total time: 13.13 minutes
total words: 1896
total time: 5.71 minutes
total words: 881
total time: 9.42 minutes
total words: 1677
[Hays]: Today, May 22, 2023, from 5 p.m. to 6 p.m., there will be an evaluation subcommittee meeting to be held through remote participation via Zoom. The meeting can be viewed through Medford Community Media on Comcast Channel 15 and Verizon Channel 45 at 5 p.m. Since the meeting will be held remotely, participants can log in or call in by using the following link or call-in number. There's the Zoom link with the meeting ID 991-0113-0546. You can dial in using the number 1305-224-1968 with the same meeting ID number. Additionally, questions or comments can be submitted during the meeting. by emailing shays at medford.k12.ma.us. Those submitting must include the following information, your name and last name, your Medford Street address, your question or comment. As approved by the committee on February 1 2023 the evaluation subcommittee will meet to review and develop the process for the 2022 23 superintendent evaluation, and in particular tonight's agenda is as approved by the evaluation subcommittee on Thursday, February 16 2023 the subcommittee will meet to create the composite evaluation. So, I just literally a couple of minutes ago sent the other subcommittee members, shared with them the folder I've created with all of the member evaluations.
[Graham]: Member Hays, do you want to call the roll first?
[Hays]: Oh, I apologize. Yes. That's OK. Thank you for reminding me. I will call the roll. Member Graham?
[Unidentified]: Here. Member McLaughlin? McLaughlin. Can't hear you. You're clearly here, though. Can you hear me now? Yes. Okay, good here.
[Hays]: And member Hays is present. All members are present so we can begin. So I just like I said, I was beginning to say I shared moments before the meeting started or probably maybe even a moment as it started. So I began creating the composite just in terms of putting the ratings, which I will share with you guys. I have not had a chance to compile all of the comments because I don't think I gave myself enough time, I think we probably should have planned a couple of days between the due date and the meeting, because all of the, all of them came in, except membercrats, all of them came in yesterday. So let me see if I can bring up the, nope, that's not the right, hold on.
[Unidentified]: Give me just a second. Okay, let me see if I can share this. Hold on just a second. All right, I'm having technical difficulties.
[McLaughlin]: Do you want me to share it? Is it something you emailed us?
[Hays]: It's in the shared folder if you're able to open the Google Drive. OK. It should have been shared with you. Hold on.
[Unidentified]: Let me see if I can. I apologize.
[McLaughlin]: That's OK. And so it's right here. What do you want, the PDF, 2023 evaluation PDF, or what are you looking for?
[Hays]: There should be one that's labeled composite, or there is one that's labeled composite.
[Unidentified]: OK. I'm just not seeing how to share. That's OK. I can do it. You mean on the Zoom?
[McLaughlin]: Yeah. Uh, it's just on the it should be on your right on your I mean on the bottom menu bar. So evaluations of committee notes, notes version 2 version 3 Superintendent evaluation guide. Oh, last modified. Let me do that.
[Unidentified]: Last modified. So tell me what it's called. Do you remember? I'm sorry.
[Hays]: I'm getting help right now with that one.
[Unidentified]: Yeah, it's not coming up unshared with me. There it is. Is that coming up? OK.
[Hays]: OK, so what I was able to do so far is compile the ratings and fill them in. We created a composite form where we could put, instead of the checkboxes, we could put in the numbers of each rating so we could see how they kind of fell out in terms of understanding what the final composite rating rating scores, for lack of a better word, would be. So as we can see, this first page, the goals, the professional practice goals, there was one significant, five said met and one said exceeded. Student learning was one, some progress, one significant, four met, one exceeded. District improvement goals, three significant progress, three met, and one exceeded. So anyone can jump in at some point if they want to add anything. I mean, I think we can see they pretty much fall out in terms of what the combined scores would be. They're pretty much all in that met when you look at the preponderance of scores. Of course, the five is certainly the professional practice goal. the student learning goal, the four and the 18.
[McLaughlin]: Yep. I was just going to say, I think this is really helpful. And I, you know, especially having the numbers being able to add up instead of trying to, you know, nuance a whole bunch of other things. So it looks like the, so the access toward progress goals and the assessed performance on standard. Okay. So, so the access towards goals, which we can see, you know, so, Obviously, the numbers speak for themselves. So, you know, some progress and significant progress, or some significant progress and met. And then the step two, it looks like the numbers are in the proficient. I know that you said you're going to marry the comments from the evaluators. So. Yeah, I'm going to, I'm sorry.
