February 7, 2007

Minutes of the Governing Board Mid-Year Planning Retreat of Wednesday, February 7, 2007, beginning at 8:30 a.m. held at the Mountain Club Clubhouse.

Governing Board Members Present:

President Steve Campbell

Dr. Joan Fleming

Dr. Andy Newton

Mrs. Dee Navarro

Mr. Tom Staley

Also Present:

Mr. Kevin J. Kapp, Superintendent

Dr. Chris Reynolds, Assistant Superintendent

Mrs. Renee Raskin, Director of Business Services

Mr. John Vanuk, Student Representative

Mrs. Andi Mayer, Assistant to the Governing Board

Others Present:

Jay Collier Arn Lavington Ed Yeager

Geneva Saint-Amour Lauren Millette Joe Howard

Jake Magallanez Barbara Van Fossen Bucky Bates

Stephanie Hillig Chris Lawrence Nancy Martinez

Frank Lawhead Linda Ryan Jim Cowan

Totsy McCraley Marianne Brooks Bill Munson

Tim Carter Brian Moore Susan Clark

Joe Terra David Martin Abbie Roses

Shelley Norwood Kathy Patzer

CALL TO ORDER AND WELCOME

President Steve Campbell called the meeting to order at 8:30 a.m. and welcomed everyone in attendance. He also thanked Food Service for providing breakfast.

LOCATION FOR NEW HIGH SCHOOL BUILDING, LOCATION FOR NORTHPOINT EXPEDITIONARY LEARNING ACADEMY, AND POSSIBLE BOND ELECTION

Dr. Andy Newton noted that when the district opened NELA the board had tried to purchase a building by the high school, which didn’t happen, so NELA was located temporarily at Dexter. He stated that he felt NELA will need to have their own dedicated facility and that the original plan was to house NELA at Dexter for a two year period.

Mrs. Dee Navarro asked, what did the School Facilities Board approve us for? Mr. Kevin Kapp responded, a 500 student building with 62,000 square footage. He noted that the SFB is very open to what the district wants to do with that building, whether we have it built at a new site or at PHS, and SFB will help the district negotiate for land. We have the option of asking the city for land at Pioneer Park and that SFB allows districts to purchase, lease or trade land.

Dr. Newton asked Geneva Saint-Amour, how long can NELA stay at Dexter? Mrs. Saint-Amour responded, parking is an issue, there are no fields for P.E. or athletics, the basketball court is in disrepair, and we are sharing with Kids & Co. and Discovery Gardens. We’re pretty crowded now and will be adding more students next year. She added that Dexter is a very well-maintained and functional building and is suitable for now, but will not fit the eventual 400 student enrollment.

Mr. Campbell asked Mrs. Saint-Amour, what’s your feeling on a separate location? Mrs. Saint-Amour responded that she thought it would be beneficial to be close to the other high school in order to share some facilities.

She suggested looking at PMH as an expeditionary campus.

Mr. Kapp commented that it would push that facility to around 1,000-1,100 students, which is probably over-maximizing with too many students in one spot. He added that we have a 500 student building potential from SFB and $1.8 million from the sale of the Nature Center. He noted that we need to identify 50-60 acres at Pioneer Park, have SFB build our building, then move NELA, PEAK and possibly JROTC to that site, which would have access to fields and parking, and eventually move PHS out to that site.

Dr. Newton noted that PHS is almost there now as far as student population.

Mr. Staley stated that he didn’t know where you could put another building at the high school and suggested building a new high school at Pioneer Park through the city or county or through a joint venture. Once you move the high school students to the new campus, move both middle schools to the old PHS campus. He added that you could sell the old campus, but we have lots of good things there such as the Ruth Street Theater, tennis courts, etc. He suggested moving NELA and the district office to Granite Mountain. Dexter would then be vacant and you could either keep it open for elementary or build a new preschool. You could then sell the district office, Dexter and PMH and possibly build a new high school at zero cost for the taxpayers. He felt that either the county or the city would be very interested in the land at PMH. He understood that there was some sentimental attachment to the PMH campus, but we need to do what’s best for students now and in the future.

President Steve Campbell asked, if the city leased property to us, what kind of money would that be? Mr. Kapp responded, you can do a 75-99 year lease and negotiate the price. President Campbell noted that we could lease property at Cliff Rose for $1.00 a year. He stated that he had some concerns about a giant middle school.

Dr. Joan Fleming stated that she felt Tom Staley’s plan was coming from a business perspective and not necessarily an education one. She suggested building a new high school in the north part of town and felt that putting more money into the existing high school would be money down the drain. She noted that the district could sale a bond and use money from the sale of the PHS campus to pay down the bond. She suggested taking the money from the sale of the Nature Center and use it to build a new preschool at Cliff Rose or use the money from SFB. She stated that have one big middle school would have some problems.

Mr. Tim Carter noted that they had put together a partnership for another accommodation school in Prescott and would be doing a lease with the county for three acres for $3 a year. He added that SFB will be building us a facility that would accommodate high school students in the morning, middle school students in the afternoon and juvenile probation and GED classes in the evening with a 75 year lease.

