrified by the decline in the mental health of our students, the increased rates of depression and suicidal ideation, the negative effects of isolation, the decline in academic progress and the increase of academic cheating we see in our community as virtual learning goes on month after month. I am committed to continuing to advocate for the end of virtual learning after May 2021. I will be the voice of students who deserve the finite resources in RRISD to be used for what RRISD does well, teach on-campus and in-person. To that end, many of our students were not prospering academically prior to March 2021 and I look forward to spending our time setting goals for the administration to begin to make meaningful progress for every student.
Covid-19 has done to education what 9-11 did to our country. We have to acknowledge that it has changed everything and yet find a way to move forward. Three thousand students have already left RRISD since August 2020. No matter what we decide (continue virtual learning into the next school year or not) it’s possible that more students may leave. In listening to parents across RRISD, I believe that a failure to recommit to on-campus school in August 2021 will result in the largest loss of additional students.
I am looking ahead…thinking of students, teachers, needed skills, financial viability of RRISD etc. In my view, successful organizations remain committed to their core competency, their competitive advantage, they know what they do well and they focus on it. Texas on-line public school has been around for a long time and is available for free to all 5.5M TX students. They have perfected the on-line learning model and employ expert staff. I do not favor getting into the business of competing with these on-line vendors. The only thing it will accomplish is take away resources from in-person education and further blur our focus and understanding of what we do well.
Thank you again to RRISD admin for doing what you could with that vague resolution from the 17 Dec 2020 board meeting. I am not surprised that your last slide ends with a question, “What additional clarification and/or priorities does the Board recommend for the development of the district’s recovery plan?”
As to the signature request, BDAA Local policy allows for additional signatures of trustees who have a senior. It has been used in the past, and I’m sure it will be needed in the future. It is a simple courtesy for a fellow trustee who is not an officer to be able to sign the diploma. In the next year or 2 I know that a couple of current trustees will have seniors at the same time, we may want or need to implement this policy during that year. This is the same policy that allows former trustees the opportunity to come back and present diplomas to their child, or even a grandchild. Again, it’s a simple courtesy for those that have served our district.
As to your questions Trustee Weston regarding the budget and the proposed “Retention and Incentive Payment” I do believe that staff will be prepared to answer your questions. I have a question for Dr. Presley and Dr. Adix and Ms. Vierra regarding who will be eligible; those employed since August only, or some other calculation? I will make sure to copy and paste your questions posted here to make sure they have been seen by the administration and will be addressed on Thursday.
While I agree with Trustee Weston that the motion passed on December 17, 2020 (well technically it was December 18 since it was after midnight) was vague, the other option did not take into account any of the unknowns, particularly those regarding TEA. After midnight on the last day of class for the fall semester was not the prudent time to say we will do away with virtual learning in August. We have absolutely no idea what TEA is going to require or allow or not allow. I do agree we need to do a better job preparing for our student’s recovery, but to make such blanket decisions at such a late hour, without any guidance from TEA was not something I was comfortable doing. I think we can strengthen the guidance we give to the administration and amend that motion, and I was hoping that our LSG training originally scheduled for last week would be the start of that. Now that our Lone Star Governance training has been rescheduled for the end of this month, I hope that we can begin to focus on our goals and constraints, to actually focus on our students. This is where we will have the most impact and be able to be very specific in our desires for the district. I would encourage the new trustees to look at other districts around the state that are using LSG. I know that our student’s mental health needs will be paramount and is a topic that is important to several trustees. So in the LSG model, for example, a constraint the board MIGHT want to discuss would be, “The superintendent shall not allow any high school counselor to have more than XX students.” And then the progress measures would be how many times counselors are meeting with each student; or something to that effect. It is within this LSG framework that I believe most of what the board wants to accomplish will happen and it will be the place to really dictate what we as a board would like to see in the recovery plan.
Trustee Weston,
I do agree with you that the recovery plan slides have much more to be desired and a vague resolution from the board may be the cause.
However, I strongly disagree with you and Dr. Bone on the issue of ‘encouraging in-person’. I disagreed back in December. I disagree now. ‘In person’ is not a silver bullet to solve all problems, especially when we cannot practice it safely now during the current transmission surge, which is, hopefully, the last one.
I do not think any discussion on the merit of ‘in-person’ learning over ‘virtual’ learning or when to stop ‘virtual’ learning was productive or will be productive in the near term. Now is one of those moments where we can either raise the bar by encouraging open-minded and thoughtful conversation and out-of-the-box ideas or slide deeper into the hell realms of divisive battles.