[Hays]: Yeah, I'm going to put them together in a document. That was my plan was to have that ready for today, but they were just, it was, I didn't have enough time.
[McLaughlin]: No, I think you've done a great job. Thank you for all that you have done. And I think this particular rubric and sort of seeing the visual again, I'm a visual learner, as I've said before, I think seeing the visual with the numbers and the standards is really helpful for me. So I appreciate that. And so the way that the numbers look, and again, we will talk about this in the larger committee meeting. But if I understand correctly, the way the numbers are coming out now is a is proficient.
[Hays]: Pretty much across the board. Yeah. When you look at that and we can scroll down through the rest of them, too. But well, these are the these are the three the three main areas. Right. These are the three where we all had to take all of our scores and and Yeah.
[McLaughlin]: And we'll see that later on page three or whatever. Yeah.
[Hays]: Correct.
[McLaughlin]: I thought your instructions were very helpful as well. So essentially what you had said to us was go to page three, do your individual assessments based on what you think. And then you're taking those individual assessments and assigning the number of significant progress met or exceeded based on various committee members input. and then the same with the standards that we all agreed upon.
[Hays]: Yes, thank you. Thank you, that was a good way to summarize it.
[McLaughlin]: No, I think it's been super helpful. And then I think that obviously there'll be some, so that's the quantitative data. Right, and there'll be some qualitative data that will be brought to the table at the next. Um, school committee meeting, um, when we. When we share this out, is that right?
[Hays]: Uh, in terms of the comments from members, yes, we can either I mean, we can either work on that. here or here if we can get them to all together into a document or we can we do have another subcommittee meeting scheduled where we could look at that and I think what we had said as part of the process was that the subcommittee would would put selected comments in to kind of represent the ratings that we would select comments from the various members evaluations and create the composite, including the comments to bring to the whole committee.
[McLaughlin]: So may I? Sure. Thank you. So would it be helpful to have all of the narrative in one like, you know, Google Doc or something that is shared? individually with us where we cannot respond to each other, so that we're not violating any public meeting rules, where we could potentially highlight comments that we feel are representative of the whole, probably as like sort of homework before the next meeting?
[Hays]: Yeah, thank you. That's a really good suggestion, because as I said, I'd envisioned having it ready for this meeting and we could actually just do it together at this meeting. But given that that, you know, the time frame didn't allow for that, maybe that's the best way to move forward is to create the finish creating that Google Doc, which I've already started, but just haven't been able to finish. And like you said, I can share that with you and member Graham. And when we meet on April 1st, I believe it is, we could probably have a pretty efficient meeting in terms of choosing out the comments.
[McLaughlin]: I think you mean June 1st, right?
[Hays]: I'm sorry, I keep saying April today for some reason. Yes, June 1st. Thank you. That's fine. Great. Do we want to scroll down and you can see some of the other, we can view some of the other scores just so people have an idea of where some of these fell out. These are the specific, the superintendent's specific goals, early literacy, her professional practice goal, and her three district improvement goals.
[Unidentified]: And feel free to ask any questions.
[Hays]: I mean, this is really just, I just pulled the data straight out from everyone's individual evaluations. And you can see it really all does fall kind of in that middle, the met range. And then these are the individual standards and the indicators of how people vote rated on the indicators.
[Unidentified]: Standard one instructional leadership. Standard two, management and operations, there was just one indicator chosen. And there's standard three, family and community engagement. And then finally, standard for professional culture.
[Hays]: So I guess from here do we need to make a motion that will that that would be the next step would be that I'll send um create the combined uh the document of combined comments and uh We'll meet next time and go through those to fill in the comment sections of the composite. Member Graham?
[Unidentified]: I see your hand up. Member Graham, did you want to say something?
[Hays]: Oh, she just texted me that she can't be unmuted. She can't unmute.
[Unidentified]: Oh, okay.
[Hays]: Let me, let me see what I can do.
[Unidentified]: Hi, can you hear me? Yes. Okay.
[Graham]: I can't turn on my camera for reasons I don't understand, but I just didn't want you to think I was sitting here not paying attention. I am totally fine with that approach.
[Hays]: Okay. So do we, I don't know, do we need to vote on that or is that more formal than we need to?
[McLaughlin]: I don't think you need a motion, but what do you think?
[Graham]: I don't think so. Yeah, I don't think so. We have two meetings scheduled to do this work. So yeah, that's just really a continuation. We might just at the end of the meeting, instead of motioning to adjourn, we might just motion to continue the meeting.
[McLaughlin]: I think that's the table motion to table to the next meeting.
