Board Meeting Minutes - Dec.13, 1999

FEDERAL WAY PUBLIC SCHOOLS
SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 210 - KING COUNTY
FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 9800

THE BOARD OF EDUCATION OF THE FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 210 HELD A REGULAR BOARD MEETING AT 6 P.M., MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 1999, WILDWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, 2405 SOUTH 300^TH STREET, FEDERAL WAY, WASHINGTON 98003.

BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT:
LINDA HENDRICKSON, PRESIDENT
JIM STORVICK, VICE PRESIDENT
HOLLY ISAMAN, DIRECTOR
JOEL MARKS, DIRECTOR
ANN MURPHY, DIRECTOR

STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT:
TOM MURPHY, INTERIM SUPERINTENDENT
MARJORIE A. deMERS, SECRETARY

1. CALL TO ORDER

President Hendrickson called the meeting to order at 6 p.m. She then recessed the Board meeting to executive session at approximately 6 p.m. to consider matters pertaining to personnel, negotiations, real estate, and legal issues.

2. BOARD MEETING RECONVENED AT 7 P.M.

President Hendrickson recessed executive session and then reconvened the regular Board meeting from executive session at approximately 7 p.m. President Hendrickson welcomed those present to the Board meeting, and she extended a special thank you to the Wildwood Community, staff, and students for hosting the Board meeting and for providing the refreshments during the informal reception prior to the Board meeting.

3. FLAG SALUTE

Mr. Tom Capp, Acting Principal of Wildwood, introduced the Wildwood Student Body Officers to lead those present in the flag salute. The following students were introduced: Melissa Johnson, Jessica Cha, and Brandy Frazier.

4. COMMENTS FROM TOM CAPP, ACTING PRINCIPAL OF WILDWOOD ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Mr. Tom Capp, Acting Principal of Wildwood Elementary School, welcomed the Board and those present to Wildwood Elementary School. Mr. Capp thanked the students and the staff for the wonderful decorations they provided for the Board meeting. He said that the theme at Wildwood for the month of December is to celebrate the season of giving. He said that the philosophy at Wildwood is that the community gives to us good teachers, a place to come each day, and in return he said that the people at Wildwood want to show their community that they are able to help those who may not be so fortunate this holiday season. He brought the Board's attention to the basket of food that will be donated to the Food Bank. Mr. Capp said that he told the students that if they collected over 2,500 pounds of food, he would dress like Santa Claus and spend a day in a tent on the roof of the school. He said that each day he checks to see how close the students are to collecting over 2,500 pounds. He said it is looking very likely that he will be on the roof top. Mr. Capp said that Wildwood's enrollment currently is close to 650 students in preschool through grade 6. He said that the staff is made up of talented, dedicated, and energetic teachers who provide a solid education for the children of the Wildwood Community. Mr. Capp said that, in addition to the teaching staff, there is great support from exceptional educational assistants, counseling staff, reading tutors, playground and lunchroom assistants, bus drivers, custodial staff, and most of all a wonderful parent volunteer group who come each day to spend time with the students. Mr. Capp introduced to the Board the members of the Wildwood office staff. He said that Christine Young is his right hand assistant and serves as a vital link with the staff, community, and students. Mr. Capp also recognized the office secretary, Linda Currey, who could not be present at the Board meeting. He said she is in charge of all of the attendance records and making sure that the general questions that are posed by the students are responded to. Mr. Capp introduced Evelyn Rojas, office clerk. He said that she is fluent in another language so that is very helpful with new students who come to Wildwood who do not speak English. Mr. Capp said that all three of these women are wonderful to work with. In addition to a great office staff, Mr. Capp said he is fortunate to have a great PTA. He said that he has been teaching for 20 years and each year that he has been in the Federal Way School District, he has been in awe of the work and dedication that the PTA puts into their work and programs at Wildwood Elementary School. Mr. Capp introduced the PTA officers at Wildwood. Mr. Capp said that the PTA President, Peggy Smith, is one of those awesome persons who is always asking "What else can I do?" Mr. Capp said that Mrs. Smith is the type of person that he can exchange ideas with, and following that exchange, she will get her officers on board to implement the ideas. Mr. Capp said that Linda Currey is not only the office secretary, but she is also the Vice President of the Wildwood PTA. He said she is another one of the people who go the extra mile. Mr. Capp said that Vicky O'Reilly is the secretary of the PTA which is quite a big task to keep all the records and notes. Mr. Capp introduced the PTA Treasurer, Karen Brooks. He said that Karen is also one of the reading tutors. He said that the PTA volunteers helped create what he calls "The Martha Stewart Moment," in the arrangements that they made for the informal reception prior to the Board meeting. He encouraged everyone to sample the refreshments at the back of the meeting room. Mr. Capp said that the PTA publishes a newsletter each month. He introduced Mrs. Paula Snyder who publishes the PTA newsletter. Mr. Capp said that, in addition to the newsletter, Mrs. Snyder works in the Wildwood Pre-School Department. He said that she always has a smile. He said he is encouraging her to go back to school to get her teaching certificate. Mr. Capp said that each night when the students leave Wildwood and each morning when the students arrive, there is a wonderful gentleman who really cares for children. Mr. Capp introduced Mr. Frank Fisher. He said that Mr. Fisher is in charge of the crossing guards and assists in the lunchroom and classrooms. He said he is a wonderful volunteer. He said what Mr. Fisher does is greatly appreciated by everyone at Wildwood. Mr. Capp said many great things happen at Wildwood. He invited the Board members, Interim Superintendent Murphy, and Acting Assistant Superintendent Davidson to come to Wildwood. He said each day brings its challenges which are met "head on." He said everyone is looking forward to the holidays to spend some time with their families and friends. He said the welcome mat is open at any time at Wildwood.

5. COMMENTS FROM LINDA HENDRICKSON, BOARD PRESIDENT

President Hendrickson thanked Mr. Capp, the PTA, the staff, and students for creating a "Martha Steward Moment." She thanked the members of the Wildwood Community for extending their greetings and for making everyone feel so welcome.

6. COMMENTS FROM INTERIM SUPERINTENDENT MURPHY

Mr. Murphy, Interim Superintendent, introduced and welcomed 30^th District State Representative Mark Miloscia and his wife to the Board meeting. He said that they are also Wildwood parents. Mr. Murphy said that the Board of Education in the last several weeks recently had two very exciting and thought provoking meetings. He said one of these meetings was the Board/Superintendent Retreat held on December 3. He said that the majority of the time at the Retreat was given to the Board's discussion on the strategic plan and the direction of the school district. He said that the Board reaffirmed the emphasis and support for literacy, especially reading in the Federal Way School District. He said that the Management Team will be making some recommendations to the Board regarding budget and how the budget will look in terms of promoting the focus on literacy as the number one priority of the Federal Way School District. Mr. Murphy said that on December 6 the Board had a three-hour work/study session on the project for the development of the secondary course expectations. He said that this project is an attempt to identify in each course at the secondary schools exactly what it is we want students to know and be able to do. He said that work is somewhat different than simply adopting a textbook. He said that, in conjunction with that work, the expectations then will lead to the development of assessments that will be used Districtwide so that for every class, the teacher and the students will know prior to the beginning of the class what the expectations are for student learning and how students will be assessed. He said that there will be a core set of knowledge and a core set of skills and abilities that every student will be expected to know. He said that there is a commitment to involve the community and parents in reviewing and developing the expectations as well as work in creating and developing assessments. Mr. Murphy said that Mr. Mark Jewell, Director of Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment, will provide a brief description how this input will take place. Mr. Jewell said that much of the information that he will be sharing is contained in a fact sheet at the back of the meeting room. He said there were some very important outcomes as a result of the Board Work/Study on December 6 about the course expectations and the assessments that Mr. Murphy described. He said that, when we talk about the vision in Federal Way for every student to have world class standards, we have to ask what does this really mean. He said we are developing at the secondary level course expectations and assessments that are designed to promote rigorous standards for our students. He said at the Work/Study the Board gave clear direction in regard to what the next steps should be. He said that we need to proceed with the development process for the course expectations and assessments. He said that the community participation and involvement will be expanded to ensure that we are achieving the rigorous standards that we desire for our students here. He said that, as a result of that discussion, every step of the way we will be obtaining some feedback from community members about creating the rigor that is associated with the standards that have been set. He said that there are a number of opportunities that he wanted to bring to the attention of the Board. He said that there are opportunities to review the draft documents and for participation in a variety of ways as we move ahead with refining, revising, and establishing the course expectations. He said that there will be a community forum that is tentatively scheduled sometime in March. He asked that those who have an interest in the secondary course expectations to contact him or the project manager, Cindy Kelsey, who has been leading this project last year and continues with the work this year. He said the goal is to create rigorous standards for the students. He said that the Board will adopt the standards and associated policies. He invited those present to participate in the process.

