[Jenny Graham]: our regular meeting starting at 6. Please be advised that there will be a meeting of the Medford School Committee in Howard Alden Memorial Chambers, Medford City Hall and via remote participation. This meeting is being recorded. The meeting can be viewed live on Medford Public Schools YouTube channel through Medford Community Media on your local cable channel, which is Comcast 98 or 22 and Verizon Channel 43, 45 or 47. Participants can log in or call in by using the following Zoom meeting ID, 961-0194-9221. Member Ruseau, will you please call the roll?
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley.
[Jenny Graham]: Present.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham.
[Jenny Graham]: Here.
[Paul Ruseau]: member and Tapa here. Remember all the party here. Remember, right? Phil present members are present. Mayor Lungo-Koehn.
[Jenny Graham]: President seven in the affirmative seven present zero absent. The meeting will come to order. I'll please rise to salute the flag. I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, item number three on our agenda, we have executive session. Executive session of the Medford School Committee pursuant to Master in Law, Chapter 30A, Section 21A, to conduct strategy session on the basis that an open meeting may have a detrimental effect on the bargaining positions of the Medford School Committee. Specifically, the Medford School Committee will be discussing ongoing collective bargaining negotiations with the Massachusetts Nurses Association, the MNA. Is there a motion to enter executive session? Motion to enter executive session by member Reinfeld. Seconded by Member Olapade. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley? Yes. Member Graham?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa? Yes. Member Olapade? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Rossell? Yes. Mayor Lanko-Kern?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. We will convene an executive session. We will report out of executive session is my anticipation, and we will do that as soon as we're done with the executive session. And then we may take a brief recess until six o'clock for the meeting to start at six. Thanks, everyone. Executive session, I am pleased to say that we have reached an agreement with the Massachusetts Nurses Association for a successor bargaining agreement that will last through FY 28, which is through June 30, 2029. Is there a motion to approve the contract by member Reinfeld? And seconded by? Seconded by member Lopate. Member Ruseau, can you call the roll, please?
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: So I did just want to say thank you to the MNA and the team that worked with us to get this done. We started meeting in maybe April or so, and it has been, you know, it's very difficult to adjust for schedules during the summertime and they rose to that challenge. So I want to thank them for that. I want to thank them for the discussion, particularly when we got to talk about things that didn't work in our school buildings and come up with better ways to make things work. on behalf of students. So I really applaud their hard work and their delivering for our students at all times. So I really do appreciate that. And Mr. Carboneau is here with us tonight. He is the bargaining liaison to the MNA. And if you, I didn't know if you would like to say something or just have us say thank you, but you're welcome to say something. Yeah, absolutely. You do. There you go. You're good.
[SPEAKER_12]: Yes. So my name is Mark Carboneau. I'm an associate director with the Massachusetts Nurse Association. And I just would like to say that this was a sometimes intense process. But I really felt that we collaborated to work together on this one. And I think that the document that we came up with, this collective bargaining agreement, was something everyone should be proud of and we look forward to working with you all on that. So I'd like to thank chairperson Graham, who I was able to have a series of off the record discussions as far as off the record bargaining. And I'd like to thank all the members for all the work you guys have done on that. So thank you so much. And I'd like to thank you on behalf of the nurses. Thank you so much.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you, I will miss our daily chats. And I think for those who may be viewing this either tonight or in the future, some of the big central issues that we were grappling with was alignment of the schedule for the nurses to the new school day and the new professional day. So that was a very big deal. We also worked through a number of changes to create a bank of flexible hours for the nurses to participate in some of the things that happen outside of their core hours. And that I think will become really, really useful as we talk about how we register students in a timely way for athletics or for kindergarten or run vaccine clinics and the like. So there's any number of things that In the past, we have had to sort of scrounge money to pay our nurses to do those things. And we were able to integrate all of that into the contract which is a really big deal and create this bank of hours that will like allow really allow us to serve the needs that are going to evolve as this new schedule unfolds so I'm really delighted that we were able to get all of that done. And the new schedule starts tomorrow. So we will, we will see you all on the new schedule. Thank you, Mark. Is there a motion to take a brief recess? By Member Intoppa, seconded by, seconded by Member Reinfeld. Member Ruseau, will you call the roll?
[Paul Ruseau]: Remember Bramley. Remember Graham. Yes, remember and tapa. Remember all the potty. Yes, remember Ryan fell. Remember so yes Maryland go current.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Seven in the affirmative zero on the negative, we will be back at six to start a regular meeting. All right, welcome back, everyone. Next on our agenda is item number four, which is the consent agenda, which includes the approval of bills and payrolls, the approval of capital purchases, of which there are none this time, the approval of grants and donations, which include a computer monitor donation by TrueSearch in Boston, The approval of field trips, which includes the Medford vocational technical high school current culinary arts department field trip to Johnson and Wales in Providence, Rhode Island, and approval of our meeting minutes, which include the regular meeting on September 8 2025. Is there a motion to approve the consent agenda. Motion to approve the consent agenda by Member Bramley, seconded by Member Intoppa. Member Ruseau, if you can call the roll.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Bramley?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa? Yes. Member Olapade? Yes. Member Reinfeld? Yes. Member Ruseau, yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The consent agenda is approved. We do not have any report of subcommittees. And we will move on to the report of the superintendent with item number one, which is the Mustang moment. Dr. Pelosi.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Good evening, thank you very much. For this evening's Mustang moment, we have our Student Advisory Council representatives. So we have seniors Jaden Ville, Jaden Zhang, Christine DeSotel, my apologies, and sophomore Alachi Yeager. So I'm gonna ask them to come to the podium. They're going to discuss a little bit, give us an overview of what their role is as a student advisory council representative and a little bit of like some forward planning for the year.
[SPEAKER_01]: Is it on?
[SPEAKER_01]: Well, thank you, school committee, superintendent and mayor for being here today. And my name is Jayden Ville, and I think I speak for all of us here when I say that we're here because we want to make a change. We want to make a difference. The theme at MHS this year is belonging, making students feel like they're a part of the school. And we believe the key way to do that is making sure that students feel like their voices are heard. I know personally, I see a lot of students walking through the schools every day, and they have things they want to fix about the school. They see certain things, and they just say, I wish it was something different. However, they don't always have a platform to do that. That's where we come in. We wanna champion the student voice, give a microphone to the voices that they wanna hear. Because when we know that everyone is at the table and we have as many different constituents as possible and making an inclusive decision that we get the past results. Over the past few years, started with seniors, Darren and Noah, the class of 2024, we advocated for students For a big concern we had was that students were kind of having trouble carrying their stuff. And so we asked that, you know, what if we could remove the backpack policy or have a way to something that can just carry around school to make their lives a bit easier. Let's talk about the homework policy and how can we make students lives easier while they have the enriching part of homework, but also can balance it with their extracurriculars and ideas. And with class government just this year. We open it up just from the original five class president, vice president, secretary, and treasurer positions. We open it up so that more students can run. And now there's 10 class representatives to better represent the class and help fundraise for our class and get more ideas done. However, the key to that success is not just raising questions. It's about fixing problems. And so that is why we continue to work and advocate for the student body here today. And that's also why we are expanding our reach into the regional student advisory council to continue to see how can we not just help our school, our community, but also maybe our region, even the state as a large. Archimedes once said, give me a place to stand and I'll move the earth. When I say, give us a place to stand, give us a voice and we can make a difference. Thank you. Hello.
[SPEAKER_16]: Student involvement is integral integration, sorry, an integral part of the way that our school functions right it allows for the student voice that is generally under representative and splintered across many different perspectives to be assimilated and be presented to the school committee who has the power to make actual change. The legislation created by this committee and the changes wrought by it have had significant positive impact over the course of many years that the school advisory committee has been running. And we hope to continue this legacy forward into the coming 2025-2026 year. This assimilation of ideas is not a process that happens out of nowhere. It is a process that involves deliberation and that involves research, that involves taking the opinions of the student body and drafting solutions and speaking to members of school administration and members of the government here in Medford to find which solutions are reasonable, which solutions feel like they're attainable. and then drafting responses, drafting opinion, which is brought here to you to deliberate on. And it is this process that has allowed us to have success in years previously, and we hope to bring forward into the following year when we talk about our regional council meetings. Because the scope of these problems are not restricted to Medford alone, they're restricted to any student everywhere. And by bringing these issues to a state level, we feel that we may be able to influence more schools and bring a better, more representative opinion of the student body. This process is aided not only by my fellow committee members, but also by our advisor, Ms. Freitas Haley, who provides I would say the role of another one of us. She also brings forward opinions, also questions our outlooks, also asks what can be done here to the point where we feel that her contribution has been just as instrumental as the rest of us. So I'd like to give a special shout out. This is especially meaningful to me because it is an outlet through which we can enforce ideas of effective altruism and change that we can bring that is positive. The devotion of our life to the helping of others is, in my opinion, the highest pursuit, and this opportunity is the epitome of doing so. I believe that it's a podium that we all strive for to accurately represent those that place their faith in us, and we hope to continue doing so. Thank you.
[SPEAKER_02]: Hi. So I'm going to say that I first joined this group of people back in like junior, sophomore, freshman year, I'm not sure. But I joined it because I had a lot of ideas, and I didn't really have anywhere to go with them. And I think that that's part of the reason why this is such an important group of people is because we take in those ideas, we gather together the people in the student involvement organization, which is the like broader group of the student body. And we sort of conglomerate them into like this big group in order to find the commonalities between them and find ways that the student body is agreeing that there's something that needs to happen here. And then as a group of driven individuals and with the help of the broader population, we're able to draft up ideas and find ways to fix those problems. And I especially appreciate this because it's such a like general process that involves so many different voices. And it gives a chance for people to bring forward their ideas and bring forward their solutions in a way that they're not usually able to. Because other than this group, the main other way to have a voice at a larger administrative role is through student government, which is honestly a harder process to get into and ends up blocking out a lot of different voices, which we've been trying to fix with the expansion of that role. But still, if people have an idea, but they don't necessarily have the chance to run for student office and put in that time just for that idea, this gives them an outlet to bring it forward, then we discuss it. And we find what sort of problems come from that initial problem, what sort of solutions come from the initial solution. We are able to bring together all different ideas and all different voices in a very broad discussion format in order to formulate the best option plan to move forward. And then from that discussion, we bring things to you. And we bring this fleshed out idea that comes from so many different voices, so many different perspectives, and really, I guess, epitomizes the student body's voice in a way that no other group really seems to do.