[Graham]: But the close out of the meeting, I think we call it something different.
[Unidentified]: Hold on.
[McLaughlin]: Yeah, and to be clear if people are wondering, like again that are watching or whatever if they're wondering why we're not discussing, you know, the, the ratings themselves that's not the purpose of the meeting this meeting is really to as a, as a, you know, the evaluation subcommittee to really work on the process, right? Member Hays. Correct, yeah.
[Graham]: And so it would, instead of being a motion to adjourn, it would be a motion to continue the meeting on June 1st.
[Hays]: OK. Well, does anyone have anything else to add about this? I guess at this point, the data is in. It really is just that question of adding in the comments.
[McLaughlin]: Can we get a timeline member Hays, excuse me, may I speak, please. Sorry. Yes, of course. Can we get a timeline on when you want to get the qualitative material to us and when you'd like us to get back to you with the highlighted material before the next meeting that would be helpful just to put it in my calendar.
[Hays]: Well, I will be getting that to you. I mean, I'll be getting the finishing, completing the Google Doc that's already in the, it's in the shared folder I already sent you. I don't know that, I think that actually the next meeting is for us to together create the, decide upon the comments to go in the comment section. So I'm not really sure there's any, I don't think there's anything you need to send to me.
[McLaughlin]: Oh yeah, that's right. We're not getting them back to you. We're just highlighting the homework in the meantime, right? Thank you.
[Unidentified]: Oh, I see a hand raised from Jess. I don't know.
[Hays]: Is Jess able to unmute, or is she?
[Healy]: Hi. Can you hear me? Yes. Hi. I just had a quick question. Do you ask parents or teachers anything for this, or is it just the school committee that does the grading for the performance?
[Hays]: This is a school committee process. The school committee is responsible for evaluating the superintendent.
[Healy]: Oh, okay. Thank you. I just wasn't sure. Thank you.
[Hays]: You're welcome. I don't know if anyone had anything to add to that, if there was anything I missed about community input. In terms of actual writing of the, the superintendent evaluation, that is our responsibility in terms of community input, that would probably be more through any evidence that the superintendent provides for us of community input on any of the areas that she's being evaluated on. Is that correct to say, yes?
[Graham]: Yeah, yeah, you're correct. I think I would just add to that, that this is a legal requirement for school committees. It's one of the three responsibilities that are set out under the law for school committees. School committees do have, just for your information, some latitude in terms of what process they establish. And your point is well taken that perhaps in the future, we should think about a public input part of the process, because I think that's important to all of us. So just more to say, The process is laid out and how we submit the results is very defined, but we do have the latitude to outline the process itself that leads to that kind of standardized reporting to DESE that we have conducted this review. So there is some latitude there, and I do think Jess's point is well taken, that we should think about that for future, which would require some set of activity, like before this meeting in particular, so that we could hear that input and have a process for how we might include that. So I think just for your information, great suggestion, Jess. And we should think about that in the future. I will also note that this is probably the earliest we've ever been able to have an organized process. The last couple of years, we've made a lot of progress to doing this consistently and clearly, and this is just another step of progress, at least in the four years that I've been on the committee.
[Hays]: Thank you. Yes, I think we're always looking for ways to improve the process and improve our ways of getting information to evaluate. So I think that as member Graham said, looking for a way to include the community in the process would certainly be a next step, a next goal for next year. That being said, if there are any, not any other questions from either the committee or from any members of the public?
[Graham]: Member Hays, I think somebody, Paul has his hand in the air, Paul Garrity.
[Hays]: Oh, thank you, I didn't see that.
[Graham]: I couldn't tell if you were clapping, Paul, or you had your hand up.
[Hays]: Yes, Mr. Garrity, go ahead.
[Graham]: I think he needs to be able to be unmuted.
[Hays]: Okay, that's someone else. Superintendent, are you able to unmute him?
[Paul Garrity]: Good evening, ladies. Hi, thank you. My quick question is that, When this report is finally shared with the public as a whole, will the metrics that were used by the individual reviewers also be made part of the presentation? In other words, there's columns with numbers and saying, this is our evaluation. Will we have some kind of metrics that says what do the individual reviewers use to make that determination that resulted in a number for a particular category?
[Hays]: Sure, good question. Well, we use the self-evaluation from the superintendent, where she gives us an update on, it's all based on the goals that the superintendent and the school committee discussed at the beginning of the year, the agreed upon goals and indicators. And so the superintendent presented her self-evaluation two weeks ago, and that's the information that we use to complete our evaluations. Does any other member have something more to add to that?