7. PUBLIC QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS

President Hendrickson outlined the procedures for public questions and comments.

Representative Mark Miloscia, Wildwood Elementary School Service Area, welcomed the Board and those present to Wildwood Elementary School He said he thought it was wonderful that the Board was holding the majority of their meetings at the school sites giving a chance for the students and the parents to attend a Board meeting. Representative Mark Miloscia offered congratulations to Directors Marks, Murphy, and Isaman on their re-election to the Board. Representative Miloscia invited those present to keep in touch with their legislators during this legislative session. He said there is an historic opportunity this year as a result of the passage I-695 to shake up the status quo which prevents a lot of good ideas from being implemented. He said for the first time everything is on the table for consideration for change. He said that now is the time for people to contact their legislators to let them know what kind of changes they would like to see take place. He said there will need to be some budget cuts.

President Hendrickson thanked Representative Miloscia for his comments. She said the Board has worked very closely with their state legislators, and she said that Board members will let their legislators know about some issues that the legislators could address as they begin to look at things in a new way.

8. SUPERINTENDENT SEARCH UPDATE

President Hendrickson asked for a report on the superintendent search update. She said that the Board is being ably supported by Interim Superintendent Murphy. She said the search process for a permanent superintendent is moving ahead. Director Murphy, one of the Board's Superintendent Search Liaisons along with Director Storvick, reported that the Board is pleased to announce that there has been pretty strong interest in the superintendent position in Federal Way. She said that to date about 275 contacts have been made by the Search Consultant. She said that the applicant pool is pretty strong, and overall the Board members are very pleased with the quality, quantity, and the diversity of the applicants. Director Murphy reminded those present that the Board is not meeting until January 5 to review all the completed applications. She said that the Board had previously been scheduled to meet on December 6, but because of timing issues, the date was changed to January 5. She said the Board will be meeting in executive session from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. on January 5 to review the applications. Director Murphy said that after the review of the applications is complete, the Board will set a time to bring the finalists to the District which she indicated could possibly be the end of January through the first part of February. She said the plan is to have the finalists have the opportunity to meet with a variety of community groups, which will include teachers, parents, students, representatives from the PTSA, union groups, local government, business, and faith leaders. President Hendrickson thanked Director Murphy for the update on the superintendent search and encouraged people to participate as the superintendent search process moves forward.

9. REVIEW OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR

There were no requests to modify the consent calendar.

10. APPROVAL OF AGENDA

Director Marks moved and Director Isaman seconded the motion that the agenda be approved as modified with the special report, item C-3, continuation of the discussion of programs for students not on track to graduate with their class, moved to item C-1, and special report C-1, Report on Math Goals for Grades 4, 7, and 10, and Reading Goals for Grades 7 and 10, moved to item C-2, and item C-2, Report on Status of School Design Teams, moved to item C-3. Motion carried unanimously.

11. APPROVAL OF MINUTES

Director Isaman moved and Director Storvick seconded the motion to approve the minutes of the regular Board meeting of November 22, 1999. Motion carried unanimously.

12. ADOPTION OF CONSENT CALENDAR

Director Storvick moved and Director Isaman seconded the motion to adopt the consent calendar as presented. Motion carried unanimously.

13. PRESENTATION OF LEVY RECOMMENDATION AND ADOPTION OF RESOLUTION FOR THE FEDERAL WAY SCHOOL DISTRICT MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION LEVY TO BE PRESENTED TO THE VOTERS ON FEBRUARY 29, 2000

Mr. John Welch, Director of Fiscal and Business Services, recapped for the Board the recommendation from the Management Team regarding the Federal Way School District replacement Maintenance and Operation Levy which is to be placed before the voters on February 29, 2000. He said that the Management Team is recommending a two-year replacement Maintenance and Operation Levy. He outlined for the Board the rationale for recommending a two-year term for the levy. He said that in two years, many of the districts who have traditionally gone for a two-year levy may be looking at a four-year levy, and at that time there may be more regional support and communication for a four-year levy. He said it is the belief of the Management Team that it is responsible to request a two-year levy after having recently asked the voters to support a construction bond. He said that the District anticipates showing the community progress on the construction bond projects and in the promotion policy to prove that the District is responsible stewards of public resources. He said that it is anticipated that over the next two fiscal years a resource plan will be developed to align with the promotion policy that bests supports students reaching higher standards. He said that over the next two years it is anticipated that there will be a clear picture of any additional costs associated with opening a new high school and the districtwide grade reconfiguration. In regard to the amount of the levy request, Mr. Welch said that for calendar year 2001 the recommendation is for an amount based on a projected levy rate of $3.03 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation, and for calendar year 2002, the recommendation is for an amount based on a projected levy rate of $3.02 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation. Mr. Welch said for a home of $150,000 these rates would be about $38 per month. Mr. Welch said that the levy recommendation has been revised since the Board meeting of November 22, 1999, where the request was made to go back and review the total tax rate. He said the recommendation does keep the total projected tax rate at the current 1999 level when looking at both the M&O Levy and the Debt. He said that the assessed valuation growth assumption for 2002 has been raised slightly to 4.5 percent. He said that while this is slightly higher than the original assumption, it is still less than the four-year average (1997 through 2000). In addition Mr. Welch said it should be noted that, historically, the actual assessed valuation growth has been higher than projections. He said the District has been very conservative in the past. He said that, should this occur, then the actual levy rate will be less than projections outlined in the recommendation. Mr. Welch said that, in conjunction with the levy planning, he provided the Board a projection of the tax rates related to the debt service on the bond. He said it is the commitment of the District to maintain a debt service rate at approximately $1.47 on the average over the life of the bonds. He told the Board that this recommendation, while keeping the total tax rate at the 1999 level, will provide an increase in levy revenue that the District can use to increase the investment in the promotion policy with specific literacy targets. He said this recommendation will allow the District to address some of the on-going operating cost increases, but will also require the District to be clear about priorities and how we spend the resources. He said that the members of the Management Team believe that the Board’s support of the levy is important for broad community support. He said the Management Team believes that the levy recommendation is responsible and maintaining the M&O tax rate at the current level can be done. He said that, while the debt service rate will need to fluctuate over the next few years due to the $83 million bond projects, maintaining a total tax rate for calendar years 2001-2002 at the current level is the best plan.

Following the presentation of the recommendation, Mr. Welch responded to questions and comments from Board members.