Dr. Newton stated that he thought Dr. Fleming’s idea of selling the high school was a pretty good idea since that campus is not in the greatest shape.

Mr. Lavington pointed out that the district has already spent $100,000 for locks, $600,000 for new HVACs, $400,000 on the tennis courts, and $200,000 for carpeting at the high school out of the current bond money. Mr. Staley stated, that’s almost $2.5 million. He added that the current high school is overloaded and is old, but we’ve already done $2.5 million in work on it and it would be better with 1,200 students rather than 2,000. There are lots of middle schools with that large of a student population and you could separate 6^th grade from 7^th and 7^th grade. He added that a new cafeteria, band room and science wing were still planned for PHS. There has been a fundamental shift now with an extra $10 million. Put that with the money from the sale of other property and we’d have about $50 million.

President Campbell noted that the fundamental shift is not just SFB, but looking at PHS and the problems we’re having now. We are land locked now and the more we add the more challenging the situation becomes

Dr. Chris Reynolds added that when we had our Cabinet Chat at the Bus Barn, they suggested moving to Pioneer Park and selling the bus barn property.

Mrs. Geneva Saint-Amour noted that NELA is often in the uncomfortable position of being the “new kid on the block” and voiced concern over the possibility of hard feelings if they were to get a new building. She suggested building a new high school and moving CSS, DO, NELA, JROTC, PEAK, Kids & Co. and the preschools to the existing high school campus and the possibility of leasing the Dexter facility to a charter school.

Mr. Staley stated that the middle schools at PHS would alleviate the parking problem and the traffic problems at AJ and GMMS. Once we take that step we need to show the public that all property is on the table. If we don’t do that it will be hard to sale a bond.

President Campbell noted that another issue is if Dexter is vacated by NELA, would it be sufficient for the preschools. Mr. Chris Lawrence responded, we are concerned about safety due to the many entrances and having no fire suppressant system. He added that most of our student population is special needs students and there is a need for more bathrooms. President Campbell asked, the building could be adapted though? Mr. Lawrence responded, yes, and the amount of classrooms would be appropriate.

Mr. Kapp reported that after visiting the Cliff Rose site they had found out that all the surrounding houses were for retired people. He noted that Dexter was designed to hold from 400-500 students. He also thought about Northpoint, since that’s were the need is. He added that JROTC must be with one of the high schools because those students have to take traditional classes also.

Mrs. Marianne Brooks pointed out that if a building were built at Cliff Rose it would not just be for the preschool, but for Kids & Co. also.

Dr. Fleming stated that she had spoken with some of the PHS staff and they had said that they’d like a new high school. She added that Vaughn Delp believed putting the two middle schools at the high school would be a bad idea.

Mr. Lawrence noted that Yavapai College is building a new child development center and that he’d like to keep those early interventions.

President Campbell suggested developing a list – what’s best for preschool, elementary, middle school and high school.

Mr. Jay Collier noted that we’ve heard about 4-5 ideas and that it’s a huge thing to think about. He stated that he thought it might be helpful to identify as many idea as possible on paper and give it to the growth committee ad let them pick the ideas apart and that people will have to realize that there will have to be some concessions made. He asked, is the Board willing to put two middle schools up at the high school – or is the small school concept so important?

Mrs. McCraley pointed out that Nancy Martinez has written out a number of those options for discussion and we could add to that list. She stated that she agreed with Jay Collier – that she’s always been impressed with PUSD’s philosophy regarding small schools and small class sizes. When looking at growth trends, there has been none at the middle school level, which needs to be considered before the Board makes a decision.

Mr. Staley stated that we need to start having some public meetings on this, which is a critical element. He added that he thought our class sizes were rather large and pointed out that you can still have a small class size in a large facility and you could have two sessions to maintain the class size. We’re having huge growth at our elementary level and that will be at the middle school and high school very soon. He suggested taking care of NELA and PHS by building two new facilities for both of them.

President Campbell noted that the Board must come to some type of cohesive consensus, what direction to go, and then put that out there.

Mr. Bucky Bates stated that he believed the public would not be supportive of sending 6^th graders to a 1,200 student school and that there are physical plant problems that will need to be addressed.

Mr. Collier noted that the roof has been worked on, APS put in new HVACs and all new lighting, and new carpeting. He stated that plumbing is the only thing that would concern him in the future.

President Campbell asked, why don’t we see growth at the middle school level? Are parents concerned about the transition from elementary to middle school, and are trying charter schools and then coming back at the high school level?

Mrs. Stephanie Hillig responded she thought that might be a part of it. She added that if you’re going to go to the public about the high school, you need to consider the middle schools also and added that the middle school teachers were not in favor of moving to the high school.

Ms. Linda Ryan noted that you could research issues that bigger structures cause more problems at the middle school level – come from an educational point of view, not a financial one.

Mr. Brian Moore stated that a building that big with 1,200 middle school students would not support the middle school philosophy of team teaching and would become a junior high, rather than a middle school.