[SPEAKER_00]: Hello. Um, so I believe I joined student advisory committee when I was back in sophomore. Yeah, when I was a sophomore, and I had seen a problem and I had wanted it fixed. So I am a part of the Vogue School at Medford High. And something about the Vogue School is that schedules are very different compared to like the normal high school where half the day consists of your shop. And because of that, a lot of people weren't able to take the classes they wanted. So I saw an opportunity to try and change that. I got some friends, we talked about it and we were like, yeah, you should do it. So I joined. and this year we finally got it implemented and that made me very happy because I could finally take the classes I wanted. Something I've noticed like these past three years was that a lot of people like to use our organization as kind of like a therapeutic like kind of area where you can vent your worries. We have like guidance Councilors that measured high and a lot of people like to vent to them too, but it's not the same as like venting to your peers, you know? And at the same time, we also get stuff fixed. We can listen to their ideas, bring them up with you guys. Yeah.
[Jenny Graham]: Are there any questions from the committee or comments? Member Tapa?
[John Intoppa]: Thank you. It's no surprise to anyone that I'm super psyched about this because I was a member of student government at Medford High and then also all throughout higher education was involved with student leadership and student government and how do we advise and work to help form policy that we want to see every day that affects us every day. And it's what led me to being here. And I super appreciate the idea of expanding that and for bringing this committee back to life. I loved working with you all. two years ago a lot on some things and I'm really excited to see what you bring to the table moving forward. So thank you very much for doing this work and I really appreciate it.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Oh, I was going to say thank you as well. And just to let you know, so the rules of the school committee have a place for the student representatives. And we hope to see at least one of you at every meeting. And just to, I think, work with Ms. Freitas Haley. members of the committee to figure out how you get on the agenda if you have things you want to talk about and of course anything that we're discussing on the floor. Your seat is there but I think member on top is the one who's going to get tapped on the shoulder and borrow his microphone at any point, because we really do want to hear from you and a lot of the things that we do here come from your voices, whether or not they are in this public forum, but I love the idea and the practice of making them more visible. So thank you for being here and keep showing up. And we want you to be part of these meetings. And I think many of us would be very happy to be invited to your meetings. I think several of us attended in the past. We can't all show up. That would be a problem for open meeting law, but we would love to be a part of it and make sure that this conversation goes both ways. So thank you.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you. I think something that my colleague just mentioned actually both my colleagues mentioned is seeing a need and feeling a need I think you all kind of commented in your own ways that noticing something that you're seeing day to day in your classroom in your school, you know, amongst your peers your friends your teachers, whatever may be, and acknowledging that there's an opportunity here as someone who's witnessing this. I have a perspective that I want to communicate out to the people who can make the changes that I'd like to see. And it's something really important that we don't get the privilege of seeing necessarily because we're not in the classroom each day like you all are. So I think maintain that, hold on to the opportunity that you are noticing to say, what can I do as someone who is seeing this need and how can I fill it, right? And even if that's just coming to a meeting like this, sitting in that student advisory chair and letting us know what you're noticing, what your colleagues or your peers are seeing and how we can best support you. So I think just appreciate that you guys are seeing that and you're actually living into that a little bit. So thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I just want to say thank you.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you for your words tonight. Thank you for your dedication and your commitment to being advisors for Medford High School and to bring that work here. I think it's very important. Tonight was like the epitome. This is why we wanted to make sure we start our meetings with the Mustang moment. I think it's important not only to remind all of us, but just for the greater community to hear the work, the wonderful work that you're doing. to engage with your classmates, to work with school leadership, to raise concerns and issues and have a dialogue and a discourse for what that means for the student body and then how to work through it. It's very important, especially nowadays. And I think you are all leading by example. And I thank you very much for the work you're doing and very excited for you to be joining our meetings each time we meet. So thank you very much.
[SPEAKER_16]: I think that we all feel very grateful that you recognize the importance of student opinion in the creation of legislature affecting said students, as we hope that we can provide a touchstone for the student body throughout your decision making process and look forward to the future year.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you all. We look forward to seeing you at our meetings. Sometimes they're long. It's OK if you have to leave. If you need us to change the agenda so you can participate, please just let one of us know, and we will work that out if it's a particularly long agenda because we want to hear from you. And I think we may need to do a photo op if we can all convene. Thanks. Okay. Item number 6.2, we have a preliminary report on enrollment. Dr. Suzanne Galusi, Interim Superintendent. Thank you very much.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you, Mr. Pippicelli. So at the beginning, yes, thank you very much. At the beginning of each school year, we usually report on just a brief overview of the enrollment at this time. So making sure that we have the disclaimer that enrollment at this time of year is pretty fluid and it fluctuates. I can make sure that I provide this body with updates as we go through. The October 1st SIMS data is due to the Department of Education by the end of October. So right now, currently, as of last week, our total enrollment is 4,125 students across the district. Here on the screen, you have just a snapshot of grade level and school with the district-wide view of 4,125. One of the things that I want to just call out is there's an asterisk, there is a column that says TBD. There's a small number of students that are still not officially enrolled. They're just through the registration process. This year we have put some parameters in place to make sure that we are getting students into our buildings as quickly as possible. And so that we're not having students wait longer than a few days before they're entering Medford public schools. However, there are some pieces of Things that can hold that up for some students, that's EL testing, special education placement, or sometimes just medical needs. Director Silva is working with families directly because we don't want that to be a barrier to them starting school. Those are some of the pieces that we've kind of put in place this year. but you will see just across the board what the enrollment looks like at this time. I will pause here before we go on. I don't know if there are any specific questions that you may have regarding enrollment.
[Jenny Graham]: Are there any questions from the committee? Member Ruseau?
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. Without digging through the data, are we approaching the need for any more kindergarten classrooms?
[Suzanne Galusi]: No.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you.
[Suzanne Galusi]: No. Actually, I think what we've seen a little bit this year is we have seen a decrease in some of our student enrollment or populations, especially around EL families.
[Paul Ruseau]: Well, that's a whole conversation. Thank you.
[Suzanne Galusi]: But I could just remind, I will just maybe, I'm sorry, Member Graham, but just to remind people that we did, the Roberts, since COVID, we've always had, we've had to put in a fifth K section. They started this year with one. We just, it was automatic. We did have to add kindergarten classrooms everywhere but the McGlynn. Well, no, the Missittuc, is four. They have three of every section. The Brooks has five, the Missituk has four, the McGlynn has four, and the Roberts has five.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Branley, did you have a question? I just had one question. Do you know offhand the number of students that we had enrolled on our 10-1 report last year?
[Suzanne Galusi]: We have, there is a just, well, I would have to go back just to make sure because when looking at the data for last year, it's the entire year. And right now I just have like a month's snapshot. So it wouldn't be fair to necessarily tell you what those numbers were at the end of last year because enrollment ebbs and flows throughout the year. But there is at least like a 25 student difference.
[Jenny Graham]: Is it an increase or a decrease? Decrease. Member Ruseau?
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes, I have the report from last September 8th. And we had 4,207. Interestingly, just three days before that, we had 4,214. So when we say it's fluid, it's kind of wildly fluid at this time of year. Do we have the EL students? Is that a separate category on there? Yes.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Not on the one that is on this presentation. I can get you that information. OK, that'd be good to know.
[Paul Ruseau]: And my question is too complicated for this, but I just have a lot of questions about EL students. And when students leave, not just EL students, when all students, when students leave the district, there's not often a, we're leaving, goodbye. And so it's hard to know why they left. We know if they go somewhere else and then that place asks for their transcripts. That's sort of the only way to know, but not all students, that's the case. So.
[Suzanne Galusi]: The overarching piece I could give you is there are two buckets for that data trend right now. And there are students that have left the country. either permanently or visiting. But if it's for an extended amount of time, then that does affect their registration and they have to kind of go through that process again. There's the other bucket, which students have left Medford. And so we do have the data as to the places that they have gone. The majority are not to a private or parochial school. The majority are actually, they have moved residency. I can give you that breakdown if you would like.
[Paul Ruseau]: I would.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Member Olapade.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you. I had a quick question about the high school enrollment data. For the final report, I know this is just preliminary, would there be a way to separate MHS from MVTHS just so we have an idea about the actual numbers of students that are allocating from the middle schools and then students that are coming into the districts? I know that the middle school count is 282, you know, obviously, but then the count for ninth grade is 307, so there is a, you know, 25, 30-ish student uptick. So just understand what that looks like and where that's coming from would be just awesome to have.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Yes, so because of the freshman rotations, I won't have ninth grade yet, but I can give you the split for 10th grade, 11th grade, and 12th grade.
[Aaron Olapade]: Awesome, thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Branley?
[Nicole Branley]: just to follow up on member Rousseau's comment for the special ed piece I know that I code all the kids in a couple of different aspects of where they're moving to and why when they unenroll so if they don't come to school for so many days obviously the school will flag us and let us know and then we have to put that code in And there are times that I'm sure it happens with the Yale students, because that's not my department, but with the specialist students, I'm like, well, where did this kid go? You have to show that data. And then so when we're placing students, which happens to me every day in my role during the day, but all those specialist students come through my office. How long does it take us to in Medford to place a special ed student?