Director Murphy thanked Mr. Welch and his staff for preparing yet another levy request as has been done in the past every two years. Director Murphy asked for some clarification. She noted from the information received that from the year 2000 to 2002, there is about a 20 percent increase of assessed valuation. She asked if this increase is due primarily to new construction. Mr. Welch said it certainly weighs toward the new construction side. He said that the projections used for calendar year 2000 (8.05 percent) are pretty much right on the mark. He said this is based on the preliminary numbers received from the assessor’s office. Director Murphy noted that her assessment went up. She confirmed that the District feels pretty confident about the 8.05 percent. She also confirmed that the District is confident about the 2001 percentage of 7.45 and 2002 percentage of 4.5 percent. In regard to enrollment, Director Murphy confirmed that the projection is for approximately 1.49 and 1.48 percent increase for the two levy years which amounts to approximately a 3 percent enrollment growth during the next levy period. She said from the information that she has received, it appears that the District is asking for approximately $1.7 million increase for the year 2001 over the prior year, and in 2002, an additional $912,000 increase for a total increase of approximately $2.6 million over the previous levy amount. Mr. Welch said that essentially Director Murphy’s comments were correct, but he indicated that the figures break out to be a little bit different than that when applied to budget years. Director Murphy confirmed that the $2.6 million increase works out to be approximately 12.9 percent increase from where we are at the present time. Director Murphy said that her dilemma is that we have about a 3 percent enrollment growth, but we are asking for almost a 13 percent increase in levy funds. She said that the other dilemma for her is that we have had a lot of commotion from community and taxpayers recently regarding taxes. She said the community in general is really keeping an eye on taxes. She said for her it is a very difficult thing to say that enrollment growth is about 3 percent over this two-year period, but we will be asking for almost a 13 percent increase in levy dollars. She said that she really finds the information provided by Mr. Welch to be very helpful. Director Murphy noted that the increase in the CPI (consumer price index) has fluctuated a little over the years, but she said that now it appears to be around 3 percent. She said even though everything is not directly related to student enrollment (dollars do not always correlate to how many students there are), she indicated that the consumer price index is a good benchmark. She said the gap for her between approximately 13 percent and an inflation rate of 3 percent seems wide for this period of time when everyone is looking at their tax bill. She said she would not doubt that we could spend every penny of it, but she said she also believes the members of the Board should be efficient to the extent possible. Director Murphy noted that assessed valuation is going up about 20 percent over the three-year period (2000, 2001, and 2002). She said that the valuation of her personal residence has gone up quite a bit. She said as her valuation goes up, she pays more taxes. She said that, even though it looks flat on the chart for the $150,000 homeowner, she believes the assessed value for the $150,000 homeowner has gone up. Director Murphy said if someone bought a home now for $150,000, the tax rate would be based on that amount, but she said if the house was held for the three-year period, the assessed value will go up approximately 20 percent and so will the taxes. Director Murphy said she would like to see the Board limit the rate of increase to the consumer price index which is approximately 3 percent which would equate with the projected rate of 3 percent for student enrollment growth. Director Storvick said that Director Murphy aggregated the increases in the M&O Levy to approximately 13 percent, but he said she did not extend out the CPI, which would be about 9 percent. He said that it works out the levy increase is a little over 4 percent a year compared to the CPI of about 3 percent a year. Director Murphy said what she believes would make more sense would be to use a 3 percent inflation factor and multiply the levy amount in the year 2000, $20,236,000, by 3 percent and multiply that total by 3 percent and use that total figure to place on the ballot rather than the higher amount. She said that she thinks that would be a little more prudent. President Hendrickson asked what those figures would be. Director Murphy said for 2001, the figure would be $20,843,080, and for the next year, the figure would be $21,468,372, for a total of $42,311,452. She said what is being proposed is about $44 million. She said that is the way she looked at the figures. She said what her hope would be is that we would recommend an increase that would be consistent with the inflation rate and not exceed 3 percent per year. Mr. Welch said that the Management Team did talk about some of the issues raised by Director Murphy. He said one of the issues that influenced the recommendation from the Management Team is the need to make an unprecedented level of investment in the promotion policy, targeted assistance, and staff development if we are going to have students reach the level where we want them to be. He said that fortunately the assessed valuation allows the District to see some increased capacity in the levy revenue and to be able to apply that increase to the promotion policy while keeping the rates at the current level. He said this has really been driving the discussions at the Management Team Level.

Mr. Tom Murphy, Interim Superintendent, commented on the increasing assessments on homes and the resulting increase in taxes. He said it is important to remember for local school districts that when a bond issue or the M&O levy is passed, the amount is passed and not the rate. He said if the assessment on an individual home increases, that does not mean that the District receives more money. He said whatever amount of money is decided upon by the Board for the next two years, the District is only going to collect the approved amount, and the individual assessment does not impact that dollar amount. He said from a larger standpoint, the individual homeowner benefits from growth that increases the assessed valuation of the District because then the individual contribution of the individual homeowner to the total amount of money actually decreases. He said that the District is not one of those taxing bodies that levies a rate and that every time the assessment increases, the District receives more money.

Director Isaman commended Mr. Welch for the work and time that has been spent in guiding the Board through the levy process. She said that Mr. Welch does a wonderful job of being able to turn what the Board asks for into a concrete proposal that is compatible with programs and the support that is needed for the District that is fair, right, and prudent. She said that, as she reviewed the recommendation, it encompasses everything that the Board had asked Mr. Welch and his staff to do. She said that the Board asked that the recommendation stay within a certain levy rate that was complementary to the bond rate which was accomplished. She said the Board also asked that Mr. Welch and staff bear in mind the tremendous burden that this community is asking the Board to take on in regard to higher standards. She said that the Board has already taken steps toward supporting students through promotion and higher standards. Director Isaman said she supports the proposal as submitted. She said she believes the proposal is just exactly what the collective body of the Board has asked Mr. Welch and his staff to do.

Director Marks said he understands that it is the set amount that is collected. He asked if it is not true that with the numbers that have been given to the Board it is still costing the homeowner who paid $150,000 a year for a home, $20 more per year in 2001 and 2002 than the year 2000 with that set amount. Mr. Welch said that was correct. Director Marks said that Director Murphy brings up some valid points. He said that the concern he has is that even today there is kind of a flavor out there that the District has embarked upon a bond with no tax rate increase, but he said that some people are thinking that it is no tax increase. He said the truth of the matter is that there is no tax rate increase on the bond portion, but when the levy is added into this, the combination will result in the average taxpayer with a $150,000 home having to pay $20 more during the life of the levy for next several years. He said he will vote for this with the reservations that this is an increase. He said he will give the voters an opportunity to vote on the proposal. Director Marks said there is a question on the consumer price index as brought up by Director Murphy.

Mr. Welch said he would reiterate that in calendar year 2000, there will actually be a decrease from calendar year 1999 to the citizens in the actual tax rate. He said that in calendar year 2001, while we are projecting that the M&O is less than where we were in 1999, the debt service piece is going up because we are issuing our first bond. He said from 2001 to 2002, the debt service piece goes up, keeping the total tax rate at the 1999 level, not the projected 2000 level. He said that this year the tax rate is $4.55 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, next year the estimate is for $4.42 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, and the following year, the estimate is $4.55 per $1,000 of assessed valuation, which is where we are in 1999.

Director Marks asked if it is correct to say in regard to the bond and levy piece that on the out years the rates will go down. Mr. Welch said that was correct. Mr. Welch said the years we issue the debt, we will have to make payments on the debt. He said that, over time as some debt that we currently have outstanding expires, then the overall tax rates will go down.

Director Murphy asked if anyone had requested to speak to this agenda item. President Hendrickson noted that she had not received any requests for public comments. Mr. Lloyd Gardner, member of the audience, indicated that he wished to speak to the levy recommendation. President Hendrickson encouraged Mr. Gardner in the future to submit the public comment form indicating which topics he wished to address.

*Mr. Lloyd Gardner said that homeowners should not have to pay more taxes regardless of what the rate is. He said having the rate at a fixed amount does not really leave the taxes at a fixed amount as the value of the homes increase. He said he would like to be assured that his house taxes are not going to go up. He said as far as growth is concerned, he said we have new houses coming in. He said he shares a concern for the taxpayers.

Director Storvick moved and Director Isaman seconded the motion to adopt Resolution 99-66 approving the Federal Way school District Maintenance and Operation Levy proposal to be presented to the voters on February 29, 2000, as follows: A tax of approximately $3.03 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation (based on 100 percent of true and fair value) to provide $21,942,000, said levy to be made in 2000 for collection in 2001, and a tax of approximately $3.02 per thousand dollars of assessed valuation (based on 100 percent of true and fair value) to provide $22,854,000, said levy to be made in 2001 for collection in 2002.

Director Murphy offered an amendment to the motion that would read that the Board adopt the resolution approving the Federal Way School District Maintenance and Operation Levy proposal to be presented to the voters on February 29, 2000, which would limit it to a 3 percent increase per year over the base levy amount which we have in the year 2000. Director Marks asked for an explanation of the amendment. Director Murphy said that her amendment would change the last portion of the motion which states that a tax of approximately $3.03 per thousand, etc. She said her amendment would indicate that the amount of the levy would be limited to a 3 percent increase each consecutive year from the levy collected in the year 2000. She said what she is asking for is a 3 percent increase for the levy amount for each of the two years, 2001 and 2002, in place of the main motion. Director Marks seconded the amendment to the original motion.