Mr. Frank Lawhead stated that we have two middle schools that already have nice campuses with auditoriums, football fields, tracks, etc. He thought the parents would see that many students in one facility as a scary thing and we might lose some of those students.

Mr. Joe Howard stated that the district needs to look into the mystery of where those middle school students go between elementary and high school. We’re pulling tons of students out of other areas at the high school level, but not at the middle school level, which would be worth studying.

Mr. Bill Munson stated that you must consider philosophy vs. financial – we don’t even know what the high school would be worth. We should probably find out from an appraiser what the various properties are worth and that the hospital might possibly be interested in the high school property. He noted that many Phoenix schools are going back to the K-8 philosophy and that maybe we should re-evaluate that, since K-8 keeps them from growing up so quickly.

Mr. John Vanuk stated that he didn’t support K-8 because going from elementary to middle school is a big step and then going from K-8 to high school and then college might be an even harder transition.

Mr. Kapp stated that we need to pass a bond to build a new high school within 2 ½ years, which makes the timing a little long for Northpoint. In order to sale a large bond issue you need to sell something big for a trade-off. We also need to collect data on why the middle schools are not growing.

OUTSOURCING TRANSPORTATION

Dr. Chris Reynolds reported that over the years the district has discussed outsourcing services such as food service or bus transportation. Mr. Jim Cowan distributed some results from surveys regarding contractors and outsourcing and noted that he had contracted 10 contractors in Arizona and had three contractors that were interested: Durham, First Student and Laidlaw that furnished us with information. He stated that in his lifetime he has worked with both contractors and school districts and that there are pros and cons to both and that he would be happy to answer any questions.

President Campbell noted that we had just spent a lot of money on new buses. Mr. Cowan explained that contractors will usually buy them from you, but there have been districts that have become disenchanted with the outsourcing and then had to go and buy new buses.

Mr. Staley asked, why are we discussing this now? Mr. Cowan responded that he ha been asked to present this by the district administration. Mr. Staley asked, you don’t think busing is a problem? Mr. Cowan responded, no. Mr. Staley asked, you don’t feel outsourcing would be beneficial? Mr. Cowan responded, no. Dr. Reynolds added, we’re comfortable with what we’re doing and with outsourcing you’d give up control and they don’t do fingerprinting, etc. He stated that we just thought we’d present this to the board and put it to rest.

Mr. Collier stated that he was surprised to see it on the agenda – unless you have a concern, I think everyone is happy. He added that outsourcing is not as responsive to our needs.

Dr. Reynolds noted, we just wanted to put this to rest.

Mr. Cowan noted that special needs students is one of the largest and fastest growing populations in our district and we’ve added two additional runs and will probably be adding more. He added, that’s an area that contractors don’t like because they don’t make as much money.

President Campbell stated that we have a lot of flexibility and can be more reasonable on our own.

Mrs. Renee Raskin noted that where we go over is for diesel fuel.

Mr. Staley noted that the potential for outsourcing can be good, depending on your needs. He stated that he remembered asking if we should be looking at outsourcing, but we just spent $2.5 million on buses and have a new fleet. We should not talk about it until our buses have aged. He asked for the top two major weaknesses in our existing bus system. Mr. Cowan responded, transferring students and scheduling. Mr. Staley asked, if we have a major weakness, would contracting out a part of our schedule – would that help us solve some particular problems? Mr. Cowan responded, my thought is no, because they want large contracts. Currently we are controlled by DPS and we have a good relationship with DPS, and having talked with many other directors in the state – they tell me the contractors do not enjoy that type of relationship.

Mr. Joe Terra stated that he has a background in sub-contracting and noted that you can get what you want through sub-contracting, but often times the problem becomes managing the sub-contractor.

Mr. Kapp noted that this topic has come up several times over the years and needed to be discussed here and would blend with other topics on the agenda such as bus routes and start and dismissal times. We wanted the opportunity to discuss it and then put it to rest.

BREAK

START AND DISMISSAL TIMES AND IMPACT ON BUS ROUTES

Mrs. Dee Navarro stated that her concern has been long wait times after school for students waiting to be picked up. She asked if we now had the new bus drivers? Mr. Cowan responded, yes, 3 regular drivers and 1 special needs driver. He added that transportation is still fine-tuning to try to improve the wait times. He stated that the principals could speak about this topic, and noted that they have already reduced the wait time by 10 minutes.

Mrs. Stephanie Hillig noted that it had improved by 20 minutes for them.

Mr. Joe Howard reported that it had also improved for them by 20 minutes. He stated that there was some concern now regarding more transfers, because students that are not PMH students makes for tougher supervision.

Mr. Cowan noted that the transfer points are WTS, GMMS, PMH, and PHS.

Mr. Yeager noted that they have a couple hundred kids coming through and it has been really busy the last couple of months due to more transfers.

Mr. Munson noted that in a couple of instances there are kids waiting for 40 minutes. Mr. Cowan noted that those were probably students who are on the out-of-town routes.

Mrs. Navarro stated that she did not think elementary kids waiting for 45 minutes was acceptable. Mr. Munson remarked, they are a small group of kids that chose to attend our district from Prescott Valley, etc.