[Graham]: I would also just say that that self-evaluation also included various forms of evidence that support the narrative that was provided. And so, for example, there were scores from our map testing from last year and this year that were provided to us to provide evidence around the student learning goal, for example. So there is both the superintendent's narrative and evidence that she provides. And I think also, you know, just sort of our own like point of view and experience over the course of the year as we have been thinking about this evaluation and our work on the school committee. All of that is part of what goes into everyone's individual ratings and rankings.
[SPEAKER_04]: Thank you.
[Paul Garrity]: So was that uniform across the views, the individual views or the uniform or how do I, I know that they were uniform approach.
[Hays]: I'm not, can you further explain what the question is?
[Paul Garrity]: Well, I have three people sitting in a class and three people making an observation. How do I know that we're utilizing the same reference points, the same metrics, the same key indicators? That's what I'm trying to get a feel for.
[Graham]: I think the short answer is you don't. There are seven individual members of the committee, all who have different points of view. And this is the way that we start to coalesce to a single point of view that is our committee's view. So we all obviously are looking at the same evidence. We may see that evidence differently because we may have had different deeper discussions and been working on things, you know, outside of committee meetings and and what have you. So the first step is for the committee to say individually and independently, this is how we are feeling. And then the ultimate product here is the review that represents the committee's view by a majority vote. So the recognition is that individuals are going to have their own perspective, and that's the starting point to coalesce to the review that gets approved.
[McLaughlin]: Thank you. Yeah, I just wanted to add that I think what I'm hearing too is that, you know, the evidence that's there and we are, that's part of the process that we're going through now in terms of making this process uniform using the rubric that DESI provides around evaluation, identifying in advance what the goals are, what goals and items are being evaluated, And that we're using this specific rubric to do this which has not been the case in the past so that's all publicly available information that's all part of what you see here in the in the. in the material that we just shared, but also, you know, DESE has their superintendent rubric online, the Department of Elementary and Secondary Education, and was one of the reasons that we really wanted to standardize the form and use what other people are using so that we're comparing apples to apples across districts and amongst each other. And then the other piece I think I heard you say was that, would you know what individuals reported? And yes, that's part of public information. And we are also sharing that as part of a vote that we took earlier that each of our reports are, you know, they're public anyway, but that we would all, you know, essentially be able to see or have that information that we saw individually. But this subcommittee is tasked with bringing all that information together under member Hays' stewardship and direction to bring all the information together. And so that's part of why we're looking at the, you know, quantitative data. The numbers are a little bit easier to just sort of put together. The qualitative data can be a little bit more time-consuming because we might have seven, you know, well, we will have seven narratives, but I suspect that a lot of them will be similar and some of them may be dissimilar, and that's sort of what we'll be charted with. And then I just, if I might, Member Hays, I wanted to also address the question from Jess, who, I don't know Jess's last name, but sorry, Jess, that we didn't get the name for the record, but to just share that part of the superintendent evaluation process should be happening throughout the year, right? I mean we're all hearing from constituents as school committee members about what their experiences are in the district what they would like to see changed or better or improved what they think is working, you know how things are sort of happening so we're seeing that throughout the year we definitely have public participation throughout the year as well. I think it's a longer conversation for the entire committee to have around, you know how and in what way. there'd be public participation in superintendent evaluation and also looking at what other districts are doing and what the protocol is and sort of all of those things. And because it can also, as you can imagine, the people that show up might be the squeaky wheels and the people that don't might not be. So there sort of has to be a process that we all agree is equitable and is one that is consistent and one that the MASC, which is the Mass Association of School Committees, and the MASS, which is the Mass Association of School Superintendents, would surely offer advice and let us know best practices around doing that as well. So I think that there's always opportunity for feedback. So I hope that you guys are reaching out to us to let us know. And also, I know that the superintendent has been receptive as well in terms of people reaching out to her. So I would encourage that too. And that's part of the building relationships that we should all be working on in terms of the family and community engagement. So I just I just sort of wanted to mention that as well.
[Paul Garrity]: Again, my concern consistency review and that the key indicators are shared universally across all members when they make their determinations. Thank you.
[McLaughlin]: Absolutely. Thank you. Yep, it is as part of the data that's that's if I may member pays I'm sorry. Sure. Absolutely, that's why we're going with a rubric. So thank you, you're absolutely right. It's shared with all the members across the board, same rubric. We're all evaluating based on the items we agreed to evaluate based on the superintendent's goal. So we are making it much more uniform. Thank you for asking and for noticing. Thank you.