[Suzanne Galusi]: I think that varies depending on the needs, but we worked, Ms. Bowen, Ms. Silva, and I worked very hard to make sure that we're shrinking that timeline based on some of the data we were collecting last year. So I can get you what those specifics are, but we're really hoping for no more than three days.
[Nicole Branley]: Okay.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you.
[Nicole Branley]: I'll put three days-ish.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you. Any other questions about enrollment? Member Lopate?
[Aaron Olapade]: It's just to clarify, what does the KF stand for?
[Suzanne Galusi]: That's kindergarten. Yes. No, I'm glad you brought that up. KF is kindergarten. PK is pre-K or our MEAP programs. And then I believe at the high school, the SP is project transition. So that's for our students that are 18 to 22 years old.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Any other questions about enrollment? Oh, member Rousseau.
[Paul Ruseau]: I did just Google. The F is for full day. I was like, I'm like, what's the F for?
[Unidentified]: What is she saying?
[Jenny Graham]: What do you mean full day? What are you talking about? KF. F is for kindergarten. Some districts go half days.
[Aaron Olapade]: KF, kindergarten full day, which is all kindergarten students here in Bedford. Every acronym.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay, moving on to item number three, we have a recommendation to approve handbooks by Dr. Pelosi. Yes.
[Suzanne Galusi]: All right, so the school-based handbook, family and student handbooks saw three updates globally for this 25-26 school year. That was for the Metro Public Schools AI responsible use policy and guidance. It was for the expansion of curricular accommodations based on sincerely held religious beliefs. And then it was the adjustments to our new arrival and dismissal times. So first we had a very dedicated group of Medford public schools administrators and staff members that worked throughout the year Tyler tirelessly last year to create language for students and staff and families around our AI policies guidance. One of those was school committee member Erica Reinfeld, and joining her from Medford Public Schools staff was also Molly Layden, Dr. Nicole Chiesa, Will Pippicelli, Dr. Bernadette Riccadeli, Dr. Peter Cushing, and teachers Dan Wagner, Jason Campbell, Rebecca McGinnis, Allison Quealy, Grace Turnbull, May Abusan, and Lindsay Rapucci. So they worked throughout the year to create a comprehensive tool that lays out the responsibilities and the resources that are available to our community around the guidance for AI. So the principles, just to highlight like the principles of this guidance were how the resources would support teaching and learning. It addressed data privacy and security considerations, and it supported the ethical and responsible use of generated AI tools. If we go to the next slide, DESI has come out with their, last year they had their suggested timeline for districts that they wanted to see engage in this work. And this to the left was their projected timeline for doing such work. So for us here in Medford Public Schools, we have met their deadline. DESE had the policy going into effect next school year, 26-27. We're just a little bit ahead of the curve. What we are continuing to work on, I would say, would be just further professional development. There has been some professional development. throughout last year around cyber security around AI and the use of it in classrooms, but the continuation of offering professional development to our staff is still a goal and still ongoing. If we go to the next, just the high level pieces that are in this AI guidance, all we have here just to give the community a brief overview is like a list of the table of contents. So these are the areas that are explained in the Medford Public Schools guide. guidelines, both for students and for educators, there are embedded resources and links for people to use. I don't know, Member Reinfeld, if you wanted to maybe highlight anything or mention anything about the work.
[Erika Reinfeld]: I will note that this was not done in a vacuum. This was informed by a district-wide survey of, I will say, staff, teachers, administrators. There were conversations around bringing in feedback from students and from families as a follow-on. The goal was really to get something on paper, but I think we had 120 or so responses, and we pulled out patterns, and we looked at those, and that really informed the discussions that we had. And I will say this when we go to read the policy. Well, maybe I won't since I'm saying it now. But the review timeline on this we set at one year because things are changing so much as we learn. and as different software companies, programs decide to comply or not comply with student privacy laws. So this is something that will be continually reviewed and that was always the goal and to see how with an eye to our student council representatives here, how this is actually affecting students and what this looks for. So we were looking for a policy and guidelines that teachers at different grade levels and in different subject areas could customized to the needs of their particular learners. So those were all parts of the conversation that we had. I'm happy to say more or answer specific questions, but I don't need to go on about it. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Other questions, members of HAPA?
[John Intoppa]: So quick question. Thank you for all this information. So we have on our agenda a policy on AI guidance and how that's gonna work. If we vote this into the handbook, is that the same ruling? Or are these two different rulings for two different things? Because inherently, if we vote yes on this, it automatically brings it in.
[Erika Reinfeld]: So the policy that is in paper, it takes the educator and student guidelines directly from the materials in the handbook. The handbook contains additional information, like the resources and the language for syllabus, which wouldn't be a school committee policy. And then the policy also adds a little bit of, top level framing for the policy book and a section on use in district operations, just because that was new guidance that came out. The committee was really focused on the classroom. But are you asking whether we then have to approve both things in both places every time?
[John Intoppa]: I'm asking in terms of, no, I was just more of like if they were similar because I have opinions about generative AI, and I have concerns, and I have issues with it, specifically how it's being used in the handbook and in the policy. And I was just making sure that how we vote on the handbook doesn't affect the policy, because I get into my specifics in reviewing the full policy in the text that it's written.
[Erika Reinfeld]: So a lot of the language is overlapping and I think one of the, as we discussed in the handbook policy, the handbook update policies. those get reviewed and then summarized to align with the policy. So if the policy changes, the handbook would then have a follow-on update to reflect the new policy.
[John Intoppa]: Cool. Yeah, because just my question was then, do I say my concerns now, or do I wait till the policy reading? But if I can just wait until the policy reading, I can more dissect it in terms of that. It's a good question.
[Jenny Graham]: So what I might suggest is that you, at some point, when we're done, and I would like to hear from our students, a motion to sever the AI approval in the handbook until we get there. Yeah, that's what I was planning on doing.
[John Intoppa]: So thank you for affirming that.
[Jenny Graham]: I think I would just like to second that.
[SPEAKER_16]: With regards to generative AI. my understanding that this is not the time to talk about that, but we have also some concerns with specific wording within the school student handbook. Thank you.
[John Intoppa]: So, member Intoppa, do you want to make a motion to sever the MPS AI guidance from the handbook?
[Jenny Graham]: Motion to table. Motion. Handbook approval or handbook
[John Intoppa]: Okay, if that makes the most sense, then I'll motion to, I'll take the recommendation of Member Ruseau, motion to table the handbook discussion.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay, there's a motion to table the handbook discussion by Member Intoppa. Second. Second by Member Lopate. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley. Member Graham.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Sorry, I just, I would like to hear the rest of the overview of the handbook updates before we table the full discussion.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I think- Motion to table is undebatable. to be withdrawn.
[Jenny Graham]: Yeah. Okay. So it's like 10 minutes from now. So I think it's okay. We can just shift gears.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. Member Tapa?
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes. Member Olapate? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau? Yes. Mayor Longo?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. We will table the handbook discussion until we get through the AI policy, which is coming up shortly. And I think there may be somebody online who would like to speak and we will be back to you shortly. Okay, item number four is a project manager position update Mr. Ken Lord our chief operations officer.
[SPEAKER_18]: Good evening, thank you. As I have detailed in the memo, I'm requesting that we change the proposed job description for project manager to include building systems slash project manager. It's become clear in the first month that I've been here that we do need a position like this to work with the new McGlynn and Andrews HVAC system to learn that complex system, be in charge of that, as well as other systems, as well as deal with project manager duties.
[SPEAKER_17]: That's what I've described here.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Branley.
[Nicole Branley]: This project now. Which one? Well yeah I know. So I would say specifically the HVAC project.
[SPEAKER_18]: Okay so right now we have the McGlynn and Anders HVAC project. We have an owner's project manager JLL who's driving that project. They work with the architect B2Q and the contractor Consigli. And what Tom Ellis the representative from JLL is recommending we identify someone to learn those systems as they bring them on board. They haven't started up any of those systems. The software is not even purchased yet. So we want to get this person in and ready to be able to hit that ground running when they're ready.
[Nicole Branley]: Okay, perfect.
[SPEAKER_18]: The existing systems are managed by our maintenance staff.
[Nicole Branley]: And they have the equipment to do what they need for now. And then obviously everything will be updated when the time comes. Yes. Okay, perfect. Thank you.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you for the update. You just mentioned. Is there any type of shift in the qualifications of the applicant needs to have or the commensurate pay or anything like that? Or is it just the expectation of the needs that you're recognizing?
[SPEAKER_18]: I think I think the pay is anti pay is correct. I think that there's we look for a little bit more of a mixture of experience rather than just someone who's saying, you know, a contract is licensed.
[SPEAKER_17]: Some of them are HBC experience. What is the core or mixture that?
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you.
[Nicole Branley]: Member Branley. I noticed the salary here. Was that similar to the salary that it was before?
[SPEAKER_18]: It's the same one.
[Nicole Branley]: It's the same one. OK. I just want to make sure. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Is there a motion to approve this job description? Motion approved by Member Lopate, seconded by Member Branley. Roll call, please.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Before the roll is called, may I ask just a question? Refresh my memory on the salary range, please. Thank you.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley.