Mr. Cowan noted that the only way you could get around that is if you had buses committed to each school. He added that there are many districts that do that, but we would need double the amount of buses. Students that attend from other districts must provide their own transportation, however, we do send a bus to Prescott Valley since there are 50-60 students that ride it.

Mrs. McCraley reported that they have been tracking the buses. PHS dismisses at 3:09 p.m. and the last bus arrives between 4:09-4:20 p.m. We’re also having problems with road construction on Iron Springs and near Abia Judd. When you have all three levels of kids waiting for buses, it can be a problem.

Mr. Cowan noted that it’s a matter of the time for elementary – to take to Diamond Valley and get back for another run.

President Campbell asked, could changing the dismissal time help? Or adding a few more buses? Mr. Kapp noted, that’s why these two topics are related. We start middle school and high school at about the same time and then 20 minutes later we start the elementary schools. He stated that if we want to solve this you would need to change the times – it’s solvable, but there would have to be some trade-offs. If the elementary schedule were to be from 8:00 a.m. – 2:15 p.m. and the middle and high school schedule from 9:00 a.m. – 3:30 p.m. the elementary parents would think that is too early of a start and the high school coaches would say that it’s too late for practices and also that away games would cause students to miss three classes instead of two.

Mrs. McCraley suggested reversing them and having the middle and high schools with the early schedule. Mr. John Vanuk commented that most teenagers are sleep deprived and it would make more sense to have the high school schedule start later.

Mr. Kapp noted that NPR did a study that showed that younger children tend to fade in the afternoon.

Mr. Ed Yeager noted that with a later start time for the elementary, most parents would be at work. Regarding sports – it’s important, but it is a much smaller segment of the total student population.

Mr. Staley stated that you could make arrangements both ways and asked if the start times of eight and nine o’clock would solve the problem. Mr. Cowan responded, it would go a long way in solving it, but you’d still have to add 10-15 minutes for transfers.

Mrs. Saint-Amour stated she’d like to see the late start for the high school, which would allow for tutoring in the morning and you could have morning practices as an alternative. She felt that the transportation department should do more research to show that this would solve the problem.

Dr. Newton asked, what is the percentage of students that ride buses? Mr. Munson responded, at the elementary level approximately 50%. Mrs. McCraley responded, at the high school level approximately 10-12%. Mr. Howard responded, at the middle school level approximately 60%. He noted that less than half of the students/parents would be affected, but felt that most parents won’t want to change the schedule.

Mr. Munson reported that he had chaired a committee a few years back looking at this issue and that’s exactly what happened – the coaches and secondary teachers did not want a late night and the elementary kids can’t wait in the dark for buses. He noted that they had looked at a 9:00-4:00 schedule for the high school and the teachers and parents were not happy with that proposal. Between the teachers and coaches, what we have is the most we could do.

Mr. Cowan noted that there is less wait in the afternoon for the elementary students – the waits are mainly at the transfers and now the major wait is for the secondary students.

Mrs. McCraley noted that the high school only has two security guards and it’s hard to cover the bus stop and do crowd control If the middle and high schools start at 8:05 a.m. anyway and the elementary at 9:00 a.m., that would solve the major problems. Mr. Cowan responded noted that the major problems are not in the morning, but in the afternoon and for the out-of-district routes. He suggested looking at and prioritizing the problems.

Mr. Howard suggested taking small steps and start with half-hour changes.

Mr. Staley suggested that if the starting times are okay, extend the middle and high school dismissal times to 3:30 p.m. and give the students an extra 20 minutes for lunch. Mr. Howard responded that the kids are wiped out and so are the teachers and that it has been better with the earlier dismissal.

Dr. Newton pointed out that with the 3,000 middle and high school students, these changes would affect all of them in order to help out 25% of the them.

Mr. Kapp suggested looking at the educational research and the advantages and disadvantages.

Mrs. Saint-Amour noted that a large portion of the NELA students ride the bus and the transfer wait is of huge concern. The kids are not comfortable waiting at a school that is not their school.

Mr. Howard suggesting meeting in the middle with an 8:00 start time for elementary and 8:30 start for middle and high schools.

Dr. Fleming stated that she supported what John Vanuk had said about middle and high school students needing to sleep later in the morning. She stated that the coaches would lobby against this as they did with the calendar. Having practices in the morning could be an alternative.

Mrs. Raskin noted that you still have parents working and would they want their middle school students being at home in the morning by themselves? Dr. Fleming suggested letting the parents know in advance and have them work it out.

EARLY RELEASE/LATE START FOR ALL SCHOOLS FOR PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

Mr. Kapp reported that every Wednesday, with the exception of the elementary schools, there is early dismissal. He noted that the district administration has been to every elementary school for the open forums and they all have asked when they will get professional development time. He added that the parent groups have mixed feelings. Academic achievement is at its highest level – we are the 8^th best district in the state. Most schools have continued academic growth and teachers have more time to team and align curriculum. Sustained professional development time for teachers is required by law. Mr. Kapp stated that it’s time to address the fact that elementary teachers are wanting time also. They have been doing it, but after the kids leave. He noted that the carving out time for elementary schools would affect the dismissal and start times. Generally, parents don’t like early dismissal on Wednesdays and would rather have it on Fridays. Faculty suggested having it on Friday as well. We owe it to our staff to find time for all staff and thought it was worth pursuing.