Every family has different circumstances. The district shall serve all.
I will post specific comments on the slides after I gather my thoughts.
Thank you Pres Weir for addressing my concerns here. It is appreciated.
It sounds as though you are comfortable and it’s not unusual for a non-board officer to sign diplomas. Can you clarify if this trustee would only sign their own student’s diploma or the diploma of all 2021 RRISD graduates? I have full confidence in Trustee Harrison as our elected Secretary and as long as this in no way undermines her role therein, I am amenable to this.
I am glad to hear that you believe staff will be prepared to answer our questions on item D3 (Possible Incentive Payments). As a trustee, it is far more helpful for me to understand the cost of proposals in advance of our meetings, rather than learning that in the course of our meetings. My request going forward is to provide this kind of information (cost of proposals) in advance as we plan future agenda items.
And I appreciate your perspective (and Trustee Xiao’s who has contributed on this thread as well) on Item D5. I eagerly await our LSG training. I will not be supportive of “virtual learning” in RRISD after May 2021. I have explained why. I don’t see any end in sight to the harm coming to our students or the reversal of the loss of 3k students, until we are all back on campus starting in Aug 2021. The number of times a school counselor (and we have many who are fantastic) meets with a student doesn’t matter if that student is struggling with the things I talk about over and over again. For me, it doesn’t matter what TEA decides regarding the funding of “virtual learning” in ISD’s across the state. I believe that the vast majority of RRISD parents (desperately) want their children back on the campuses our community has invested in for a long time with meaningful access to the best teachers in the state of Texas. Also, a likely unintended consequence of pressing forward with a “virtual learning” investment in perpetuity will be a community that grows skeptical of the construction of new schools, expansion of schools and other RRISD facilities for students who learn at home. Our students depend on the community trusting and supporting that their tax dollars are spent wisely. That support and trust rises and falls on their observations of our decisions at the top.
In August the vaccine will have been out for 9 mos. As of 8 Jan 2021, Dr Presley reported (via e-mail to me since I asked him for the data) that 179 of our 269 employees (age 65+) have received the Covid-19 vaccine. The remaining 90 employees in this age group will be getting the vaccine this week or have decided not to get it or have gotten it through other means. I see on RRISD social media that school nurses across the district have been vaccinated. Everyday that goes by more and more RRISD employees (who want it) will be vaccinated. This is a meaningful turning point in this pandemic.
Lastly, I have an error in the fourth paragraph of my original post. I wrote: “To that end, many of our students were not prospering academically prior to March 2021…” I want to correct “March 2021” to “March 2020.”
The first thing I notice about the recovery plan is the timeline. To me, it is unacceptable. There are no weeks, let alone months, to wait for a comprehensive plan to come from the top. The recovery plan should start now, from the bottom up.
Every campus should be allowed to adjust their local practice to address their unique situation. Secondary schools are different from elementary schools. There are many experimental adjustments we can make now as we weather through the current surge and vaccination rollout. For example, both in-person and virtual learning can better use the asynchronous time for teacher-student interaction.
We absolutely need to take input from teachers, principals, and parents in district-wide decision-making. But the recovery plan, even if it is just a partial one, should be in place by the beginning of the last 9-week period, and can be further fine-tuned based on community feedback. I fully expect many more families will return to campus by then if we are fully committed and demonstrate it is safe to do so.
As on the issue of ‘virtual learning’ after Aug 2021, TEA funding, political wind or majority popular view will not determine my position. Real unmet needs (fear of human contact or comfort at home itself are not) will. Though we may not be legally obliged to offer the option for a Special Ed or TAG program, I am not going to dismiss the option now without fully evaluating the cost and value of ‘virtual learning’ or exploring creative solutions.
Lastly, I want to point out that we need to look forward, not backward. Many industries, including education, are forever changed by the pandemic. Whether the changes are desirable or ones we are comfortable with, if we adapt and innovate, we will excel. CTE programs, for example, can take advantage of remote learning without redundant investment in equipment or personnel across campuses.
I have a typo in the above post. I meant ‘as compared to SPED or TAG’.
Dear Fellow Trustees,
I concur with Trustee Xiao on many of his points. I have stated my opinion on the Dias and on this message board previously. I am not in favor of eliminating virtual learning for the 2021/2022 school year. We will have many, many families who still feel it isn’t safe for their students to return to school next fall. I know each of us have different levels of tolerances for what is or what is not safe. But as Trustee Xiao said, “The district shall serve all.” I could see referring those families to an established online Texas public school if it was only a handful. But it will likely be thousands. As such, we have a duty to provide a quality education to them until this pandemic is past.