[Nicole Branley]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa. Yes. Member Olapade. Yes. Member Reinfeld. Yes. Member Ruseau. Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. 7 in the affirmative, 0 in the negative. The job description is approved.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you very much.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you. Next up, we have continued business. We have an update and recommendation to approve the Cummings Foundation $35,000 grant for the Center for Citizenship and Social Responsibility. Mr. Trotta submitted a report, and I'm going to turn it over to Dr. Galusi.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you very much. So I know that Mr. Trotter provided the membership with a little bit more description. I will say that just to maybe get to like the key points in conversation with Mr. Trotter. The language that was in there that was causing some concern, I believe, was in there mistakenly and will not be in there in the future years of this grant, which is a 10-year grant. But you can see here the categories of pretty much how that for this school year, which follows how the other budgets have typically gone, what the buckets of spend are for. So the largest here is for staff stipends. So there are chapters of CCSR at every school across the district, and these are going to the stipends. Now, every school has one stipend. Some schools, depending on the number of students that are in that chapter, they may have two advisors. That's work for this year that's still unfolding to see how students are going to participate. Some of the stipends also go to administrative assistant or secretarial type work in order to keep the purchase orders for materials and supplies going through Medford Public Schools. So it's not just, just to clarify, there's those additional stipends, one stipend as well. A bulk of the work goes to the supplies and the materials that are needed for each chapter to engage in the projects. So when students are working with their advisors to come up with what they want their project, their civic minded project to be. There's money that's allocated to their needs. I did ask about professional development materials. I did learn that there is a resource library in the Medford High School library that all of the advisors have access to, and that library keeps building in terms of resource for the advisors. And then the last piece was just a small amount of money. If there is an advisor, which has come up in the past, wants to bring students on a field trip or bring in a guest speaker that is related to the work that they have chosen to do, that money is earmarked for just in case opportunities throughout the year. Happy to answer any further questions that you may have.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Intoppa, Member Reinfeld, and then Member Ruseau.
[John Intoppa]: Thank you so much. I'm really happy to see this breakdown and also you know the clarification in terms of the language. I think one thing to make very clear and important to folks is that this is not the only basis of funding for the CCSR, that the CCSR actually, especially in the secondary education part of the CCSR actually encourages students to get grants elsewhere and to help fund the projects through that as a way of project learning and a way for folks to learn how to do that in the real world. I know that my project in the CCSR was mainly funded actually through Tufts and through Harbor Freight and that was done in with my advisor Michael Skorka teaching me how and Richard Trotta teaching me how to sort of do that. So when we see These numbers outside of the scope of, well, how does that fund everything? It's important to know that at the core of the CCSR they are teaching students how to be advocates and how to advocate for themselves in terms of what they want to get funded. So oftentimes they're reaching out to community partners for sponsorships and a lot of other things. So just kind of like a point of information, I guess, about this funding when we see this here and we go, well, how does 4,000 sustain the various grade levels and various intricacies of projects? Oftentimes we rely on our community partners and thank them for that. So thank you for the clarification and I appreciate all the information presented.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Member Reinfeld. Yep, I just wanted to thank Mr. Trotta for providing this. I know I was the one who severed this last time and I just want to say thank you for providing the additional info. That's it. Member Ruseau.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. I was just looking at the letter again from last meeting, and I don't really feel like we got answers to the question we were asking, which was, what does the grant require? The letter explicitly references a relaxing of requirements. what were the requirements and what are the requirements now is still unanswered. And I went back and looked at the presentations from June and I still don't know how the $29,000 gets spent. I mean, is it $28,995 for one person and a dollar for each other person? I don't know. It's not in any of the presentations we've received. So I'm not satisfied that this answers our questions and I'd like to get those questions answered.
[Suzanne Galusi]: I think that's fair. So I have requested a further drill down from Mr. Trotta around this for this school year. I can go back and get it for last school year, if that is the request. This school year, we just don't have it yet because the participation is still, they're still kind of like building through enrollment of student participation, the number of advisors and what that will look like. But I'm happy to give that to you.
[Paul Ruseau]: I would like last year's Yeah, I mean, because my sense after all these years is it's, it's pretty much been the same for the last eight years. Well, almost whatever the years have been, it's been, we've been paying the staff and everybody about the same. But I don't know who's getting paid what. And that's really not, I mean, if it has nothing to do with us and we shouldn't be talking about the CCSR in any way, shape or form, then let's say that and stop talking about the CCSR. But we talk about it a lot and I have no idea what happens to the money and where it goes. And that's not my opinion as a body that is responsible, acceptable. So last year would be great. And if it's particularly different than the year before that, then I'd like to know that too.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Intoppa.
[John Intoppa]: My understanding for one for the in terms of where we find what those that is actually outlined in the 10 year grant contract executed in 2021 so we'd have to refer to that language to find out what that means outside of the scope. My understanding of the faculty and staff stipends when it comes to advising is more in the term of that this is the allotted amount and that it is earmarked for that. So that way every, you know, and I don't know what the number is. I know I was asked to be an advisor at some point. I never got to that point of asking what the stipend weeks I didn't ask ignored. that I care. But as far as I'm concerned, it's a baseline stipend of whatever the amount is, and then that $29,000 is basically reachable to them because we pay part of Mr. Trotta's salary through the budget. And as far as I'm concerned, it's for folks outside of that. But I could be completely wrong. I don't know the answer 100%, so I don't want to pretend like I do. But that is my interpretation of this letter and from past context, working with Director Trotta on this.
[Jenny Graham]: There are no Medford Public Schools operating funds that pay for CCSR. It is entirely grant funded. Except for Mr. Trotta's stipend. Except for Mr. Trotta's stipend.
[Suzanne Galusi]: It has to be I'm so sorry, I don't know if I'm like out of order by saying this. But his stipend, part of the grant, I have learned part of the grant is that his stipend has to be separate from the grant funding. So that does go all to the work of CCSR and Medford Public Schools pays his stipend to oversee the grant.
[John Intoppa]: everyone else's, all the other advisors and assistants, whether it's faculty or staff, is from this, but TRADA is the only one that is paid for in our budget.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay.
[Nicole Branley]: Member Branley? So who holds on to this $35,000?
[Suzanne Galusi]: There's an account, like a grant account in Medford Public Schools that is allocated each year and then it's drawn down for the for them to pay the stipends and to pay the materials and to so our grant manager Susan Callahan helps to manage. Okay, this funding members so thank you.
[Paul Ruseau]: So that's sort of it there is a line item that pays for Mr. But when there's this relaxation in that letter, does that mean we could perhaps use the grant to pay for him instead of the very limited Medford Public Schools funding? But it says relaxed with no explanation. What does that mean?
[Suzanne Galusi]: And it's not in writing, but that's why I was told it was in error. it was an error and should not have been part of the clause and that clause is removed moving forward. So what I could maybe do is ask for them to like reissue the letter.
[Jenny Graham]: I think what I'm not clear about is what is the clause that was an error? Like what did we think we had to do that we no longer had to do?
[Suzanne Galusi]: It's just the wording around it being relaxed. like and could be earmarked for other purposes, the language that you were concerned for last time.
[Jenny Graham]: But what is being relaxed? I'm not quite like, what is relaxed? Is it like a particular requirement? I'm just trying to be very clear about what we're being asked to approve a grant. And there's a lot of lore around how CCSR is funded, including I have been told by past people in the administration that we are required to pay stipends at certain levels to certain people. I don't know if that's true or if it's not true, but what I'm trying to understand is what are we required to do under the contract that we signed? What are those features? And when we relaxed something, is it all of it or is it a specific thing? So I just want to be clear what we're saying because I don't want people to go out and be like, the school committee is gonna go spend this money on whatever they want because it was relaxed. I just want to be very clear about what it is that was relaxed. Nothing has been relaxed.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Nothing has been relaxed. The language was an error that how you're spending the money could be relaxed, Nothing is being relaxed moving forward. These are the three buckets of spend, which is stipends, materials, and field trips, transportation costs, guest speakers. That's it. There's no relaxing of how we're spending our money. Those are the three buckets in which CCSR is spending their money.
[Jenny Graham]: Then I would like to ask that we get an official correct letter from the Cummings Foundation so that we can approve this in a way that is diligent with what they're asking us to do, especially if nothing has been relaxed.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes.
[Suzanne Galusi]: I think we're in year eight of a 10 year grant.
[Jenny Graham]: Yeah. And I think the other thing is to say, oh, this was in the grant 10 years ago. I'm sure that it was, but it's been 10 years and it would just also be helpful for people to say, here are the key features of the grant that was signed 10 years ago by nobody who's still in the building except for Mr. Trotta so that we can parse fact from fiction. That's all. Member Rizzo.
[Paul Ruseau]: And I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I'm going to anyways. But this paragraph, like nobody wakes up as they're typing a memo and writes a paragraph that says the foundation has lifted restrictions on the use of grant funds. That didn't come out of thin air. That came out of an email or a letter or a memo that somebody received. Nobody just wrote that for kicks. So I can understand if you're saying that there has in fact been nothing relaxed, but somebody received something somewhere along the line that definitely said restrictions have been relaxed. This isn't a sentence you can accidentally add a and or a not and suddenly get this sentence. This is clearly a paragraph written based on some other thing that exists somewhere. So I look forward to the report on what is
[Suzanne Galusi]: I will have the letter reissued. I'm still in my learning of CCSR. So I can't speak to what it was in the past, but I will absolutely get a yes, a revised letter. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Intoppa, did you have a question?
[John Intoppa]: And one more not to like you said, I'm going to make maybe a dangerous assumption. What I'm assuming is And again, I use the word assuming strongly, is that the Cummings Foundation had guidelines on what they wanted the grant funding to be spent on. And now, with a lot of things happening federally with grant funding, what they're earmarked for, they are lifting certain recommendations to avoid becoming targeted. I'm going to assume that they are basically saying we had priorities and now it's whatever you want to do. Because that seems to be the trend that seems to be what's happening nationally. And I have a feeling that it was just more of or maybe it wasn't that deep. Maybe it's nothing like that. And maybe it's just, you know, hey, we wanted to use it for this, but now you know, whatever floats your boat, whatever we can do to make sure that students have student success and that they're doing the projects they want to do, and that we actually really don't care what you use it for as long as you spend it appropriately and responsibly.