Dr. Newton stated that he felt it was a legitimate request.

Mr. Vanuk noted that for him it breaks up the week and he loves the early release on Wednesday. We’re seeing so many new clubs starting because of it and if you move the early release to Friday, students won’t stay for clubs then.

Dr. Fleming stated that she would recommend Wednesdays because by Friday afternoon, people are burned out. She asked what the principals thought of Friday for early release and professional development.

Mr. Howard reported that Wednesdays give them a lighter feeling two times a week instead of one. He noted that work with the city and parks and recreation have fallen short – there is a lack of student interest and the kids just walk around downtown or parents pick them up.

Mr. Lawhead said, Wednesday or Fridays, they just want the time.

Mr. Munson stated that he thought Friday was the day of the week when you have the most absences and parents might start allowing students to stay home because of the shorter school day.

Mr. Staley asked, what is the contract time? Mr. Kapp responded, 7:45 – 3:45 for an eight-hour day.

Mr. Staley stated that you’re decreasing instructional time and that he was strongly against that at the elementary level and added that he did not support it at the middle and high school level.

Mr. Staley asked, what’s attendance like on Wednesday?

Mrs. McCraley responded, teacher are attending professional development. We are doing North Central accreditation and all teachers are on two North Central committees or are doing departmental things such as aligning curriculum. One Wednesday is for faculty meetings with 30 minutes of PLC – it’s being used.

Mr. Staley asked, what’s the percentage? Mrs. McCraley responded, if they are there that day, they attend.

Mr. Howard suggested looking at research from Chino Valley – they have had early dismissal on Friday for the last several years.

Mr. Kapp noted that he had a good accounting system through reports.

Mr. Staley stated that he felt early dismissal on Friday was not as good as Wednesdays and that you see kids wondering around town every Wednesday and felt Wednesday would be the most efficient.

Mrs. McCraley noted that the middle and high schools added time to the other four days – that was the tradeoff – so it does not shorten instructional time. Mr. Staley noted if it’s not an efficient use of time – the shortened periods.

Mrs. McCraley pointed out that activities, athletics, fine arts are all a big part of a comprehensive high school and it’s important to still allow time for groups to meet. We are seeing more students starting new clubs and if we put early release on Friday we’d lose a lot of those clubs. She added that lots of things at high school happen on Fridays – dances, games, etc.

Mr. Vanuk noted that teachers utilize Wednesday for review because of the shorter periods and it’s better and helps the students a lot.

Mr. Moore asked, why does it have to be on the same day of the week? Mr. Kapp responded, the theory is that it would encourage vertical curriculum articulation and also would affect the bus schedule.

Mr. Howard noted that it’s a concern when kids leave our campus on Wednesdays and it’s not perfect on Wednesday. He stated that in Chino Valley, Friday attendance did not go down and as far as teachers leaving – that would be my problem as an administrator to deal with.

Mr. Cowan noted that on Wednesday afternoons we have under 50% rider ship.

Mr. Kapp noted that both the elementary and middle schools would like Fridays, rather than Wednesday. Mr. Howard suggested being careful about splitting up the middle schools and elementary schools.

Mr. Kapp noted that administratively he would like to work on some scenarios and come up with a proposal and bring it to the Board. He added that they would look at job-embedded time for professional development at the elementary schools with changes in dismissal times and maybe tweak the middle and high school schedules.

Mr. Staley stated that it was embedded in their time anyway and would not like to see elementary schools have an early release because it would decrease educational instruction.

President Campbell stated that he thought it was not so much embedded as the amount of time. He added that there was no decrease in instructional time.

Mr. Moore stated that it’s embedded in their time, but displaces something else – grading papers, prep time, etc. – they make that up on their own time.

President Campbell noted that teachers then stay later to make up the prep time they missed because of displaced time.

LUNCH BREAK

PARENT FOCUS GROUPS

Mr. Kapp introduced Mrs. Abbie Roses and Mrs. Shelley Norwood who were involved with the parent focus groups. He noted that Shelley was the facilitator and also coordinated the mystery shopping.

Mrs. Roses reported that one of the things that has been important to marketing five years ago was to listen to our customers, so we started with suggestion boxes at every site and mystery shopping. She noted that over the last two months they have been doing focus groups, which is a very valid format for collecting information and we’ll continue having them in the future. Every person who participated wanted to know that something was going to happen. They had shared their thoughts, asked us to please take them seriously and do something with the input. She noted that a lot of the issues would not cost money.

Mrs. Norwood reviewed the specifics regarding the number of participants in the focus groups at each level. She noted that there was a commonality of themes and recommendations and everything had to do with students. She reported at the high school there were two major issues: wanting a closed campus (with the exception of seniors) and regarding curriculum they felt there was a gap in English between the remedial and accelerated classes. They felt you could close the campus now by providing awnings outside for extra space and allowing vendors on campus.