Furthermore, I believe that virtually learning gives us an additional tool in our toolbox to better meet the needs of ALL students. As Trustee Xiao stated in his post, the world has been forever changed by the pandemic and we can’t go back to the way it was before. We have a chance to innovate our practices and utilizing virtual learning in some capacity will likely be a part of that innovation.
As for the recovery plan, I prefer to hear Dr. Presley’s presentation before making any comments.
Regarding item D3 (now E3 in updated agenda): Adoption of Resolution for Retention and Incentive Payment Due to COVID-19 Pandemic and Amendment to the Round Rock ISD 2020-21 Compensation Plan
I like to request that items that are placed on the agenda that affect the budget have attached documentation of how the budget will be impacted. I personally do not look at expenditures as a singularity but how they fit into the whole budget and impact the budget overall. If this is expenditure will increase our projected $27 million budget deficit, I would like to understand how. Also is there a budget modification needed for this item then I assume we have to vote on that also?
Regarding item D5 (now E5 in updated agenda): Student Recovery Plan
I reviewed the six slides and had similar thoughts to Trustee Weston’s first post.
I clearly see the desire from Trustees to meet all students needs and am happy that is something I know we can all agree on. Currently the district is not fully serving all children so we should discuss this as a board so that recovery can take place for all students. The emails we receive stating how students are not being served in-person; the data that was provided in our board update on Friday January 5th which showed that we had a net decline of 44 students from December 8 to January 5th; along with the over 3000 students that did not show up this year point to the fact that the district is not serving the needs of these students. Also, if 48% of elementary students are attending on campus then those same families, we can assume for the most part would want their middle and high school student(s) to attend in-person also, right? This is not happening as we can tell by the percentages. The district only has 33% of middle schoolers and 18% of high schoolers attending on campus. This directly points to the fact that the district is not serving potentially 15% of middle school and 30% of high school students that want to be back on campus but are not. Another point of data is across the state TEA posted that as of October 2020 54% students were learning on campus, why are RRISD numbers overall so much less than across the state? I do not believe it is all due to demographics.
I am continuing to advocate for BOTH virtual and real in-person choice. I am urgently concerned about the high school students that do not have years to recover from the learning loss, especially seniors. I think the board should afford these students some urgency in providing them a real choice in their education. RRISD students should be afforded the opportunity to stay academically competitive and receive real in-person education with fidelity. I hear Trustees say they want families to have choice and I fully agree with you, let us provide choice! Maybe Trustees believe there truly is choice of virtual and in-person education? That is just not true there is virtual at home or virtual in person. The slight difference is that a student can possibly interface directly with the teacher in-person during asynchronous but so can the virtual student. There should not be a contest or argument between virtual and real in-person. Our district should provide BOTH choices virtual and real in-person. Real in-person is what many parents and students have been waiting for all year and here we are in January and 10 months since this all began with no real in-person choice for our students.
I will continue to place urgency on this issue of real in-person education with fidelity because I care about those thousands of students that our district is not serving by not providing it. In a Texas Tribune article dated December 15th and titled “Texas school leaders urge state not to cut funding as they struggle with declining enrollment” stated that “Enrollment increases as more students attend school in person, Morath said, referring to data collected between September and October.” So, giving our middle and high school students a choice of real in-person would not only be serving them as we are called to do but it could also help bring students back to our district which would help with the shortfall of funds that Trustee Vessa points out in other posts.
In the December 17th meeting Trustee Vessa at around 6:20 (hr:min) stated that we all want to make in-person middle and high school conditions better and looking around she asked if anyone disagreed, which not one Trustee did, so I am asking that we all get behind that and ask the district to make the conditions better? What would it take for my colleagues on the board to act and make the in-person experience something that the middle and high school students can thrive in academically and socially? What are the roadblocks to getting a better in-person experience for our students? As Trustee Harrison has stated many times and it is presented on slide 4 of the presentation hybrid is not sustainable so what are we doing to improve this not only for our students but teachers?