[Jenny Graham]: And I think getting to the bottom of those choices is a good idea. Yeah, I'm not saying it's not, I'm just saying that that's probably... Is there a motion to table this update, this request to approve the donation? Well, we took it up on the agenda, so. Yep. Motion to table by Member Ruseau. Is there a second? Seconded by Member Lopate. Roll call, please. Member Branley.
[Nicole Branley]: We're holding off on accepting the money. We've already accepted the money. We're just holding off on the letter.
[Jenny Graham]: We are tabling the motion to approve. The school committee is required to approve donations and grants. So we're holding off. We're just withholding our approval. Okay. Good. That's why I'm like, hold on. We just want to be clear about what our requirements are when we accept money. That's all. Perfect.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley? Yeah. Member Graham?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa? Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative zero in the negative. The request is tabled.
[Paul Ruseau]: Um I have a motion. 2025 dash, I've got to find the number. I'm sorry. No. It's, wait. Yeah, 2025-30. That's the AI one. 30 is the one that I want to take out of order. Oh, yeah. Is that what's next anyways? No.
[SPEAKER_17]: Okay.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yeah, let's take, let's, yeah, let's, the motion to take 2025-27 out of order. Thank you. Motion to take 2025-27 out of order by member Rousseau, seconded by member Reinfeld.
[Jenny Graham]: Roll call.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes. Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. Center on. Okay, so 2025-2027 offered by member Reinfeld policy I J and D, the AI use of generative AI and Medford public schools. I am going to read this here with me. I think it's important if we're going to have a discussion about it that we all are on the same page about what is here. member public schools view certain technologies and integral part of the educational experience and is committed to providing a strong digital learning environment for all students. We are dedicating, we are dedicated to providing all students with a 21st century education that will enable them to be lifelong learners and contributors to a diverse and rapidly changing world. The MPS technology responsible use policy outlines the guidelines and behaviors that our users are expected to follow when using all technology, including AI. MPS supports the use of developmentally appropriate technology resources, including Gen AI, to improve teaching and learning for all students. MPS recognizes that AI literacy includes understanding, evaluation, and use of appropriate Gen-AI tools. These skills are important for students and staff to participate effectively in technology-driven academic and work realities. In accordance with the above, MPS will provide guidance, training, and resources to support the ethical and educationally appropriate implementation of Gen-AI tools across the district. Some important definitions. Generative Artificial Intelligence, also known as Gen AI, is the type of technology that generates content including images, text, video, audio, and other media when prompted by a user. Generative AI is a machine learning model that creates new content based on large amounts of training data in response to user prompts. Predictive AI analyzes historical data to examine trends and patterns and make predictions about the future. AI literacy includes learner skills and knowledge that demonstrate their understanding of the opportunities, risks, and ethical considerations of generative AI. Guidelines for use. Our Medford Public Schools AI guiding principles consider how the resource we use supports teaching and learning, addresses data privacy and security considerations, and supports ethical and responsible use of Gen AI tools. In addition to these considerations, students and staff must ensure critical evaluation of Gen-AI content to recognize biases and misinformation. Guidance for the student's default use of Gen AI tools in a given department shall be consistent across grade level and shall not infringe upon a teacher's discretion to allow or disallow their use for specific assignments or to provide learning supports or accommodations to students as designated by law and documented under a student's IEP 504 plan or other relevant provision. All Gen AI use must be linked to one or more specific educationally relevant objectives and shall not undermine the development of critical thinking skills. When responding to concerns about the use of Gen AI tools, MPS shall apply the same criteria used to review other instructional materials and access technology. For students, Gen-AI tools. Any Gen-AI tools being used must follow usage terms, e.g. age restrictions, caregiver permission requirements, etc., and align with district student and data privacy and security requirements. Students should not use any generative AI tools without prior approval from educators or educational teams. Students must also properly cite all AI-generated content. Plagiarism. AI tools are only to be used with the express permission of educators and academic teams. Obtaining answers or completing assignments without properly attributing AI generated content is plagiarism and is forbidden. Teachers will provide information on the purpose of the assignment and how Gen AI should and shouldn't be used in the classwork. The academic honesty panel. If students are suspected of plagiarism with Gen AI, teachers will be required to supply relevant work examples for review and determination by the academic honesty panel. The panel's decision is final. Assessments. If allowed by the educational staff, AI tools may be used to assist students in preparing for assessments, but cannot be used to complete assessments unless explicitly stated. Bias and critical thinking. All AI-generated content should be checked for accuracy, bias, misinformation, and potentially negative content. Students should understand the limitations of AI-generated information and the importance of using trusted sources for information verification. Citations. A record of prompts used in Gen AI should be kept along with the output of the AI tool used. Any AI-generated content used in assignments must be cited, and teachers will provide guidance for how to attribute AI-generated content in student work. data collection, and privacy. All technology resources utilized in the Medford Public Schools, including Gen AI, will adhere to the district student data privacy, data collection, regulations, and best practices. Students should never input personally identifying information, sensitive, or confidential data into any AI system, including images. Students should immediately report any security breaches, suspicious activities, or exposure to inappropriate content encountered during AI use in school authorities. Ethical use. All AI, all gen AI content should be critically reviewed before use. All AI generated content should be checked for accuracy, bias, misinformation, and potentially negative content. Users may not use AI to create or disseminate harmful content. Any form of communication with or through AI tools, including chatbots or virtual assistants, must adhere to the same standards of respect expected in human interactions. Abusive, harmful, or disrespectful conduct conduct through AI platforms is unacceptable. The use of Gen AI for schoolwork must be recorded and shared. Gen AI tools used in Medford public schools are for educational purposes only. for educational staff. Educational staff should speak with students about the definition use of Gen AI and MPS for Gen AI tools. Any Gen AI tools being used must follow usage terms, including age restrictions, caregiver permissions, et cetera, and align with district student and data privacy and security requirements. Educators use of Gen AI should be as a tool to support teaching and learning environment, but is not to be solely relied on in place of educator review and judgment. As far as assignments and assessments, teachers are responsible for posting expectations, allowable, and or prohibited uses of Gen AI tools for students' use in their classes. These expectations may be specified in assignment directions, the syllabus, Google Classroom information, classroom postings, or other relevant locations for students to access. Teachers might allow the limited use of generative AI on entire assignments or parts of assignments. Educators should identify when and how Gen AI can be used and why. For bias and critical thinking, all AI-generated content should be checked for accuracy, bias, misinformation, and potentially negative content. Educational staff should understand the limitations of AI-generated information and the importance of using trusted sources for information verifications. AI detection tools. Currently, detection tools that claim to detect content developed by generative AI are not reliable enough to accurately identify cheating plagiarism on their own. Data collection and privacy. All technology resources utilized in Medford Public Schools, including Gen AI, will adhere to district student data privacy, data collection regulations, and best practices. No private, confidential, or personally identifying information should be entered into Gen AI tools. The district's approved use of online platforms, software, and resources, including AI tools, should always be consulted. Ethical use. All Gen AI content should be critically viewed before use. All AI-generated content should be checked for accuracy, bias, misinformation, and potentially negative content. Users cannot use AI tools to create or disseminate harmful content. All use of Gen AI for school work must be recorded and shared with teachers, such as with a transcript of prompts and responses. Gen AI tools used in member public schools are for educational purposes only. For district operations, Medford Public Schools recognize that Gen AI is increasingly embedded in the tools and systems that districts are used for budgeting, staffing, resource allocation, operational decision making. These systems can help forecast trends, streamline processes, identify patterns and data, but may also reflect flawed assumptions, limit human discretion, and reinforce inequities in funding, hiring, or access to services. Medford Public Schools commits to operational uses of Gen-AI with the same attention to ethical principles, communication equity, legality, as with instructional tools. Specifically, the use of Gen-AI tools for operational purposes will ensure transparency and oversight, support human judgment and review, monitor for bias and equity risks, strengthen data literacy and interpretation, use responsible procurement practices, and align with legal requirements and community values. Monitoring and review. We're almost done, I promise. The district has a right to monitor the use of AI technologies to ensure compliance with this policy. Monitoring will be conducted in an ethical manner, respecting the privacy and rights of students and staff. Violations of this policy may result in disciplinary action, including but not limited to restriction of access to AI resources, educational interventions, or other disciplinary measures as deemed appropriate by the school administration. MPS guidance as to responsible ethical use of Gen AI will be reviewed and updated annually to reflect new developments in AI technology, changes in legal and ethical standards, and the evolving needs of the educational environment. There are a series of related policies around instructional material, curriculum instruction, access to electronic media, internet acceptable use, software policy, and policy hygiene. Member Reinfeld.
[Erika Reinfeld]: So the educational staff and the student is taken directly from the committee's language. Most of this overview language is from, but I added the bits about consistency across grade level and within subject areas. The thinking on that, right, is that if a student on side A at the Andrews has a different policy than side B at the McGlynn, that's a problem. But recognizing that these tools are used very differently in a humanities class, a science class, a world language class, special education, so special education professionals were on in this group to say when things are using English language learners have a different need than others and in terms of assessing where the students are. So that's that was there and then as I mentioned the district operations that is kind of brand new in the DESE guidelines that came out at the end of August and I recognize that this work was done before our chief operating officer and assistant superintendent for instruction and curriculum. This actually began right in our surprise superintendent transition. And so I have to thank Director Chiesa for stepping in and doing some of that material. So that's where this came from. I put it on the agenda tonight because I knew the handbooks were on the agenda and I think it would be inappropriate to be referencing a policy that doesn't exist. So I welcome the discussion, friendly amendments, whatever we need to show that we're thoughtful and to make sure that we are supporting students. The discussion in these committee meetings was these resources are here to stay. We need to be using them responsibly and we need to have a position and not just let things happen. because someone comes up with an idea. So I am excited to have a consistent policy in this area.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you, Member Reinfeld. Questions from the committee? Member Ruseau?
