School Board Meeting June 16

The La Crosse Education Association president was a public speaker and thanked the administration for their cooperation leading to contract ratification. There was hopefulness expressed that such cooperation would continue.

At several points during the meeting, our superintendent reminded the board of the strategic plan and especially how the reports (ELL, Youth Options, and SAGE) aligned with the plan. During these comprehensive reports, the supervisor, Rob Tyvoll, was applauded for his thoroughness in reporting and the results he achieved as reflected in ACCESS scores, overall enrollment numbers that have dropped nearly 50% since ELL was started. This was credited to a combination of fewer ELL students as well as many of them being exited from the program. 12 different languages are spoken by students in La Crosse who are served by ELL and this diversity was celebrated. One particular program that was celebrated was the ELL Science Adventures program in which students were pre-taught science skills and learned language in the environment which involved extensive travel. The DPI honored our ingenuity in this summer program. In the AMAO's, for WKCE, those exiting the program, and progress in language goals we met expectations. There was a call to continue supporting Preschool through grade one with increased support. Also, we showed our appreciation for our partnerships with higher education. Exit interviews with students were very favorable overall. Some were not so favorable, and serve as opportunities for us to improve.

Youth Options Report. This program for students in grades 11 and 12 affords students great flexibility in what courses can be taken. Data presented included numbers of students and the classes they enrolled in. Mr. Tyvoll brought up a new change in our law called course options in which students could take courses from other school districts. The only provisions for blocking such requests at the moment include if there's a conflict with an IEP, if it doesn't support a college or career pathway, or if it does not meet graduation credit requirements. We will keep a watchful eye on costs (figured on prorated open enrollment). This is far from solidified, but being a large district with a wide variety of courses, we stand to benefit.

SAGE report. This has been a long-standing commitment in our district. Our associate superintendent of human resources made this report highlighting the goals of SAGE. 900+ students qualified at a reimbursement rate of $2,000+ per student. While the total dollar amount has increased, it was only due to the increased number of free/reduced lunch students...not increased financial support from the state. We have made a commitment to support every k-3 classroom with SAGE. Reports were made based on $ received by each school.

Along with the proposed budget came Instructional Priorities. This was submitted by all instructional supervisors. Included in the report was a status of initiatives led by the team, as well as future planning as it relates to the strategic plan. This was directly aligned with the board goals and this is where many new ideas were presented. One overarching goal reiterated by Dr. Harcey was the commitment our district will be making to a customized learning plan for students.

We showed good gains in all levels on the WKCE and this was a separate report. However, time was not allotted to discussion about each school. Data was reported by grade/school/content. 

Reviewing the checklist from the NSBA publication:

 

Our board and staff have been trained on the principles of continuous improvement...this has been partially achieved. Some of our board, most of our administration, and some of the teaching staff have been trained in aspects of continuous improvement, but to varying degrees.

We have developed a culture that promotes quality among the first considerations...this has been partially achieved. While some of our district programs (Fine Arts, Health Science Consortium, Preschool) are distinguished, we lag behind the state averages in reading and math. This isn't necessarily a new problem, but we are falling into the trap of making excuses for not reaching goals instead of focusing on quality.

We manage by facts and our decisions are data-driven...this is partly achieved. We have come a long way in terms of using data, but our decisions are sometimes “softened” when we realize the many different possible causes for problems. For example, there is a very clear understanding that each building is a different community and in some buildings where academic success is not as high, we are willing to use excuses like “the demographics of that school inhibit them from achieving as high as another more affluent school.”

We focus on our customers and clients in designing and delivering our services...we have mostly achieved this goal. We really reach out to provide a variety of instructional programming and make it accessible to all of our constituents (our choice and charter program for example: lottery selection, bussing from satellite schools, etc.).

We practice problem solving, prevention and intervention rather than reaction to promote student success...this has been partially achieved. Our district's revision of the RTI process is demonstrative of our proactive (rather than reactive) approach to helping struggling learners. Where the process breaks down, however, is in details of unsuccessful interventions that lead to referrals. Not accepting students in Special Education because of procedural errors is a disservice to our students.

We use problem solving and risk taking to move beyond incremental improvement...this is mostly achieved. Our year round school is an example of our district taking a calculated risk to support this endeavor. This was a bold move and has been supported by our board.

We use strategic planning to focus and drive our decisions and strategies for achieving our priorities...this has been mostly achieved. The strategic plan is posted, referred to often at our district leadership team meetings, and referenced continually in our board meetings.

We practice bench making with other school districts and businesses...this is partially achieved. We have called upon our community partners in setting goals and even in instructional design (Health Science Academy). However, we seldom collaborate to set academic goals with other districts.

We treat all stakeholders with respect...this is fully achieved. We recognize our community partners regularly at board meetings, celebrate staff accomplishments routinely, and have made customer service a goal this past year.

We practice constancy of purpose...this is mostly achieved. See above.

As Superintendent, in order to improve the board's focus on continuous improvement, I would make the following 3 recommendations:

1. After successful (thorough, thoughtful, positive) reports I would ask openly, “How can we do this better? Are there ways we can expand the success of this program to touch more students? The data represents a successful program is in place. What is our next step to make it even more successful?”
2. We often function with blinders on as a district. At best we compare ourselves to our neighbors. I think we need to take a wider look at the state and look at other districts our size with similar demographics who have distinguished themselves as being exceptionally high-achieving and model some best practices after their work.
3. Are we looking at the right data when making decisions? Do we have the right tool to house and access that data? Last, are all of our administrators and teachers trained in using data correctly...leveraging it to make changes in instruction that result in increased student learning? At the moment, I would say no to all of the above. I think we are using a “shotgun” approach at collecting data...burdening our teachers with collecting data that is reported and not used (i.e. AimsWeb, DRA, PALS, and district assessments all being recorded in kindergarten.