Policy and Planning - Matt Hartman/Margaret Driscoll

Transcript (~1 min @ 1:09:20)

Speakers identified by voice; unnamed voices are numbered within this recording. Auto-caption text — verify against the video.

▶ 1:08:55 Speaker 2: Okay. Thank you again for coming, and I wanted to just wrap up by saying thank you for taking this integrated approach, looking at the data, helping us understand how the data are driving decisions, both on curriculum and investments that we are making as a district, as well as the support for teachers and professional development and learning. We look forward to seeing you again in July or August, and hearing more about the translation of the vision and strategy into that learning and that PD plan, which we will vote on at that time.

▶ 1:09:27 Speaker 7: Thank you so much for having us.

▶ 1:09:28 Speaker 2: Thank you so much. All right. Thank you. This ends the committee.

▶ 1:09:39 Speaker 1: Okay, now on to Policy and Planning.

▶ 1:09:50 Speaker 4: Good evening. This is the Policy and Planning subcommittee, and tonight we have four policies returning for their second read and potential first vote, if the committee would move that way. These policies were last heard on the 19th of May for a first reading, where they were displayed alongside MASC model policies, in most cases. One policy did not have a MASC policy. Any further, I'll highlight that as we work through it. And at this point, we've convened with Ms. Lindquist, our attorney, on some questions around some of the policies, and she has offered some language updates that are included in the packet. I'll take these up one by one just for edification of the committee and the public, so that we look at each one individually. Starting with Policy KA. This policy is- Thank you School Community Relations Goals. And in the packet, it's aligned next to the current Melrose Public Schools policy, last reviewed in 2013, and the current model MASC policy on the right side. It's been highlighted what the differences are, so if members have questions, comments, or would like to move forward with our policy or the MASC policy, or some combination of the both. I think in my review of this, it doesn't seem like there's a change to make here. But that's one member's recommendation to others, so I'm happy to hear comments on the KA policy at this point, or a motion if that's where people want to go.