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you for doing this. There's a lot of work. I really appreciate that there's, it's not just focused on students. I think that would have been the easy way out. And I don't envy the staff that have to learn all these things that are frankly, changing every day. I think perhaps for students, it's easier to learn all this stuff, perhaps. But did we have a mention of professional development in this?
[Erika Reinfeld]: I believe we said that the district will provide training and resources.
[Paul Ruseau]: Okay, that's the training is word. Okay.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yeah. So one of the one of the objectives of the of this task force working group was to identify the training needs not prescribe what they should be. So I know that document exists, but has not been codified. Thank you mad for meetings, and I will also note that the language that is in the handbooks was reviewed at department meetings and building levels so. It has seen other eyes, although, as we mentioned, additional input from different stakeholders is still needed here.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. I would just ask that in the next budget that we, I'm guessing that professional development around generative AI will not be free. It might be quite an expensive professional development offering. So just something to keep in mind for the next budget because our staff is certainly gonna need it. But as you pointed out, like different departments and different grade levels will need frankly, very different training. I'm assuming the sciences, probably a lot of those teachers, at least at the high school level, are already pretty aware of a lot of this stuff. But thank you. It's incredibly concise. And I love the use of the word ethical over and over, because that is a harder one to nail down. And I do like the the academic honesty panel. I'm wondering if you could tell us a little bit about why there's this panel's decision is final.
[Erika Reinfeld]: I would defer to the staff on that. That was their language and not to pass the buck, but that was our teachers and administrators. I think they wanted it to be very consistent with the existing academic honesty and integrity policy, but I'm hoping. And I want to note that director Layden is not here. Shana Tova to our Rosh Hashanah observers. So there may be some questions here that our director of technology and library services may be better equipped to answer, but perhaps Dr. Galusi can talk about the panel.
[Suzanne Galusi]: No, thank you. I think that was really nicely said. The only thing I would say is that I'm sure it's not a big surprise that especially secondary teachers are dealing with these issues quite regularly. And probably, I don't know, I wouldn't maybe necessarily say a daily basis, but I do think that it's, this is a conversation that is happening in a lot of secondary department meetings, classrooms. I also know it's quite a conversation at college campuses. There's a lot of higher level institutions that are talking about going back to the oral exams and the blue books as a way to kind of navigate what is happening now. And every time you turn around, there's now another like third, party platform that's claiming to do some other involvement of AI functioning that can determine who's used it determine who's not. I think the real main goal for this which member Reinfeld. so eloquently said, but it's really to educate how it can be used as a tool, but not to replace critical thinking, problem solving, and teaching our students the skills that they need to thrive in college and in the real world. But there are some instances where it can aid and support productivity and workflow. And I think that like, having the opportunities to do that in classrooms where we're teaching students, the difference, getting back to that ethical word again, is really the essence of this guidance. And it is important to, once approved and have the greater conversation, it is important to be reflected in the handbook.
[Erika Reinfeld]: I was just going to add that in our initial survey, we asked what the committee was, what the task should be, but also we got a high positive response to both generative AI tools support student learning and generative AI tools undermine student learning. And I think everyone kind of recognizes the complexity of that. Then this question that people are kind of most mixed on was, I know when my students are using generative AI tools. There was a big range of, I know, I have no idea. And I think more people said that their students didn't use the tools, but there was a recognition that that was going to increase over time. And that's why we really wanted to get ahead of this with the policy. So thank you. Yeah, of course.
[Nicole Branley]: Member Branley. So yeah, so my question was surrounding that academic honesty panel too, like who determines it at what grade level and all of that stuff. Is there answer to that based on what you just said, or is that something?
[Suzanne Galusi]: I know you said it was sort of brought by the teachers, but... The way that for the situations that have been arising prior to this guidance, the way that's being handled is with in-school teams that usually comprise school leaders, teachers, and school Councilors.
[Nicole Branley]: Okay, good.
[Suzanne Galusi]: And then bringing in at times if needed department heads to like a doctor keys or Dr. Khan. Okay, good. Yeah, thank you. Remember in tapa
[John Intoppa]: Thank you. I want to say first and foremost, thank you member Reinfeld and everyone on the committee for putting their heads together, thinking about what this looks like, thinking about the policy. I agree. It is very clear on a lot of things. There's a lot of, you know, the policy is bulky in terms of that. There's a lot of guidance, right? There's some things we just can't avoid. It's sometimes like we want to make them as short and simple as we can, but you always want to make sure things are clear. There's clarity. There's clarity amongst other things that better less likely. The first question I have is, has the district identified what generative AI models are state approved, are district approved, are OK to use in the system? Because it mentions that in the DESE guidelines, they have to be vetted. And I was curious.
[Erika Reinfeld]: The district maintains a list of acceptable software programs. And it, I believe, includes generative AI. Or they were adding the generative AI tools as of the writing of this policy. That's a great question for Molly Leighton as well.
[John Intoppa]: Yeah, in terms of what, because there's thousands of models and there's different third party softwares in terms of which- Only a certain number of them have the agreement.
[Erika Reinfeld]: to for student data protection. And that's really the that's the filter there.
[John Intoppa]: I was gonna say, because that is that's my biggest concern is in terms of student data privacy. Yeah.
[Erika Reinfeld]: And we kind of said there, there isn't a, it doesn't make sense to list those out in the policy because things change and legal. So the district maintains that in the same way that they maintain other acceptable software and why Google this works and Microsoft that doesn't, or I'm not trying to slam any particular company that was random. Right, I understand.
[John Intoppa]: Yeah, no, my question, it was more in terms of like, have we identified yet, you know what I mean, in terms of what we have. Obviously, like you said, things are fluid, things change, we find a problem with the software, we take it off the list, it happens all the time. I'm sort of breaking this apart in terms of, so I understand in terms of citing AI sources, I find it very interesting because it basically seems like the old adage of you can't cite Google because you can't cite a Google search. And that's exactly what an AI citation is through MLA and APA. It's just, you're writing what you searched up, what model you used and what day it was, which is funny because you go through primary and secondary education and they tell you not to do that with Google. And yet, This isn't our language, but this is what the language is across the nation in terms of MLA and APA, what is acceptable. So I think that's kind of hilarious, especially if you know how AI works in terms of machine learning that inherently it is plagiarism because it is pulling together a bunch of sources and spitting out a summary without any real citation. And if you've, you know, in college, they always teach you, even if you summarize, even if you don't use every single word, word by word, or even have two of the same, you still have to cite it because you're still using someone else's information to form your opinion. And so generative AI being cited is an interesting sort of, cycle of like, that's an interesting kind of thing. In terms of us implementing generative AI, I know that we as a committee stand on policies that are sustainable and making sure we're in our environment. And if you know about AI, generative AI, you know how much energy it uses and how much water it uses and how much fossil fuels it inherently uses to generate answers and to machine learn these systems. And so from a sustainability standpoint, not that sustainable. There are ways for them to, I'm sure, to get the energy from solar or wind. But for the most part, it's really not. In terms of ethical usage in the arts, there is no way to ethically use AI, except for if you code an AI system and feed it only your artwork, it is inherently plagiarism and not stealing like an artist, which you and I both understand. It is more of the stealing of everything else. So these are sort of some of my concerns.
[Erika Reinfeld]: I will note that the environmental piece came up as ethical as an umbrella, both ethically in terms of personal development and learning, but also in terms of societal impact.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Oh yeah, 100%.
[Erika Reinfeld]: So it was certainly discussed, but the point is taken. I will say I wrote a very different policy for my graduate students than I wrote here. Fair enough.
[John Intoppa]: Yeah, I'm definitely pulling in from what the conversations are happening in the art world in terms of higher ed and these are the conversations we're having every single day in terms of how AI is implemented in policy in the classroom in higher education. Also, the part of bias and critical thinking should be checked for accuracy, bias, and misinformation. For me, it's at this point, what's the point then in terms of taking a shortcut to summarize these things and then have to go back and still check them to make sure they're factual and to make sure that they are appropriate? And then who is doing that checking? And I think my colleagues behind me have some opinions about that in terms of what then
[Jenny Graham]: I think we would like to hear from them. Did you have anything that you wanted to amend about this policy?
[John Intoppa]: I actually, in opposition of the policy, I think that we shouldn't be, it is my personal opinion that we really shouldn't be implementing this into the curriculum in terms of its usage. I believe that Being aware, especially in terms of literacy when we look at political and also national literacy around what is generative AI what is real and what is not I think is a very scary thing it is approaching very quickly in terms of we look at AI models that are generated from last year until this year. So I'm sort of more nitpicking this in terms of that my amendment would be to only have a literacy aspect to it. And the only times that we use this is to teach about what generative AI is, but it is not my welcoming to incorporate this into the curriculum in terms of as a tool. I understand its benefits, but I personally do not have a positive outlook on generative AI and the future that it has in terms of where it will be going. So to that, I defer. to my colleague next to me. That's not even my job, but that is my job.
[Jenny Graham]: I'm unclear. Are you making a motion or are you not making a motion at this time?
[John Intoppa]: Well, at this time, there is no motion.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay.
[John Intoppa]: These are just comments and questions.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay. Thank you. I see we have a new colleague joining us.
[SPEAKER_16]: I think that we have some specific issues with the wording present within the current student handbook in result in regards to generative AI. This is more specific concerns, but under bias and critical thinking, all AI generated content should be checked for accuracy, bias, misinformation, and politically and potentially negative content. And under citations, a record of prompts used in generative AI should be kept along with the output from the AI tool used. First of all, who is doing this work? Who is keeping this record? Who is responsible for ensuring this record is kept? What is the punishment in case this record is not kept? Secondly, does this apply to participate to preparation for assignments, as is mentioned elsewhere in the document, or simply to the creation of content for the assignments themselves. Again, this is generally not clear. The student handbook itself places particular emphasis on OpenAI's chat GPT over other generative AI models. We believe that this is overly specific.