I am here to work with other Trustees to get all our students what they need to be successful and to give families with middle and high school students an actual choice (it is my understanding this is already happening in elementary). I hope this starts conversation because after watching the December 17th meeting and seeing Trustee Xiao agree with a nod of the head that the district needed to improve in-person and Trustee Vessa state, with passion, the same it gives me hope that we are all moving to consensus and can work to give clear direction to the administration to provide families choice for virtual and real in-person education.
Thank you for adding your thoughts to this post Trustee Vessa. You stated “it will likely be thousands” of students who would leave for Texas on-line public school if RRISD ends virtual learning in May 2021. I don’t want to misunderstand you so please clarify if this is what you meant. I ask because this is a bold statement and I haven’t been presented with any data (survey or otherwise) that suggests this is the case. Do you have information that hasn’t been shared with me?
What I do know is that 3,000+ (mostly K-5) students fled RRISD back in August 2020 and haven’t returned as of Jan 2021. Anecdotally I have heard from several parents of these students who reported leaving in search of on-campus, face to face school (RRISD only offered virtual learning for the first several weeks of the 2020-2021 school year) for their children or on-line learning vendors who have a proven track record of success in the highly technical on-line learning delivery model.
Please take a look at a CNN article that was posted on 11 Jan 2021 titled “How Miami-Dade Opened All Its Public Schools – and Kept Them Open”. Miami-Dade is the fourth largest school district in the US with 350,000+ students. Their superintendent, Alberto Carvalho, stated in the article, “There is no substitute (for in-person school), regardless of how great the technology may be. You cannot Zoom effectively into a full understanding, a full level of engagement for students.”
*Message board rules prevent me from linking to the story here.Parents plead with me via e-mail, in public comments at our board meetings, and when I am running errands at the post office and the local library to end virtual learning. Many high school students chose to continue virtual learning not out of fear of the coronavirus, but because it is appealing to sleep in, watch videos and play games, participate in academic dishonesty and a number of other unhealthy, unproductive and damaging reasons.
In defense of these students, I have to admit that the on-campus experience for them is very undesirable with so few of their peers on campus, having to wear a mask all day, assigned seating at lunch and accepting the academic disadvantage of competing with “virtual learners” at home who can cheat so easily. Our students deserve so much better. I hope that meaningful improvements are made to the on-campus experience for the few high school students we have on campus in this Spring 2021 semester.
I hope that more trustees will join me in recognizing that the time to end virtual learning in RRISD is May 2021. Over 100 Texas ISD’s have already ended (starting in Oct 2020) virtual learning (except for medically fragile students with physician documentation). In their announcements to their communities, they all provide the same explanation. They cite damage to the mental health of students and significant learning loss. On-line learning requires expertise, attention, focus and resources. RRISD does not have the resources to provide both world class in-person education and world class virtual school. Continuing to do both past May 2021 will only erode the thing that has attracted families to our community for a long time: top tier in-person education.
Thank you Dr. Bone for the clarification. I fully agree with you that we need to improve in-person learning and that it is urgent to do so, for junior and senior courses and subjects building upon themselves each year are the hardest to catch up in. I will 100% be behind the proposal to move away from the “virtual in-person” hybrid model we currently have in place. In addition, I would suggest all assessments in the 4th 9-weeks be conducted on-site for all students unless physician documentation says otherwise.
And we should not view safety measures, such as mask-wearing, as roadblocks for improving in-person learning. I will not, at any point, agree to compromise safety. We make our schools safe and more families will choose to send their kids back to campus. The safety measures are there for everyone and to protect everyone even if some individuals have no fear of getting COVID. The Miami-Dade school district Trustee Weston mentioned has equivalent, if not more stringent, safety measures at all secondary schools, just like RRISD, including mask-wearing at all times, restroom use restrictions, hallway transitions procedures, athlete screening, social distancing in classrooms …
It offers both in-person and virtual options. Though not a hybrid model, its in-person instructions are mostly computer-based and offered behind masks and glasses. A smaller percentage of secondary students, as compared to elementary students, chose the in-person option and the in-person number is highly correlated with median house price. Its overall student enrollment declined as well. Miami-Dade school district did not open schools until late October, after a major cyber-attack brought down the online platform and the local transmission curve fell into a valley.
When we quote a news article, an official statement, or a journal paper, the context and qualification of the conclusion are often omitted because of limited space and time. The nuisance of the lost detailed information, however, is often crucial for a better understanding.
Trustee Weston, you have tremendous empathy. You listen, you reach out and you research. I, too, am extremely frustrated with myself about the parents’ pleads. Why can’t I do more? Why can’t I be of more help?