She noted that at the middle school level their concerns were no foreign language offered, teacher performance, no general course syllabus, that the team teaching was not working – that one night the kids might have four hours of homework and the next night nothing.

She reported that at the elementary level the concerns were with fingerprinting parent volunteers and did not feel professional development days were necessary – that professional people will train on their own time.

Dr. Newton asked, how were the parents selected? Mrs. Norwood responded, they were called from a list of names given to me by the principal and told they would remain anonymous and chosen randomly. She stated that she wanted people that don’t always get heard.

Mr. Cowan asked, how do you know those people represented the feelings of the majority? Mrs. Norwood responded that she would sent them an e-mail with a list of topics to be discussed and asked them to talk with other parents.

Mr. Cowan asked, each of those people had input from a large group of parents? Mrs. Norwood responded, yes.

Dr. Reynolds asked, what topics? Could they bring other topics? Mrs. Norwood responded that they had developed a discussion guide with Mr. Kapp and Abbie Roses that was scaled down and at the end of each focus group we asked for parent recommendations to improve services.

Dr. Reynolds asked, what will be the follow-up? Mrs. Norwood responded, another focus group.

Mr. Howard stated that he would like to see it broken down by school. Mrs. Norwood noted that at the middle school level parents were concerned with consistency. Mr. Howard stated that he’d like to know whether it was a GMMS or PMHMS issue.

Mrs. McCraley noted that they are going through the NCA cycle and that she was not too sure how much information to give back to the NC teams. Some of these things dovetail with some of the NC goals. She asked if they could meet with the NC chairs.

Mrs. Raskin asked, there were no special needs parents at the elementary level? Mrs. Norwood responded that they couldn’t find anyone.

President Campbell asked, what’s the best direction to go from here? Mr. Kapp responded that the goal was to make everyone aware of the findings and if you read through the reports you will find the information came from some incredibly caring parents. He added that we need to talk about what can be addressed and that a lot of the items would not require Board action, with the exception of offering a foreign language at the middle schools. He stated that he did not think we could do them all, but there were many that could be addressed.

Mrs. Norwood suggesting allowing the public to know that you’ve done this and that you are doing something with the information.

Dr. Newton suggested doing that through more e-mails, newsletters, etc.

Mr. Kapp suggested collecting parent e-mails and using them as a communication tool.

Mrs. Navarro stated that she’d like to see the Board look at this information and prioritize it.

Mr. Kapp noted that at one of the March Board meetings we could discuss this information.

Dr. Reynolds asked, is this a standard representation – 30 parents for 5,000 students? Mrs. Norwood responded, they were a very diverse group and focus groups with larger groups dilutes the message. Dr. Reynolds stated that he was trying to feel comfortable with the sampling size if we’re thinking about responding to this small group.

Mr. Collier stated that if he were a principal he would want to know how valid the issues were and if it was representative of parents in my school and not a perception.

Mrs. Roses stated that because it was such a small sampling it indicates that we need to look into them further. We know open campus is an issue.

President Campbell stated that of all the issues he was curious where the issue of fingerprinting parent volunteers came from. Mrs. Norwood stated that all but one participant said they had been on campus and did not sign in and were not challenged – at the middle schools as well. Mr. Kapp noted that this issue was a topic that would require a lot of time and money and was really cost prohibitive and would derail the idea of parent volunteers. He stated that they want us to just look at these concerns and solve as many as we can.

Mrs. Norwood invited those in attendance to feel free to call or e-mail her if they had questions or wanted more information.

President Campbell encouraged the Board members to read the information that had been distributed.

Mrs. Saint-Amour suggested having Shari Lopatin report about this in the newspaper, which would help to validate that something was being done with the information.

Mrs. Roses gave a brief update on marketing and reported that it has been in a maintenance mode for the last few years. She noted that she is coordinating some of the marketing efforts with the Communications Committee and that the radio ads, etc. are all very coordinated now with a time line.

VOLUNTEER PROGRAM – POSSIBILITY OF COORDINATOR

Dr. Fleming reported that Abia Judd as a lot of volunteers, but that’s not true at Miller Valley. She noted that there is a real need for volunteers in the schools and if we could afford to hire a volunteer coordinator, it would help. She reminded everyone that we did have a volunteer coordinator several years ago. She added that she had experience in this area and if there was one person coordinating this effort district-wide, you could get people from the outside – people to help teachers, nurses, etc. A coordinator would know what schools needed what. Volunteers could be used only on request, it would have to be promoted with the teachers, and once teachers become aware that you have trained volunteers, they usually were very open to having volunteers in their classrooms. She noted that this was just an idea that might be considered down the road and might be helpful to the district. These same people who are in the “trenches” can help spread the word about the good things going on in the schools.

Dr. Reynolds noted that he was working with a person who has volunteered to find volunteers for specific requests and that this was discussed in DLT to find out what kind of volunteers are needed.

President Campbell asked, what kind of volunteers are needed?