[Jenny Graham]: Can I stop you? Can we do this one at a time, just so that if there are answers, we can not forget what the answer is before we get to the next thing. OK, so the first question, can you just tell us your first question again? It was about bias and critical thinking.
[SPEAKER_16]: Yes, so under both the bias and critical thinking and citation sections, records are meant to be kept either of prompts or ensuring that they are checked for accuracy, bias, misinformation, and potentially negative content. Our question here is who is responsible for this work? Who is responsible for ensuring that this list has been created? And what are the repercussions should this work not be done? And does this apply to only the creation of material for assignments themselves or preparation for tests, as mentioned, at other points throughout the document?
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you. Member Reinfeld, did you have an answer?
[Erika Reinfeld]: So this was developed by committee, but I believe The intention on who is keeping these records is the person completing the assignment. And I believe the prompts list is only for the assignments work that is turned in to say this is the sourcing for the content that I'm providing. That is my understanding of what the teachers on the committee were thinking with this language. Member Ruseau?
[Paul Ruseau]: So, I mean, it does depend on which tools you're using. Certainly, I use AI all day, every day as a software developer, but, you know, the prompts that I make and the answers that I get I mean, I can look at them going back as far as I want. They don't go away. Now, if you're just using a free web version of something, you probably don't get all those features, which is why using the approved list would be very important. And again, I'm not familiar with all the tools I use, the tools I use, which everybody knows there are many tools every day. There seems to be another tool. but using a tool for which you do not get an audit history of what you're doing seems like an absolute no-go. As I read this policy, if you open a tool and it doesn't let you see what you asked it and what the answer was three weeks ago, You shouldn't be using that tool, because you can't comply with the policy that says here's you when you go to turn in the paper, unless you copied it down at that moment, which is also, you know, That's not how people do work. I mean, you're not gonna ask a question or make this paragraph better and then go off and write some gigantic audit log of your own. That is totally unreasonable. But if you're using a tool that's keeping track of it, then it becomes, it's still a heavy lift. The question is, is it a heavier lift than just doing it all without generative AI, and I suppose it depends what it is you're doing. I would say that in most cases, I mean, I am wildly more productive as a software developer using generative AI than going off and learning an entire new whatever. When I only need a little tiny thing. So, so to me that's the answer. But I obviously was not part of this committee, but I think that, you know, if you read something at the library and you don't write down the reference, and then you have a great memory and you write down exactly what you read. Sent word for word, but don't put any, you don't remember what book it was. It still counts as academic dishonesty, right? So I'd like to think this is actually less work than some of that other stuff that we used to have to do in the olden days, card catalogs and all that good stuff. I'm really aging myself, but that's how I interpret it. Now this is the policy, like policy is not, most of the time is not implementation. So the gory details of how it gets done, like if there's 10 tools that are approved, the answer is probably different for every tool. So our policy is not going to be for this specific tool, make sure you click this after you do a question and you get your answer. And that's just not, that's an option for policy, but it becomes incredibly brittle. And then we're constantly modifying policy
[Erika Reinfeld]: every week when there's a new AI tool so that's how I interpret this to answer your question and I will add I back in this language so it's all use of Jenny I for schoolwork must be recorded and shared with teachers such as with a transcript of prompts and responses. So the policy is written to give teachers some flexibility in explaining what their expectations are and to say, this is how I want you to be citing things. It doesn't require that list of prompts, but the teacher, this is an example of something that a teacher might request. Another teacher might say, I want a disclosure of AI to say, I use this tool in my introduction, or I use this in my research to create an outline, but I don't need the specific prompt. So I think the such as is actually important here in that language. I don't know if that addresses the concern.
[Jenny Graham]: And if I might from the chair, this policy lays out that students are responsible for this and teachers are responsible for setting the parameters by which it will be used in their classrooms. So just like any assignment that you get, your teacher is going to tell you what they expect from the assignment, how to cite things, whether you type it or you send it to them in the mail, like all of those things come from your teacher on an assignment by assignment basis. And this is not. asking anybody to do anything different than that. It is asking teachers to clearly outline that to you all, but it is asking you as a student to adhere to the use of the tool. So from a bias perspective, this policy is asking you to do it and it is asking teachers to do it and be clear about it.
[SPEAKER_16]: I think that is a very helpful explanation of the intent behind the message present within the document. We're simply requesting that within the document itself, this intent is better expressed. Thank you. And I don't, as for Mr. Hsu, I I don't think that it's pertinent to discuss exactly which models are allowed at this moment, given that they change so frequently. But on your point in increased productivity, I think it's a common concern here shared by the board members that there's a difference between AI allowing you to do something faster and you actually understanding the process in which you do that. As for the rest of the document, yeah. Oh. I like that. Yes.
[Nicole Branley]: Sorry.
[SPEAKER_16]: The document, we believe that the document is overly specific in reference to particularly OpenAI's Chachapiti. While it remains the most commonly used AI model in terms of user base at the moment, we recognize that the landscape is rapidly changing and believe that more general knowledge would be, general wording would be helpful in this regard.
[Erika Reinfeld]: I can speak to that if you'd like. So that's in the definition section, because a lot of people use chat GPT interchangeably with generative AI. And so it was to specify that it is a specific tool. It is not the list of approved resources. It's a definition of clarifying language.
[SPEAKER_16]: I understand that that might be the case in that particular section, but it is mentioned throughout the document at other points, including differences in citation. And I don't have any other examples written down, but I believe that there was another one. So I might be wrong, but I don't believe that that is restricted only to the section you're referencing. But yes, it is important to define those terms. Yes. I think that, like my colleague, sorry, board member here said, there are vastly different security profiles that constantly change for different models. And so we would also like to, again, second the importance of regulating the use of specific models within the school system. You know, DeepSeek, which is owned by a Chinese company, may have different policies than OpenAI. So again, that is a concern we would like to second. In terms of environmental impact, we recognize, again, that these models have significant energy requirements. However, there is a general trend that these companies are turning to cleaner sources of energy we've seen. two purchases of and construction of nuclear power plants for the running of AI data centers. So this is a trend that is not exclusive to the use of fossil fuels. And then again, I wanna second the concern for cognitive decline as the result of over-reliance on these models.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you. That's quite a lot for your first meeting.
[Unidentified]: Thank you all.
[Erika Reinfeld]: If this passes its first reading, we will have a second reading. I'm happy to take the request to explicitly call out energy requirements as a separate thing from general ethics. I think that's That's a good idea. And the cognitive decline is a really important thing. It's embedded in the critical thinking, but I think maybe an understanding the impact of AI is maybe part of the literacy component of it. So I think we can look at the policy with that in mind. And I was going to say something else? Oh, it is. I will note that I did add the phrase developmentally appropriate in front of technology use. And so I think in a future meeting, I may bring that to the technology responsible use policy. But I think that was part of the idea here in terms of what's happening to our brains as we use these tools. Because that's that research is coming out fast and furious, and to member on top was a point very alarmingly so.
[SPEAKER_16]: Yes, although this is a very new topic. So I just, again, would like to exercise caution in that regard. And then one last point, which I forgot. The student handbook refers to generative AI as Gen AI. This is a minor nitpick, which is fine, but it doesn't make clear that it's an abbreviation. And so it's just slightly problematic. It's not a huge deal.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yeah. I thought we put it in the first mention, but if we didn't, that can certainly be fixed.
[SPEAKER_16]: Just gen.ai or any other. Making it more clear than ever.
[Jenny Graham]: So if I could recap on the policy, I think I've heard a request to make clear that it is both student and teacher responsibility to check for bias, critical thinking and citations. that we clarify the use of the phrase ethical use and that we reference not just critical thinking but also the potential cognitive decline that is associated. Those are the three changes potentially that I saw. And the environmental impact. And the environmental impact. So I just wanted to recap that.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I appreciate that.
[Jenny Graham]: No, I can't. No, it's OK. So potential updates would be reference to cognitive decline. Like direct reference that it is the expectation of both students and teachers to check for bias and citation. The environmental impact. And. We said the clarification of ethical is that. And clarification of the word ethical to include environmental impact. So those are the three things that I'm hearing in the room that might warrant an amendment.
[SPEAKER_16]: Can we also add security concerns in the selection of appropriate models for use in classrooms?
[Jenny Graham]: Can you say more about what you're thinking about?
[SPEAKER_16]: Yes, certain models have different policies when it comes to disclosure of user data. And as these are students and minors that are interacting with these models, it's important that in the selection of appropriate models, we keep in mind the security concerns.
[Jenny Graham]: Um, I believe that that is actually covered because it does talk about our data security practices. So any tool that would be approved would have to be compliant in that space. Otherwise, it could not be approved.
[Erika Reinfeld]: And it's also right. It's in the related policies. I think it's the access to electronic media. But it's definitely a or the Internet acceptable use and software. It's all covered in there.
[Jenny Graham]: Is there a motion to approve the first reading with amendment? Motion to approve the first reading as amended by member Rousseau.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Seconded.
[Jenny Graham]: Seconded by member Branley. No, I believe that was the mayor. Oh, sorry. The voice came from over there. Seconded by Mayor Lungo-Koehn. Roll call.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley. Member Graham.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa. No. Member Olapade. Yes. Member Reinfeld.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: So yes, Mayor Lungo-Koehn.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. Six in the affirmative, one in the negative. First reading is approved. Are we there.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes, sorry. Chair. I just think I'm not sure all the students necessarily know the whole process for policy approval but we have a second reading at the next meeting, or a following meeting, we can't get it that quickly. Time. Right, so it may not be right away but so the second reading will be. there'll be edits, and then we can either approve it or send it to another meeting for further edits. And then, of course, we can always just vote it down. But just wanted you all to be aware. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Is there a motion to take the handbooks off the table? Motion to take the handbooks off the table by member and tapa there a second, seconded by member Reinfeld roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Bramley.