President Hendrickson asked for discussion.

Director Storvick said that, in his history in Federal Way over a three-year period, a significant concern would be passing a levy that is based on a percentage of assessed valuation could in a number of scenarios in fact significantly increase the amount of taxes that we are paying, not hold them flat. He said that he has always found very attractive the cap of a specific dollar amount in regard to levies. Director Murphy, in response to comments from Director Storvick, said that maybe it was not clear that she is asking for a 3 percent increase over the two years, 2001 and 2002, from the existing levy amount, and this is not based on assessed valuation. She clarified in her amendment that it would be the dollar amount that would change.

President Hendrickson asked for a vote on the amendment to the original motion. The amendment to the motion failed with Directors Murphy and Marks voting for the amendment, and Directors Storvick, Hendrickson, and Isaman voting against the amendment.

President Hendrickson asked if there was any further discussion on the original motion before vote was taken.

There was no further discussion. Vote was taken on the original motion. Motion carried unanimously to adopt the levy resolution as presented. Director Murphy said in relaying her vote for the resolution that she was voting to send the proposal to the taxpayers for them to make the decision.

President Hendrickson thanked Mr. Welch and the Management Team for their work on the levy recommendation.

Mr. Murphy, Interim Superintendent, thanked the Board for the leadership that they have shown throughout this state in the last five years on efforts to reduce the burden to the individual taxpayer. He said he does not know of any other district in the state that has done this. He said the levy request is about 21.8 percent of the budget, and the state maximum that is allowed is about 24.9 percent. He said that he would hazard a guess that we are the only school district approaching our size in the state that is not asking for the maximum. He said that the Board can see from the information that was provided them the downward trend we have taken over the last five years which is in large part due to the understanding of the Board in regard to the issues and needs of the community. He said he wants to be sure to impart to the Board the desire of the District to continue to improve the educational program for all students. He said that "all" is the important word. He said that, as the Board remembers the discussion regarding the strategic plan at the Board/Superintendent Retreat and the brief discussion how the budget reflects the strategic plan, in the very near future, he hopes to bring to the Board a commitment from the Management Team and a picture in front of the budget process that says we really do believe that literacy is the number one priority in this District and that we want to make a long-term commitment both in time and money that will be concentrated on making sure that all students are at grade level in reading. He said that, at some point in time as we think about the programs that we need to have in the District to make students successful, we need to look at it from the perspective of what is required to make the programs work. He said that he is also a taxpayer in the community. He said he does not want to pay higher taxes. He said the $20 per year equates to approximately $1.66 more a month over the next two years if the assumption is that we have hit the assessment estimate, and he said we have not done that in the past. He said we have always undershot that. He said that he believes once in the last 7 or 8 years we have actually collected what we said we would collect from the standpoint of the tax rate. He said the assessment has been larger so we have always collected a smaller rate. He said that John Welch has really worked hard to get closer to that. He thanked the Board for approving the levy proposal to put before the voters on February 29, 2000. He said that he anticipates that we will be doing as good a job as we can of explaining to the voters exactly how we plan to use the M&O funds to keep the current programs in existence, but also to make dramatic improvements in student literacy.

Director Marks thanked Interim Superintendent Murphy for his comments. He said that he believes the long-term plan to improve literacy is great. He said there is a war out there on this issue. He said he believes that Mr. Murphy is fighting the war.

14. PRESENTED FOR FIRST READING, MODIFICATIONS TO POLICY 1440, "THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS – MEETING CONDUCT AND ORDER OF BUSINESS"

President Hendrickson presented for the information of the Board, modifications to Policy 1440, "The Board of Directors – Meeting Conduct and Order of Business." She said it is planned that this policy will come back to the Board for adoption at the first regular Board meeting in January. She encouraged Board members to submit any questions or comments that they might have prior to the January 10 Board meeting. She said the intent of the modification is to streamline Board meetings.

15. ACTION AS A RESULT OF EXECUTIVE SESSION

Director Isaman moved and Director Murphy seconded the motion to adopt Resolution 99-67 authorizing the Superintendent to exercise the option to purchase the property for the purpose of constructing a new high school and to proceed to close the transaction provided for in said agreement in accordance with its terms or such other terms as may be negotiated, if necessary, subject to the availability of funds in the District’s capital projects account. Motion carried unanimously.

16. CONTINUATION OF DISCUSSION OF PROGRAMS FOR STUDENTS NOT ON TRACK TO GRADUATE WITH THEIR CLASS

President Hendrickson noted that there was a report and discussion of programs for students not on track to graduate with their class at the last Board meeting. She said what she believes she heard from a number of Board members is some concern about the students transferring into the District with a "D" grade. President Hendrickson said that following that meeting, there was some question whether the issue surrounding the transfer students with "D’ grades was part of an administrative directive or was it in the procedures. She said that Interim Superintendent Murphy relayed to the Board following the Board meeting that this issue is addressed in procedure. She said there has been some question and concern about whether the District has provided the kind of support and a system for transfer students coming in with "D" grades that these students would need in order to demonstrate proficiency to meet the minimum requirement of a C minus grade to receive credit for graduation. President Hendrickson said this is an opportunity for the Board to give any guidance to Interim Superintendent Murphy if there is any guidance to be given.

Director Storvick said that he has shared this privately with Mr. Murphy. He said his primary concern was voiced by several persons who addressed the Board at the last Board meeting. He said those students who transfer to this District from another district with a "D" grade or grades which would have counted toward graduation in their prior district, follow their parents to this District, and now we are putting them credit deficient simply because they are choosing to live with their parents. He said he needs to be assured that we are taking steps to measure the proficiencies of those students to either determine whether they in fact have the proficiency to receive a C minus or better in this District or that we might consider waiving that component of the policy for those students who transfer to our District.

Director Isaman said she agrees with some comments made by Director Storvick. She said that no one wants to allow students to receive diplomas without the skills that are required to go with that diploma. She said that she believes that we have unintentionally created a situation that we need to address. She said that she does not know how to address this issue. She said she would hope that we would find a way to help those students who are credit deficient to have some options.

Director Murphy said she appreciated the opportunity to discuss this issue again. She said there was an uneasiness, particularly with the student who articulated his view about the credit he received for "D" grades from another bonafide school district paid for by taxpayer funds that is considered a standard for a passing, and the fact that the Federal Way School District would not recognize any "D" grades for credit for graduation when he transferred to the Federal Way School District. She said that she believes that we need to have something in place that would address this issue whether it be a competency test or something else. She said that she would be supportive of taking a hard look at this issue to determine what some of the options are.

Director Marks said that, when students transfer to the District with some "D" grades, for example in grade 9 or 10, we let them know that we will not accept the "D" grades for credit for graduation and that they must make up any "D" grade credits. He commented on students who transfer here in grade 12. He said that perhaps we could take a look at this with the point of view that if students come here in grade 12, we will recognize their "D’" grade credits they received from another district, but perhaps if the students transfer to the District in grade 9, for example, they would have time to make up any "D" grade credits. He said that there could be a system for students to show competency.

Director Isaman said that she asked Mr. Mark Davidson if we have a set of tests to determine a student’s competency or proficiency in certain subjects. He indicated to her that these tests are not yet in place so this now would not be an option. She said she would be supportive of having students who transfer in with "D" grades demonstrate their competency to a C minus level. Director Isaman said she would like to know the number of students impacted. Mr. Mark Davidson indicated for this year’s seniors that Decatur has about 4 students who have lost credit as a result of having transferred to the District at some point in time with "D" grades. Mr. Davidson said at Federal Way High School, for this year’s seniors, 14 students have lost credit as a result of having transferred to the District at some point in time with "D" grades. Mr. Davidson said that the figures he has for students at Thomas Jefferson are for sophomore students. He said that there are 18 current sophomores who have transferred to the District at some point in time with "D" grades. Director Isaman asked Mr. Davidson if he had data to show if any of these students had more than one "D" grade. Mr. Davidson said he did not at the present time.

President Hendrickson said from the information provided from Mr. Davidson for this year’s seniors at Decatur and Federal Way High, the total impacted is 18. She said we do not have the data for the senior students at Thomas Jefferson High School.