Mr. Lawhead stated that Lincoln has five community volunteers that read with the kids and that they have a volunteer sign-in sheet in order to track the number of volunteers and the hours worked.

Mr. Yeager noted that Washington has the same type of sign-in book for volunteers that do side-by-side reading, but they could use some volunteers for math tutoring for the upper grades.

Mrs. Saint-Amour noted that their student store could use some organizing.

Mr. Howard stated that they could use volunteers for bus duty and the homework assistance program.

Dr. Fleming noted that she had gone to ASU and used students going for a teaching degree in their volunteer program and the student received so much credit for participating in the program.

Mrs. Hillig stated that Granite Mountain had tried to start a parents on campus program and we have a schedule, but people just don’t show up. It would need to be more structured.

Mr. Lawhead noted that the training of volunteers would help.

President Campbell asked, what would a volunteer coordinator cost? Mr. Kapp responded, a 20-hour-a-day classified position would cost between $15,000-$20,000 annually.

Dr. Fleming stated that she felt it should be a certified position.

ACCELERATED PROGRAM

Mr. Staley noted that we have two district programs, one of which is a federally funded program for elementary students in the 97^th percentile and above. We have two accelerated teachers in our district. Students receive some occasional instruction up to the 2^nd grade, once a week for 20 minutes between the five elementary schools.

Mr. Kapp commented that the district used to have four teachers in this area.

Mr. Staley went on to say that at the end of 2^nd grade those students take one test on one day and if they don’t qualify there are no further services for those students and a limited amount for those who do qualify. He stated that it would be rather simple for the district to make that a priority and fund more teachers for the elementary schools. He added that he has been told that teachers incorporate that within the classroom. It would be a matter of shifting priorities.

Mr. Chris Lawrence (speaking on behalf of Nancy Martinez who was voiceless) noted that those classes were enrichment classes, not accelerated, and that children can re-test. He added that new gifted laws will change some of that.

President Campbell asked, how can teachers incorporate that within their classrooms? Ms. Ryan responded, it’s difficult, but they can use differentiated instruction and teaching strategies. She added that she did enjoy the gifted instructional specialist helping her by coming into her room and modeling how to do that and to develop menus of project oriented assignments. She stated that she would love to see these programs enhanced and would like to see the gifted instructional specialists become resource persons rather than pull-out instructors. She felt this would help us keep those high labels.

President Campbell remarked that it sounded tricky working with all those levels.

Mr. Lawrence noted that gifted laws are looking more at the specialists collaborating with classroom teachers like what Ms. Ryan was talking about and that the district would need at least one more specialist.

Mr. Lawhead commented, that’s also where planning time is so important.

Mr. Staley stated that he was looking for an emphasis on this student population (accelerated and enrichment) – just like each elementary schools has a P.E. teacher. He added that special needs kids get IEPs and gifted kids do not – that’s discrimination. He stated that he was asking for justice on both ends. We think nothing of spending $30,000-$60,000 for special needs kids, but not for our gifted kids.

Dr. Fleming stated that she agreed, we don’t do as much for our highly performing students and that she liked the idea of teachers learning differentiated instruction.

Mr. Yeager suggested brining training to the buildings (like SEI training) and have teachers train for both.

Dr. Reynolds noted that the state requires 60 hours of training in SEI and that he had heard they were thinking about doing the same for gifted students.

Mr. Staley stated that we can do this as a district if we choose to without legislative money – through grants, etc.

Mrs. Marianne Brooks stated that there are grants for technology, humanities, etc., but nothing out there for gifted. She added that she has even looked at business grants.

Mr. Kapp noted that adding personnel would help, but still would not be as effective as every classroom teacher receiving enough training to be more effective. He added that teachers work with 2-3 different groups and an instructional coach would help.

Mrs. Saint-Amour noted that NELA has a .5 position for an instructional guide and his role is to observe and then talk to the teachers about how to incorporate more EL concepts, so the model exists.

Mrs. Brooks noted that the DLT is doing a book study on differentiated instruction and suggested bringing someone in or developing our own instructional coach to help with teaching strategies. If we used Title II funds for the actual training it could be done. She added that you must give teachers time to develop the differentiated tests and evaluate the students’ strengths and weaknesses.

Mrs. McCraley stated that they’ve taken a master teacher out of the classroom to work with our new teachers and that they have sent this teacher to different types of training. The teachers feel more supported and some of the older teachers are now asking for her assistance and she also helps to structure some of our PLCs. She noted that there are ways you can work within your individual systems and added that her staff has not been trained in differentiated instruction.

Mrs. Brooks noted that she had met with a teacher at Abia Judd at the end of last year and we were looking for funding for an elementary coach and the funds that we were going to use were cut drastically.

Dr. Reynolds stated that the state mandated that all certified teachers must by 2009 have 60 hours additional training through workshops or on-line and pay for it.

Mrs. Brooks added that there is a reimbursement fund the state has where they can get some of their money back.

Dr. Newton noted that there are a lot of ideas, we know what we can do to get differentiated instruction training to the teachers, but what we really need is a plan. We need to commit to something and do something about this.