[Hays]: And I would just add, I think that at our meeting, when we present this to the entire committee for them to vote on the final composite, I think at that point, we will talk as a committee about how exactly we want to share this, what's the best way to share this so that everyone has access to it. We've talked about a couple of different ways of possibly putting it on the website and making sure that everyone has access to both the composite, but also our individual evaluations. Because as both member Graham and member McLaughlin have said, it's all public information. Desi doesn't specify how we share it or how we make it public. So that's really up to us to make that decision. And I've looked around at other districts and it's remarkably difficult actually to find in many districts to find the superintendent evaluation. So it's really kind of up to us to create that process and decide how we wanna share it and create that access for the community.
[Paul Garrity]: I would just offer in closing that it's, to educate the citizenry in terms of what were the key indicators that were being observed and that they were universally applied across the board. It would be very helpful if that was explained during the entire presentation. Thank you.
[Graham]: Sure.
[Paul Garrity]: Thank you very much.
[Graham]: Member Hays, if I might, I just also want to express that this is the literal only place I've ever seen somebody's performance review be aired in public. I think it's incredibly awkward. I think it's a problematic process for many, many, many reasons, which is probably why you don't see too many districts sort of blasting this information on their website. At the end of the day, Dr Edouard-Vincent is our employee. And so we also have to be mindful that there are lots of employment laws at play. And we need to. So we need to take care I think Mr. Gary to. to sort of balance the fact that this is all public information and the fact that the superintendent is our employee and she does have rights as an employee of the district. So that's the sticky part.
[Paul Garrity]: I agree with that, but I think we take it to a higher level and I agree with that, but I think we take it to the higher level. These are the goals. These are the metrics to see if the goals were achieved. And how did people on the reviewing committee apply those metrics to the goals that were stated is fair enough approach. Yeah.
[Graham]: And we can certainly do that. I mean, all the, the, um, the measures that were selected were selected in open meeting, but, um, maybe there's like a summary slide member Hays or something that can be put together to say, this was, this was the focus for this year.
[Paul Garrity]: Um, I think the program overall is what's important to make the judgment on, but it contributes their parts to it.
[Hays]: I think it's also important, which is also publicly available. Again, the superintendent's goals for the year that are posted, and they're also goals that are shared goals. We work on them together, the superintendent and the school committee at the beginning of the year. So that's really where the, I don't know if the metrics so much, but the decisions about what are the particular focus areas. that is done, again, in open meeting, and it's also a document that's on the website that everyone can look at.
[Paul Garrity]: Right. I had the original draft. I review it quite often. Thank you.
[Hays]: Good. Thank you. Member McLaughlin, your hand's up. Did you have something else to add? I did.
[McLaughlin]: I just wanted to say that I think it is good practice just as part of whenever we're, you know, orienting the community to what we're doing, you know, here's where we were, here's what we did, here's where we're going, here's what we're presenting, whatever. So I think a primer slide or, you know, one or two, you know, here's The, you know, here are the goals here the, you know, pieces that we evaluated on and here's what the evaluation wants is always good sort of just again because not everybody is necessarily accessing the website, not everybody is necessarily, you know, coming to a public meeting or watching the meetings on MCM or what have you. So I think it's just always good if people, you know, decide to tune in for that or if we have a record of the information is sort of this was what the process was. And so I think it could be really helpful to have a one-page, you know, piece and I'm happy to help work with you on that if you'd like.
[Hays]: That would be great because I am, oh sorry. Go ahead. Just wanted to say, I'm still, as I said, I'm still working on some of the other pieces so it would be helpful if. Yeah. someone maybe could pick up that piece of it, that creation of the slide. Yeah, I'd be happy to do that.
[McLaughlin]: And I think you did it really already. I think you did the majority of the work already in the instructions. So I think it would just be a matter of simplifying that on a slide or two. I'm happy to do that and modify you guys at the next one. Sure. Wonderful, thanks so much. Sure, so I would make an emotion that we continue the meeting to June 1st for our subcommittee meeting.
[Hays]: Second, I'll take a roll call vote then. Member Graham? Yes. Member McLaughlin? Yes. Member Hays? Yes. Three in the affirmative, zero in the negative. So this meeting is then, do we have to also adjourn? Continued. Nope, we're continued. Continued, sorry.
[Unidentified]: Thank you. Bye everyone, have a good day. Bye, thank you everyone. Thank you.
|
total time: 13.13 minutes total words: 1896 |
total time: 5.71 minutes total words: 881 |
total time: 9.42 minutes total words: 1677 |
|