President Hendrickson asked for public questions and comments.

*Jennifer Mitchell, Wildwood Elementary School service area, addressed the Board regarding students who transfer to the Federal Way School District with "D" grades. She said that she just moved here and was at the high school filling out the paperwork for her stepdaughter. She said that she discovered under the current procedure, her stepdaughter as a transfer student with 6 "D" credits will receive no credits for those subjects in the Federal Way School District. She said that she was told that she will have to make up the subjects before she can graduate. She said that her stepdaughter would not have enough time to make up all the credits in order to graduate with her class even if she took summer school and extra classes. She said that students moving with their parents are being punished for their parents’ move. She said that she and her husband moved to save their child. She told the Board that the counselor’s recommendation in the Federal Way School District was to transfer her stepdaughter back to the high school she came from the last semester of her senior year so she would be given credit for the "D" grades, and be able to graduate on schedule. She told the Board that was the last thing she wanted to hear from the counselor. She said that, when the counselor told her stepdaughter that credits she had already earned and were so noted on her transcript are now basically obliterated from the record if she transfers to the Federal Way School District, her stepdaughter was flabbergasted. She said that her stepdaughter does struggle academically. She said for her to have a set back like this really jeopardizes her chances of making it out of high school. She said she was told that options were summer school, Internet courses, etc. She said they do not currently have access to the Internet. She said to go back and have 6 semesters of classes to make up seems to be a grand scale process. She said she is hoping that the transfer students will be given some way to clear this, and she mentioned the possibility of competency testing. She said she understands the concept of having students meet high standards to graduate. She said she knows that the graduation requirements have changed since she was in high school. She said she just wanted the Board to know about her concerns.

*Charlie Hoff said he believes this is an important issue. He said whatever is decided is a message that is going to be conveyed to many students and their parents. He said many of the students with this kind of problem are in a situation for which they do not seem to assume a great deal of responsibility for. He said when he spoke with President Hendrickson earlier in the day, he relayed that it is a unique situation when the students who transfer in with "D" grades are seniors which he said is somewhat different from freshman, sophomores, and juniors. He said one of the possibilities for seniors that has been suggested is that they go back to the high school where they came from for their diploma. He said there are standard tests available for competency testing in most courses. He said the District needs to establish a system for providing the opportunity for competency testing. He said if a child has a competency in ninth grade English, then there should be a ninth grade English competency test to demonstrate that. He said he believes that we need a policy that has some legitimacy and people understand that this is where we are going and this is what gets done.

Director Isaman said that, if, for example, we were to go ahead and accept the "D" credits for students like the stepdaughter of Mrs. Mitchell that were issued from another high school, the student could be told that from the time the student enters the Federal Way School District, credit will not be given for "D" grades the student earns while in the District. She said she thought about this scenario, but she said she had concern about how a student would do in subsequent courses without a solid base to stand on.

President Hendrickson said that would be assuming we know what a "D" stands for in our District or any other district. She said that the Board work/study on secondary course expectations was a clear indication that we do not have a clear understanding of what proficiency stands for in any of our classes. She said when the Board adopted the C minus requirement, it basically was a proxy for some level of achievement that we had not defined. She said until we could get our arms around what proficiency meant, we wanted some way to raise the standard. She said for her when she read the paperwork that Mr. Murphy provided the Board on how this decision was made and the memo that went back to schools giving direction for them to provide an opportunity for students to demonstrate proficiency, it is not clear to her in the comments that the Board has heard or what they have been told that each school was offering that opportunity for students as they transferred in to the District. She said if the students did not have the opportunity to demonstrate proficiency, it would be difficult for her to say that we are not going to accept what students earned some place else when the students were operating in accordance with the rules that were in place at that time. She said she was a little bit "anguished" when she heard what we are suggesting is that students can come here to earn some credits, but when it is time to graduate, they are told to go some place else to get a diploma where the "D" credits will be accepted. She said that does not seem like an appropriate thing to do. She said this bothers her. She said to her that means we are creating a system, but we are telling people how to work around it.

Director Storvick said he does not want to suggest at any point that the Board or the District step away from higher standards and the move that we have made towards competency. He said that he and several Board members felt that they do not have a high level of confidence that a "C" at Decatur is equivalent to a "C" in the same class at Thomas Jefferson. He said this is why he is very enthused about the move toward competency and what it is that students should know and be able to demonstrate when they leave high school. He said that he could imagine a scenario where a student having a "D" in ninth grade English, could by the tenth or eleventh grade after taking additional English courses demonstrate that competency.

Mr. Murphy, Interim Superintendent, said his interest is in just a very simple question and that is, "Does the Board support the current procedure of not accepting "D" grades for credit for transfer students, and if the answer to that is no, then the solution is pretty straight forward and simple at this point in time which would be to instruct schools to accept "D" grades for credit for transferring students." He said he would like to know if the Board is looking for something to happen right away.

Director Storvick said that during his tenure on the Board a lot of time and energy has been spent on early identification, interventions, and summer school for the primary grades. He said he believes if that level of energy had also been focused at the secondary grades on this issue he does not know whether the Board would be having this conversation. He said the students not on track would have been identified the day they stepped into school. He said there would have been an intervention process identified. He said he does not want to step away from assessments. He said he is looking for short-term answers for this year’s seniors, not a step away from standards that we are progressively moving towards.

Mr. Murphy said what he heard the Board ask is to develop a system to determine proficiency for all students in a quick time frame. President Hendrickson said she does not believe that is what the Board is saying. Mr. Murphy said he heard Director Storvick say he would be in favor of putting together some system to determine proficiency of students who come in as freshmen, sophomores, and juniors who had "D" grades. President Hendrickson said she believes what Director Storvick means is that the Board is saying that for this year’s seniors, what was needed to be done in order to support them in demonstrating proficiency was not done, and in ensuing years for this year’s freshmen, sophomores, and juniors if the District can develop something to demonstrate that proficiency, then there would be support on the Board to do that. Mr. Murphy said that a one-year time frame would not be enough time to put a system in place. President Hendrickson said she believes the Board would like to have a plan come back from Mr. Murphy, Interim Superintendent, based on the Board discussion and what would be the right thing to do in regard to a time frame Mr. Murphy believes would be needed to develop proficiency or competency testing for these students. Director Marks said he would be in favor of having a system put in place as soon as possible for students to demonstrate competency. Director Isaman said she has concerns for this year’s seniors and that granting them the credit could be shortchanging the student. Mr. Murphy said he does not know of any other option for this year’s seniors who fall into the transfer category with "D" grades other than granting the credit for "D" grades. He said that, in many cases, there is no way that the District could put together a program for many of these students to recoup these credits in the time remaining of their senior year. He said to do anything other than to accept the transfer credits at this time would be confusing for everybody involved. He said he will be bringing something back to the Board outlining a plan. In addition, he said he will be sending a note to the high schools telling them to accept the "D" credits from another school district for students transferring in as seniors or students who are currently seniors irregardless of when they transferred in. President Hendrickson also asked that Mr. Murphy ask Mr. Davidson to continue the data collection process. She said if there are any students in the system who have transferred in and have been supported to demonstrate their proficiency, it would be good to have that information. She said that she has heard anecdotally that some students have received this support, but she said the Board has no data on this.

President Hendrickson clarified for Mr. Murphy that for this year’s seniors, they should be given credit, and further that the Board would like Mr. Murphy to bring back some kind of a recommendation on the timeline that he believes will be necessary to develop some sort of assessment process or some other way for students to demonstrate proficiency. She said if the time frame for development of this is two years, then that would mean that this year’s juniors would get the same treatment as this year’s seniors. Mr. Murphy said that he would anticipate bringing an outline of the plan and time frame by the next Board meeting.

Director Marks said he would be interested to know if there was any pattern in regard to the subjects for which students received "D" grades. Mr. Mark Davidson, Interim Superintendent, said he did not have that information now, but he said he would be happy to add that to the data collection requests. Director Marks said at some level there has to be responsibility for the individual who is getting the "D" grades. President Hendrickson reiterated that in no way is the Board backing away from higher standards, but she said it is also necessary to provide the appropriate support to reach those standards.