Mr. Staley commented that this would be perfect for our professional development time every week.

Dr. Fleming commented that this needed to be put on the front burner and that we also all need to talk to our legislators.

DRESS CODE FOR SCHOOLS DISTRICT-WIDE AND UNIFORMS

President Campbell noted that he had attended a session at an ASBA conference on dress codes. Whiteriver USD went to their community, discussed dress costs, went to other schools in the district and eventually came up with reasons for a uniform dress code. Some of the reasons were for order, prevent gang dress, self respect, and cheaper than designer clothes. He noted that they developed a uniform dress code for khaki pants and short and long sleeved polo shirts in 2-3 colors. He added that the district saw some dramatic changes after adopting this dress code. There was a decrease in crime, fighting, weapons, assault, and vandalism. He stated that the session had intrigued him and then asked, what has happened at NELA?

Mrs. Saint-Amour responded, it hasn’t been completely wonderful. It’s cheaper, but some parents still complain and it’s more of a struggle with the kids.

Mr. Kapp added that we’ve had a lot of discussion regarding dress code, but not a uniform dress code. He suggested that it would be better to focus on what kids can wear and not on what you can’t wear.

Dr. Fleming stated that she felt strongly that this should come from the parents. She added that she has talked with Kay Steward who is the principal of the only school in Casa Grande that has uniforms and that it came from the parents. She suggested starting with the site councils.

President Campbell noted that they only lost five students. Mrs. Saint-Amour stated that she had lost two.

Dr. Fleming stated that it would be fairly easy to start at the elementary and middle schools, but more difficult at the high school.

Mrs. McCraley noted that through the North Central cycle they have been gathering data in order to develop goals and one of the questions was regarding uniforms and that parents were not supportive.

Mr. Staley stated that he was not suggesting a uniform, but a consistent dress code for the district. He noted that he had reviewed the handbooks and we don’t have anything consistent. He reviewed some of the things he has seen from both students and teachers. He noted the inconsistencies within the elementary dress code, noted that most businesses have dress codes and that you dress out of respect for ourselves and our clients, which are our students. We need to give the principals more tools and have the courage to turn kids away from our schools that don’t meet our dress code.

Mr. Moore stated that he could agree with a consistent dress code among the three levels. He added that when Mr. Kapp had us go to our site councils, we discovered that lawsuits were split 50/50 and that schools won the lawsuits when it was a distraction to the educational process or a safety issue. He stated that you must be careful because trends come and go and there is a shock value when someone dresses differently, but then the day goes on.

Mr. Vanuk stated that he did not think it was a good idea and that he remembered what a substitute teacher who had taught in Japan had said to him – that American kids have the ability to think outside of the box – that Japan might have better schools and even higher test scores, but they become so uniform that they lose the ability to think outside of the box. He added that the more restrictions you place on students, the harder they will push back and that he did not view students’ dress as impeding him from learning. He stated that individuality is a very important part of childhood and that having two wardrobes might financially hurt some families.

Mrs. Saint-Amour pointed out that at last night’s Board meeting when Erika had received a certificate of recognition, this student had certainly expressed her individuality, yet she is a good solid student.

Mr. Jay Collier stated that he had mixed feelings, because when they had tightened things up at PMH due to a lot of vandalism they had seen an increase for school pride and improved behavior and felt it was because they had set the standard and also let people know that they were welcome to attend elsewhere.

Mr. Bates stated that he agreed with the need for more uniformity amongst the schools and added that they were working on making the two middle schools dress codes more consistent.

Mr. Kapp noted that when he had asked the principals to go to their site councils most of them said they liked their current dress code. Mr. Kapp stated that after analyzing the current dress codes, we are 80-90% consistent.

TAX CREDIT DONATION PRESENTATION

Mrs. Raskin distributed a five year history for tax credits and noted that the schools are spending their tax credit monies by between 82-106% (92% average).

Mr. Kapp noted that after looking at the data here are some interesting points: schools spend pretty high, PMH is hoarding their tax credit money, AJ has twice as many students, MV is #2 in money, and PMH has collected more money than GM.

Mrs. Raskin noted that kindergarten tuition had been deleted since it skewed the figures.

Mr. Munson noted that when the tax credit program was new, we could not believe that they would continue it so we made a conscious decision to carry that money over and it’s one of the few accounts that we can do that in. We created a surplus in order to have a cushion. He stated that they now spend just about everything that comes in.

Mr. Staley stated that he felt the schools could lose some tax credit money because they were not spending the money.

President Campbell noted that this was a five year average and the averages show that the schools are spending the money, so he did not feel it was a problem.

Mrs. McCraley stated that it’s like a checkbook – you’re not going to spend all of your money in your checkbook to zero just in case something happens.

The principals then explained how they spent their tax credit monies.

Mr. Kapp stated that he thought the district did need to communicate better to the public how the tax credit monies were spent.

ADJOURNMENT

Hearing no objection, President Campbell adjourned the meeting at 3:17 p.m.

___________________________________

Governing Board Member