With some scientific knowledge in the vaccine field, personally, I have no fear of the adverse effects of mRNA vaccines. The thing that keep me up at night is that the efficacy of the vaccines in the field may be (far) below the phrase 3 trial results, after perusing the study protocols and published data, and the effects of the new variants of the virus. Like many of my peer scientists, I am optimistic, but not so certain that we will be out of the woods by August.
We all hope so.
As a school board, we have neither the knowledge nor the data to discuss whether or not we should or can toss out the virtual option or preventive control measures NOW. I sincerely ask fellow trustees to focus our group effort on a recovery plan based on comprehensive and solid science and one that helps everyone, virtual or in-person. We are battling the effect of the pandemic together, not fighting each other over resources because of choices.
Dear Fellow Trustees,
As I read over these posts, I see areas of agreement that we can act on.
1. We agree we need to know how many families would like to continue in the virtual model for at least the first semester of the 2021/2022 school year. Once we have that data, we can work with Dr. Presley to plan and prepare. We can direct Dr. Presley to conduct a survey so we have this data by Spring Break.
2. We agree that our in-person and virtual models need to improve to meet student needs’ better. I believe actions are being taken right now to make that occur. The installation of the interactive flat panels in middle and high school will go a long way toward improving both models of learning. No longer will teachers or students be focused on the screen in front of them. They can use the interactive flat panels to see the students virtually and engage with the course content. We know the middle school installation will be done the beginning of February and the high school the end of March. I am grateful for the work of staff to make this happen in an expedited fashion. I also think the two-way discussions that we are voting on at tomorrow’s meeting will help administration with more ways to improve the student experience.
I look forward to finding more areas of agreement we can build upon.
Item E-4: February 1st, March 1st, March 29th, and May 3rd as asynchronous days.
Please give us clarification on why these specific days are chosen during the meeting. Thanks!Trustee Vessa,
I agree with you.
I would like to see actual data from community members about who would continue virtually, if offered, and would be in favor of requesting a survey to that end.
The vaccine rollout has been abysmal and I do not believe we will be out of the woods by August 2021. I feel that it is premature to say that we should and will not offer virtual learning in the Fall.
I would, however, like to see virtual and in-person options be completely separate instead of hybrid. Surely this is something that could be managed in a district of innovation…
Dear Fellow Trustees,
I agree with Trustee Harrison that in the fall, when we will likely see fewer students opting for virtual and class sizes for in-person can be larger, we should do all we can to eliminate the hybrid learning model and allow in-person teachers to just teach in-person students and virtual teachers to just teach virtual students. In some cases, it may be necessary for a teacher to offer a virtual only block, which the rest would be in-person. It may also mean that high school students wanting specific classes that do not have enough students for a virtual class on the home campus, may need to be combined with other virtual students from other RRISD campuses.
I also think we may want to get feedback on the following: for the 2021/2022 school year to say that only in-person students can participate in extracurricular activities (maybe excluding clubs and some other activities where virtual participation is actually possible). If a family is truly choosing virtual for fear of the virus, it would seem appropriate that those same families would not be comfortable with that student participating in football or basketball, as examples. I am fine with continuing the policy of allowing virtual students to participate in extracurriculars for the 2020/2021 school year, as I can see how parents with children in those activities could feel they are protecting teachers and staff by such a course of action. However, come the 2021/2022 school year, if all teachers and staff that want a vaccine can obtain one, that should not be a concern.
Of course, this is all contingent on the vaccine actually being effective for persons 16+ and the vaccine being widely available to that population.
It looks like we may have some common ground.
First, can we agree that when it comes to students who participate in on-campus extra-curricular activities that they be required to participate in school on-campus for the 2021-2022 school year for the obvious reasons Trustee Vessa mentioned?
Second, I want to underscore that there is currently no choice between virtual school and on-campus school. Specifically, regarding the middle and high school on-campus experience: on-campus, face to face instruction is currently not available to our students. The choices are virtual learning at home or virtual learning at school. This is not choice. In both cases, students are required to look at a computer screen all day and cannot participate in labs or other proven hands-on pedagogy methods in their classes. Furthermore, being on campus is an arduous, unpleasant experience for these students. Can we all agree that this has got to change and we must provide the real choice of on-campus, face to face education as an option for our students? And can we agree to provide guidance to the administration on a timeline for this?
I really appreciate the dialogue here.
- The forum ‘Round Rock ISD Trustees Message Board’ is closed to new topics and replies.