17. REPORT ON MATH GOALS FOR GRADES 4, 7, AND 10, AND READING GOALS FOR GRADES 7 AND 10

Mr. Mark Jewell, Director of Curriculum, Instruction, and Assessment, presented to the Board the report on the recommendation for the adoption of Math Goals for grades 4, 7 and 10, and Reading Goals for grades 7 and 10. Mr. Jewell told the Board that one year ago every school district was required to submit to the state goals for fourth grade reading which would address reducing the number of students who did not meet standard. He indicated that the state required a minimum of 25 percent reduction. He said that the goal established in the Federal Way School District was 37.5 percent reduction in the number of students who did not meet standard for fourth grade reading. He said that goal is to be accomplished in the year 2001. He said that the current group of third graders, when they are in fourth grade, will take the WASL, and based on the results of the assessments, the District will know if the goal has been achieved. He said that during last year's legislative session legislation was passed requiring that one year from next December all School Boards must establish similar goals for fourth grade math and seventh grade math. He said the recommendation is that the Federal Way School District step ahead of the State and set goals for math for not only fourth and seventh grades, but also for tenth grade. He said that the recommendation is also to have reading goals established for grades 7 and 10 even though these are not a state requirement. He said what was done to establish the goals was to project out the baselines of 1997, 1998, and 1999 years, using the 37.5 percent reduction as the factor and actually mapping out what that would look like in terms of a three-year goal for reading for seventh and tenth grades and for math for fourth, seventh, and tenth grades, in addition to the goal that was set last year for fourth grade reading. Mr. Jewell brought the Board's attention to the charts contained in the written report that display the goals which were also available for those in attendance at the Board meeting. Mr. Jewell told the Board that there was a process in place for meeting with the principals to discuss the setting of goals that are realistic and necessary for making a commitment for closing the gap of reducing the numbers of students who are not meeting standard in reading and math. Following the report, Mr. Jewell responded to questions and comments from Board members. President Hendrickson said that this recommendation for adoption of these goals will come back to the Board for a decision at the Board meeting of January 10, 2000. Director Marks said that, after reviewing the recommendation, it appears that we have set our own goals which are basically ahead of the State. He said he thinks this is great to be out in front of what the State requires. He said he hopes that we would do that for all areas. Director Murphy said there has been a great deal of discussion about the intensive focus on literacy. She asked if it would be correct to say intensive focus on literacy and math. She said if math goals are going to be set, there needs to be an intensive focus in this area also. She said that, when we speak about focus on literacy, we will also need to include a focus on math goals. She said that she is thinking of the classroom teacher who will need to broaden the focus to include math. Mr. Jewell said that was part of the discussion that the principals had. He posed a question that if we have a math goal in addition to the reading goal how will that deflect or perhaps be mutually beneficial to both reading and math. He said that, if students are more fluent in reading, they will do better on the math assessment because they will be able to read and understand the math problems. He said in December 2001, the State will require that districts set goals for math for grades four and seven regardless of the District's focus on literacy. He said that since that is the case, he said it is being recommended that we also extend that accountability for grade ten as well in addition to having the reading goals at grades four, seven, and ten, and have math goals at four, seven and ten because the state will require math goals at grades four and seven anyway. President Hendrickson asked Director Murphy if she was thinking about waiting to approve the math goals until these are required by the State. Director Murphy clarified that is not what she was thinking. She said about a year ago we had a timeline for when math goals would be developed and adopted which seems consistent with that. She said that she just needed to state for her clarification the additional focus on math. She said that literacy is definitely the foundation for math, particularly for the fourth grade test. She said that she does not want to the skirt the fact that math will be becoming a more intensive focus along with literacy. Director Murphy said that she is very excited about the math goals because the Federal Way School District is really lacking in math proficiency according to the WASL test. She said that the percentage meeting the standards in 1997, Districtwide in elementary was 22 percent which is now the baseline. She said that in junior high it was a little higher, 23.4 percent, and in tenth grade, it was higher still, 30.5 percent. She said that she will support setting goals in math, but she said that she is also very interested in the kind of supports that will be put in place. She said she would ask that we look at when our most recent textbook adoptions were for grade four, and what the other things are that are out there that schools are using. She said that she believes that we have to look how long the textbooks have been in place and how long have students been using the texts. She said the question needs to be asked if these texts are producing the kind of results we want. President Hendrickson asked Board members to relay any additional questions or comments they might have to Mr. Jewell prior to the next Board meeting.

*Mr. Lloyd Gardner, Meredith Hill Elementary School Service Area, said he has been reading articles on national and state test scores. He said he does have a collective tabulation of scores for all the other districts in the Seattle area. He said that the baseline for the State average was 57.9 percent in reading and for Federal Way it is about 55.2 percent. He said that this means that scores must be increased by 45 percent to reach 100 percent. He said he believes the goal set in reading is such a "miserly improvement," that we can hardly consider we are in the school business if we cannot do a better job than that. He said the State goal is 25 percent improvement and the Federal Way School District set a goal of 37.5 percent which he said is certainly better than the state. He said what he perceives as a result of the report and recommendation is that we are still not moving enough students to a point where they are meeting standard. He said that there are schools out there who are doing better. He mentioned the results that the Texas schools have had as an example. He encouraged the Board to look at other school districts in the State and the Nation to determine if there are better reading programs than we currently have. He said the same thing is true in the area of math. He said he would challenge the Board to use reading programs that really are proven to get results.

18. REPORT ON THE STATUS OF SCHOOL DESIGN TEAMS

Dr. Carla Jackson, Director of Organizational Development, assisted by staff member, Jan Bleek, and Robin Lake, from the University of Washington, presented an overview of the Schoolwide Design project. Mrs. Bleek and Robin Lake briefed the Board on the evaluation components of the program, what will work best for the Federal Way School District, and what has been learned from reform efforts in the State and the Nation. The Board was informed that a schoolwide design is a comprehensive, focused, collaborative effort that improves student achievement, based on a shared set of beliefs about learning. The Board was informed that it is based on the assumption that schools best positioned to positively impact student learning first identify guiding principles about learning, and then select instructional practices which match those principles. The Board was told that schoolwide design is change that goes on within a building, it is not about bricks and mortar. The Board was told that schools that focus on principles about how students learn and come to a collective agreement on what those principles are, and find instructional practices to match their principles of how students learn seem to have a much better chance of having improved student achievement. The Board was told that a component of the strategic plan is about the importance of schools establishing their own identity and for parents to have choice. Dr. Jackson said that the schoolwide design project is one way that this will be accomplished with a focus on internal change and instructional practices. The Board was briefed on the components that the District Schoolwide Design Team, made up of parents, teachers, and administrators, looks for when a school applies for a study grant or implementation grant. Besides being focused on student achievement, the Board was told that the Team is looking for schools who want to delve into the research and look at best practices. The Board was told at the secondary schools there are not a lot of models, but there is a lot of research. She said that schools are encouraged to look at what is working and what are the best practice strategies. The Board was told that the Team wants to be sure that what is being proposed matches with how we think students learn and that all of the resources (money, space, people, time) are focused on making a difference for students. The Board was told that all schools are asked to develop a plan for reflection, evaluation, and communicating whatever plan is developed to community members and staff members. The Board was told that there are two types of grants that schools can apply for--study grants and implementation grants. It was explained that study grants allow a school team to research, explore, visit, and analyze potential models that meet the specific academic needs of their students and that the end result of a study grant includes a set of guiding principles and adapting, adopting, or designing an effective model for implementation. The Board was informed that implementation grants put models into practice, and that the end result of an implementation grant is enhanced student achievement through putting a new model in place and evaluating its impact. The Board was referred to the document in their report which lists the current study and implementation grants. The Board was informed that it is expected that many of the schools involved in the study grants will come back this spring for implementation grants. The Board was told that the schoolwide design project is a three to five year effort to improve student achievement through supporting building identity and initiative. The Board was told that there are several stages of development. The Board was informed that Phase I includes the pioneer schools that paved the way; Phase II includes the current study and implementation grant recipients; and Phase III includes the future grant recipients. The Board was informed that grant proposals are accepted several times during the school year and are approved for one year at a time (except when a design requires multiple years of implementation, such as the Success For All program). Dr. Jackson introduced to the Board members of the District Schoolwide Design Team who were present. The Board was told that there is a great combination of staff, parents, and principals serving on the Design Team. The Board was told that when this project was begun, it was agreed that one-half the membership of the Design Team would be teachers. The Board was briefed on the funding for the study and implementation grants which are funded through school, District, and grant resources. It was noted that in regard to implementation grants, the goal is for the school to contribute building resources or grant funds to cover 50 percent of the true cost of an implementation. Robin Lake, from the University of Washington, spoke to the Board about her experience in studying schools that have attempted dramatic redesigns. She said much of her work has been with charter schools and accountability. She said there are some challenges that are unique to schools that attempt to fundamentally change their philosophy about teaching and learning and to focus on particular goals with unique strategies. She said that the most important challenge is that school redevelopment is very rarely a linear process. She said often it is quite chaotic. She said the challenge of course is to increase student achievement. She said that an important component is the evaluation piece of assessing student performance. She said that the challenge is that oftentimes when schools embark on this process and develop a vision and reach an agreement on what is most important in improving student learning, and they begin the actual implementation of that process, things fall apart very quickly and become very turbulent. She said that quite commonly there is a sorting out process where the teachers, students, principal, and parents are all trying to figure out what the vision and strategy means in regard to implementation in the classroom. She said this turbulence is often reflected in test scores early on. She said in her study of charter schools, the first two or three years a lot of turbulence is seen in the test scores. She said that then hopefully there is stabilization so that the school's actual progress can be measured. She said this will vary according to the depth of the change that the school is trying to make in the operating environment and the degree of staff cohesiveness. She said the way she has been thinking about assessment for these types of schools is according to the stages of their development. She told the Board that in the early stages of development, it needs to be made clear to the school what the baseline is going to be, how the District is intending to measure the school, and what is most important to the District in evaluating the school. She told the Board that as the school moves into the implementation mode, the District should look for indicators if the school is implementing the plan the way it said it would and whether factors or indicators start to emerge that are likely to improve student achievement. She said this could be such things as staff cohesiveness, whether the instructional program is oriented around what the school's goals are, etc. She said when the school is in the cohesive mode that is when it can be determined if there is actually improved student achievement. She said that of course test scores are looked at along the way, but she said the District needs to be cautious how quickly it moves in that direction. Jan Bleek, staff member, provided the Board with an overview of where the District is in terms of the evaluation process for the program. She said that pieces of the evaluation process are still being developed for the overall schoolwide design program, the specific study grants, and the specific implementation grants. Mrs. Bleek told the Board that rubrics have been developed as guidelines for schools who want to submit study grants. She said that the Team does screen the study grants and that there is a quality control piece built in. She said that the Team does work with the schools and does provide feedback to help them develop the very best study grant that they can. She said that built in to the application process for the study grant is a mid-year evaluation that the schools are responsible for at the school site. Mrs. Bleek said that the Team is now working with Robin Lake to develop a year-end assessment for the study grants. She said such things as whether the school has a focus, has the school developed guiding principles and key beliefs, have they brought all the different stakeholders of the building into the process, and do they have a fairly good indication of where they will be going next that will result in improved student achievement are factors to be considered. Mrs. Bleek said that one of the pieces that has not been firmed up yet is including a self reflection piece with the schools having to answer two to three questions that will determine whether or not the indicators for success are there. Mrs. Bleek said that the consultants, Tony Wagner and Paul Hill, have been asked to assist with the screening of the evaluation process before it is used in the buildings. Mrs. Bleek said that another component for the study grants will be if there is a decision to pursue an implementation grant that is an outgrowth of their study grant, the schools will have to provide the data and rationale to support that. Mrs. Bleek said in regard to the evaluation of the implementation grants, there is a rubric for the application grant process. She said that a bigger part of the implementation grant is a fully blown evaluation process that the schools need to have stated up front as part of their application. She said that schools involved in implementation grants will also agree to do a yearly assessment or yearly update for the District Schoolwide Design Team. She said this is in the development stages at this point. She said that the District Schoolwide Design Team has talked about doing site visits and what these might involve and what kind of information the Team might want to gather. She said when schools are in the implementation grant process, we will begin to look for indicators that would show that student learning is improving and what actual data there is to support that. Mrs. Bleek said that the third piece of the evaluation process is the evaluation of the program itself. She said that, because of the amount of money that is involved, the Team needs to be good stewards of the resources, needs to be sure that the money is spent wisely, and that what is being done is leading us to improved student achievement. She said that there will be a District level evaluation and assessment process of the whole program. Dr. Jackson said that the goal is that principles and practices start overlapping so there is hardly any gap left. She said that what you believe in and what you choose to implement would be exactly the same. Dr. Jackson said that this type of scenario provides the best opportunity for success. Director Isaman thanked Dr. Jackson and others for the great presentation and the great graphics that she displayed. She said she appreciated the written report that the Board received. She said as she reviewed the information in the written report, she could see that there is a component in the designs that seem to be working. She said there is an overlay of commitment by those who are making their schoolwide designs work. She said there is a feel of excitement that is hard to put into words. She said there is a commitment level that creates a caring and a focus that goes beyond the word "belief." Director Storvick said that his comment is more of a clarifying question. He asked if this is a ground up approach or is the District saying that each school will have a design, etc. He asked if there are schools who are performing who are not in the program. Dr. Jackson said that there are schools who are performing well who are not currently involved in the schoolwide design program. As an example, she mentioned Valhalla Elementary School. She said there are schools like Valhalla that do not feel the need for another "boost" because it is believed they are on right path. She said what schools have been told is that if when and they are ready to study something that they have identified to match the needs of their students, we would support the study, and based on the funds available, implementation could be pursued. She said she does not think that we have said to school staffs that they have to be a part of the program. She said it is optional for them. Director Storvick said he is curious whether we are saying we need to have 33 clearly independent and different environments or are we saying that there are models that work well like the Success For All program. He asked if we are re-inventing the product each time we go out or are we simply saying that this model works and this school embraces the concept. Dr. Jackson said the goal is to help schools have a focus to increase student achievement, and that the schoolwide design project does a good job of providing a "boost" for schools to move in this direction. Dr. Jackson said she does not think that there is a secondary school out there that feels they are where they need to be. She said that the approach Decatur has taken of having a design team is a way to get to what makes sense for that school. She said that Federal Way High School has looked at that model, and she said that one of the other high schools is also interested in that model. She said she does not think that we will have 33 schools that look completely different, but she said that there are some programs that fit different groups well such as the proven research model, the Success For All program. She said it is not an expectation that schools participate, but it is a support to help reach the goal of improved student achievement. Director Storvick asked how far away is staff from having the assessment components completed. He also asked if there are exit strategies for those designs that a school may come up with that simply are not considered acceptable by the administration or the Board. Dr. Jackson said the goal is to have the assessment components in place by February or March. She said the exit strategy is something that has not been discussed yet. She said it is a great idea. Director Murphy asked what Dr. Jackson was looking for from the Board. Dr. Jackson said that the report was being submitted for the information of the Board. Director Murphy said she feels it is a good practice for the District to pursue what works well in other schools or districts with the same demographics. She said she believes it is prudent to find something that works well when we do not have something that works as well. She said she is more hesitant when it comes to implementing something that we are not sure works as well as what we currently have. Director Murphy commented on the model for developing attitudes and beliefs which drive the instructional practices. She said at first this sounds like common sense, but at the same time when strategies are being developed to measure how effective what you are doing is, the strategies are very likely measuring how one feels about the attitudes and beliefs. She said she worries about that. She worries about the use of a lot of qualitative data in the study grants and implementation grants. She said she is a little concerned about that. She said she believes this is part of the problem with education--we may feel very good about what we are doing, but we are not producing the kind of test scores results we want. She said she believes there should be some kind of exit strategy if what is being done is not resulting in any improvements. She said she believes that we do have some schools that are implementing some programs that have not been producing significant results. She said if we are spending a lot of money on something, it has to result in improved student learning, not just feeling good about something. She noted the comments on turbulence by Robin Lake. She said she believes that if there was something significant in regard to improved student learning, it would show up within a year or two. She said she had a hard time starting with attitudes and beliefs as something to measure. Director Murphy commented on a report that she read that only 3 out of 24 comprehensive school reforms are even effective. Director Murphy also commented on the application for grant money. She said that a good degree of the grant money could possibly be funding programs that are not particularly effective. She said she would want to be cautious about the kind of grants that we are pursuing. Dr. Jackson said that the main focus in evaluating a program would be what evidence can be shown that what is being done has contributed to improved student achievement. She said that we are looking at many areas that would be a part of this evidence. She said that satisfaction is one component of this, but it may or may not lead to student achievement. She said even though there are some qualitative components, there are also some quantitative components. Dr. Jackson said that we do have an annual review process. She said that an implementation grant is for one year. She said we will try to get as much objective data along with the qualitative data. Dr. Jackson explained that staff will be cautious of grants that do not fit with what we are trying to accomplish. President Hendrickson thanked Dr. Jackson and staff for the very thorough report. President Hendrickson asked how the District's focus on literacy or any focus that the District might have is conveyed to the schools involved in the schoolwide design process, so what they are developing is consistent with what we say is important. Dr. Jackson said that the Team had a discussion about this issue, and if literacy does become a focus in terms of "the focus," the Team would refocus the study grant efforts. She said that the information contained in the report shows that the majority of the schools do have a focus on reading. President Hendrickson said that we have a wealth of information from people like Tony Wagner, Paul Hill, and many others about effective schools that some people in the District have. She asked how this information is being shared to support the schools in their schoolwide design efforts. Dr. Jackson said that was a great question. She said that the District Schoolwide Design Team is in the process of developing a dynamic web site as a resource to share with all the schools and for the schools to share with each other. President Hendrickson confirmed that we do not have a lending library or a recommended reading list or a list of reform models, etc. Dr. Jackson said that staff does have a list of reform models. She said that information was given out at the conference along with different web site contacts. President Hendrickson asked what kinds of data are we expecting schools to come up with in the beginning. She said that the reason she is asking this is because we are missing the opportunity for them to get baseline data before they even start talking about schoolwide designs. Dr. Jackson said that we ask schools to provide a history of things that they have tried or done before and what worked and what did not work. She said we are trying to get a handle on that. She said that schools need to give some objective data such as test scores. President Hendrickson verified that we have not asked for student achievement data in reading, writing, and math, attendance data, transfer data, climate survey, etc. Dr. Jackson reiterated that schools have been asked for at least one piece of objective data which could be in reading or math, depending upon what the focus is. She said that the District Schoolwide Design Team has not asked for all of the baseline data mentioned by President Hendrickson. President Hendrickson said if we are going to evaluate any progress that is being made, we need to know where we started. President Hendrickson said that the school leadership team piece is of concern to her. President Hendrickson said in the brochures that were developed it was stated that each school should have an identity. She said it was indicated that the school leadership teams should have a learning plan and from that the identity of the school will be developed. She said that process did not quite get us to where we want to be so now we have a District Schoolwide Design Team, and if this does not work quite right, what is the next layer to put on top of the school leadership teams and the District Schoolwide Design Team that is supposed to get us to where we want to go. She said she is concerned that there is not a dialog happening between the school leadership teams and the schoolwide design projects. Dr. Jackson said she believes we are fortunate to have a parent representative on the District's Schoolwide Design Team who also has the role of being a school leadership team facilitator who can help facilitate the dialog with the school leadership teams and the schoolwide design projects. President Hendrickson said a big issue is the cost. She asked Dr. Jackson what kind of dollar commitment does the District have to make. Dr. Jackson said what we have done before for implementation grants is to say that we would support a total of $50,000, with the District providing one-half and the school providing one-half. She said that secondary schools have been told that they may need additional funds because of the complex systems. She said that, for example, if the District decided to support six implementation grants, with a 50/50 split, that amounts to $150,000. She said that the District Schoolwide Design Team will be meeting to develop information to take to Management Team to show what the level of interest looks like and what funding would be needed to support that level of interest. Dr. Jackson said she would like to have the budget information prior to schools submitting a request for implementation. Director Murphy said that a member of a school leadership team informed her that the additional math curriculum that many of the schools are using is part of the schoolwide design. She said she was wondering if that was incorrect information. Dr. Jackson said how she thinks of schoolwide design is in terms of coat rack with individual coat hooks. She said that each one of the hooks represents what is agreed upon how students learn best. She said there will need to be a coat on every hook to have the schoolwide design in place. She said that the person who mentioned this to Director Murphy might be talking about one of the coat hooks in terms of math. Director Murphy asked when the community members come into the picture in a schoolwide design project. She asked if there is any kind of vote taken to move forward or not. Dr. Jackson said that there is not a formal vote, but both in the study process and the implementation process we ask that the schools develop a communications and coordination plan. She said that parents, staff, and students are to be brought along during the process, not at the end of the process. Director Murphy said that she would want to know what support level that is. Director Murphy asked if there is a possibility that an item on one of the "coat hooks" would not actually have a significant majority of support from the parent community. Dr. Jackson said that the District Schoolwide Design Team did not ask people to take a formal vote of their parent community, so she said it would be possible in response to the comment from Director Murphy. Director Murphy said for her that would be an issue. President Hendrickson said that some of the issues may be waiver issues also which would come to the Board.

*Mr. Lloyd Gardner said he was having some difficulty following what was presented. He said that we have 33 schools, and he said that we have reading problems in every school. He asked if we were going to have a basic program that has been shown to be quite successful and proven to help all students. He said if students learned to read in the early grades, we would not have the need to have a remedial program. He asked if each school is allowed to do what they want as long as they can get a grant. He told the Board that he suspects there are districts that have already figured out what the better reading programs are. He said he would hope that the District would know what these are and would be exploring these programs. He said he believes that the best progress that is being made is a result of the direct instruction programs. President Hendrickson encouraged Mr. Gardner to submit his questions in writing and indicated that he had exceeded the time for public comments. President Hendrickson said that Dr. Jackson could follow up with Mr. Gardner to let him know what kind of programs have been reviewed.

19. BOARD COMMENTS FOR THE GOOD OF THE DISTRICT

President Hendrickson announced that the Board will be holding a special Board meeting on January 5, 2000, to meet with the Superintendent Search Consultant to review applications for Superintendent, from 2 p.m. to 8 p.m. at the Educational Service Center.

President Hendrickson asked if there were any comments for the Good of the District. Director Marks brought the Board's attention to an article about the work of the National Educational Progress in Civics entitled "Students Flunk Their Civics Test - How Does Government Work? Many in High School Have No Clue." Director Marks quoted from a paragraph of the article that appeared in the publication National Issue: "In a 1998 poll conducted by the National Constitution Center, not one in 50 American teenagers could identify James Madison as the father of the U.S. Constitution. Not even half could name the three branches of the federal government. And not one in ten could name the landmark Supreme Court case (Brown v. Board of Education) that ended segregation in the public schools." He said this lack of knowledge about Civics is of great concern to him.

Director Murphy said that she had some minutes and other materials from another school district regarding facilities planning. She said that the district actually has an oversight committee. She asked that these materials be copied for the Board members so that they can see what another school district is doing in the area of facilities.

President Hendrickson said that she asked Director Storvick to take on the responsibility of organizing the Student Evening with the Board. She said there had been a tentative date in January which is no longer viable.

Director Storvick said that he will be requesting support and assistance from Victoria Bergsagel, Director of Community Relations, as the planning moves forward for the Student Evening with the Board. He said that one of the suggestions that was mentioned in the Board President's Conference was to get a committee of students together to plan, coordinate, and help facilitate the Student Evening with the Board. He said that we are now looking at the first part of April to schedule this. He said that he will be meeting with Victoria Bergsagel sometime within the next several weeks to discuss the organization of this event.

20. RECESS TO EXECUTIVE SESSION

President Hendrickson recessed the meeting to continue discussion of executive session items at approximately 10:15 p.m.

21. RECONVENE MEETING

President Hendrickson reconvened the regular Board meeting.

22. ADJOURNMENT

President Hendrickson adjourned the meeting at approximately 11:15 p.m.

LINDA HENDRICKSON, BOARD PRESIDENT

TOM MURPHY, INTERIM SUPERINTENDENT