[Nicole Branley]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Memogram.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member and tapa. Yes, my role of honey. Yes. Memorandum. Yes, never. So yes, Maryland. Okay.
[Jenny Graham]: 7 in the affirmative, 0 in the negative. We will cycle back to the superintendent's recommendation to approve handbooks. The floor is yours again. And I think we may have a question online that has to do with the start of school. So when you're done with your update about the handbooks, perhaps you can answer that question.
[Suzanne Galusi]: I'm just going to give one moment. great. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Pippa Sully. So there's two more sections as previously stated that are updates to the handbook. Um, this one is on. June 27th. The U. S Supreme Court issued a decision. Um in Mahmood versus Taylor, which is requiring school districts nationwide to provide parents and caregivers the opportunity to review instructional content in advance if they request. to allow students to be excused or receive curriculum accommodations if it conflicts with their sincerely held religious beliefs. So it is important to note that curriculum decisions still remain under the authority of public schools and that it does not alter our instructional standards or our program of studies. But what it does is just affirm that upon request materials can be provided to parents and caregivers so that they can review and request reasonable accommodations for their religious objections. So what that there is on the next slide language that we are adding into our handbooks. so that we are consistent with the Massachusetts Regulation 603 CMR 26.05 Section 1. The Medford Public Schools, through its curricula and materials, encourages respect for the human and civil rights of all individuals, regardless of race, color, sex, gender identity, religion, national origin, or sexual orientation. And in accordance with district guidelines, families may request information from building principals on available accommodations related to curriculum content. So what we are encouraging here is our charge, our collective charge this year is about belonging. And that is for every single student, every single staff member, every single family member, every single community member. And so what we really want to ensure is that we are prioritizing conversation and communication. So if there is a caregiver that has concern over any curriculum related materials, they need to reach out to the building principal who will engage in dialogue with the caregiver regarding the scope and sequence and what those curricular materials may be. And on a district level that those building principals may reach out to Dr. Kim Talbot, who was our assistant superintendent for academics and instruction.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Ruseau, did you have a question about this topic before we move on? Yes, I do. Okay.
[Paul Ruseau]: The floor is yours. Thank you. I just wanted to be clear that accommodations does not mean alternative education.
[Patricia Chery]: Correct.
[Paul Ruseau]: We don't provide two educations here. So when a student opts out, they will simply be missing out on their education or the education that we had planned. They will not be getting an alternative. They will whether that's not being class or, you know, it depends of course on the class and the grade level and all that other, we're not sending a kindergartner to sit in the hall, but, or maybe I don't know what we're doing, but I just want folks to understand that that does not mean that every parent can decide they wanna have a separate education for their child. They can decide that their kid will not get some education. I'm wondering about, Parental review of curriculum is, have we gone down the path of what does it mean for review? Like if I have a high school, if I didn't finish high school and my child is in AP physics and I wanna know what the curriculum is. Are we obligated to hand the curriculum over? And I'm assuming, of course, probably inappropriately, but perhaps the parents will not be capable of knowing what the hell they're reading or looking at. What is our obligation to help them understand what the curriculum is? I mean, when I started on school committee, I was like, let's see our sex education curriculum. And I went in and I got it and it was a binder. It was like a thousand pages long or more. Actually, it was multiple binders like this. And that was quite the slap in the face for somebody who doesn't have an education background. Like when I say, let me see the curriculum, that's not quite as simple a request as I thought. So are we saying we will, and I realize this maybe hasn't happened yet, and maybe we haven't worked it out. but are we handing over, and by the way, when I was handed those curriculums, I wasn't like, those are licensed copies. I couldn't take them home because like, they were not, like we had a certain number, they belong to the district. Are we sending parents home with curriculum and being like, well, here you go, or are we helping them understand what's in there? And if that's the case, that seems like a very large, amount of effort on our part. And I realize that this is new, and maybe there isn't an answer, but I'm worried that we're going to be accused of burying parents who are wanting to perhaps opt their kids out of certain things. I'm worried about the teaching staff because all of our curriculum is not like off the shelf curriculum. It's not like there's like a, you know, a lot of our curriculum is because we've been improving and getting it, you know, modernized, but not all of our curriculum is here's the, you know, here's the documents. So what happens to teachers who teach a class that has no specific curriculum, that they've made it up themselves? And I know we have classes like that in high school. do they have, and I keep asking questions and don't let you answer, but I'm just very worried. I'm trying to remember them all. I'll stop talking, but this whole thing is freaking me out, as I'm sure it's freaking you out. And I want, I'll just do one final thing. I hope we're going to keep track of this very carefully, so we understand what it costs us. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Dr. DeLuzzi?
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you. So I think the biggest, as I previously mentioned, but the biggest piece that I want to say is that this requires conversation. So this is not a request that can be made through email or through just one phone call. This needs to be a conversation that building leaders are engaging in with caregivers. It would require the caregivers to have a review of like the scope and sequence, so they can see maybe content that is coming up. It is not something where it's an individual lesson per se but I think. One of the things that Dr. Talbot is working on with directors is making sure that we have scope and sequence available to caregivers so that they can engage in that conversation. We are recording requests. We are making sure that we're documenting our efforts of outreach and working with caregivers so that we can understand and have an internal path as to what was requested and how we came about those decisions. Yes, it is true that the Supreme Court ruling did not rule that school systems are obligated to provide alternative materials, lessons, activities for students, but a lot of I think that that also speaks to why the conversation is so important to have with caregivers and what that might mean for the student. So in like Again, there is no judgment here, but I also want to make sure that the conversations are like what this looks like for the student and the impact that that has for the student. and what that means in terms of what their experience in that class will be. And so making sure that parents know that it's a conversation. The other piece is that this is about religiously held beliefs and content that may they may find objectionable. And that also requires conversation to make sure we're getting at the root as to how and why does this particular content go against your religiously held beliefs. And that's also a matter of conversation that needs to be had. I hope I answered your questions.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Ruseau.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. When you said it, the impact on the student, I think I'm reminded of our work on discipline that shows that when a student is out and they come back, every other student is negatively impacted by the need to bring that student up to speed. When a student is missing and they come back, they didn't get what they needed yesterday. For whatever reason, the teacher does not have you know, a bifurcation of curricula for every single student. So the student that comes back the next day having missed the content, it's like research has really solved all this, negatively impacts every other student in the class. And so that's one of the reasons we should be incredibly careful about taking kids out of classes for discipline. So I think that I would just also say that we should include that in our conversations, it isn't just that kid who might be removed because of this. In math and science where every single day is building on the previous day, I was never really an English person, so maybe in the humanities as well, but little is taught that is never referenced again. So deciding you don't want your student to receive some content there's not a lot of classes where that's the one time it's ever discussed. So I, I'm glad you're starting with conversations. Because that I hopefully can we can reduce this to a very small number. Thank you. Sorry.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Rheingold.
[Erika Reinfeld]: I was hoping you could comment just on what the expectations or requirements are for teachers in terms of posting syllabus having the curriculum night and I know we also in some cases do information sessions about potentially sensitive content, I know we did that when that when we. in fifth grade when the puberty unit comes up, that is available as a resource. And we've, I think, talked previously about listing what curricula are being used. I know DESE has it on their site, but putting it on our website and saying this is the curriculum we use for math and for science. As Member Ruseau mentioned, you can't just hand over a curriculum. It's very protected, but what are the expectations for educators to make that information available proactively?
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you for that. That's actually part of the ongoing conversations that we're having right now to make sure that things are kind of housed in one location and it makes it easier for reference and for review. A lot of teachers use Google Classroom and it It is a landing page for caregivers and for students to be able to go right there and see what the syllabi, or the resources, or the content is and so us encouraging and making sure that that is still happening so that it's accessible to caregivers, especially at the secondary level. is the expectation.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Not a mandate, but it is an expectation. Is it explicit or implicit? A little bit of both.
[Suzanne Galusi]: I was just going to say, I know that's not answering your question, but that's pretty much how I would like to answer that question. Because it is, I mean, this was something that happened over the summer. And so this is the work that Dr. Talbot is doing with directors and school leaders, and they are doing with educators. So that has been the expectation at the secondary level. That is still the expectation as we work through what this looks like as we move forward. Of course, it's completely different for elementary. And so additionally, that kind of chain of command is if once teachers receive any sort of outreach or request from caregivers, they immediately go to their principle.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Because I know sometimes I sign a syllabus for my child. Sometimes I don't. And different things are available at different curriculum nights. But we've always had that information up front.
[Jenny Graham]: So great. Thank you. Hi, I think our students have something they would like to share. Is that right? Yeah. So hold on one second. Is your mic on red?
[SPEAKER_02]: Yes. Okay. One of the main things is that it's opening up the conversation. But one of the questions that we had is, who is having this conversation? Because they go to the building principal, yes. But is, first of all, the building principal having the conversation with the parent? Yes. OK. And then when it comes to the accommodations, are they the ones determining the accommodations on a building level? Or is that overall, there's a list of accommodations that are acceptable?
[Suzanne Galusi]: There's not a list. This is a case by case basis because it really depends on the specific needs of the family as well as what the content is. So that's why it really needs to be a discussion. So the conversations are with the building principal and the caregivers, the parents, and then the building principal has conversations with the teachers to make sure that when it comes down to the student level, both the teacher and the caregiver are able to make sure that that communication is aligned.
[SPEAKER_02]: OK. So it will be case by case on what the accommodations are.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Yes.
[SPEAKER_02]: And then the other thing is, this is mostly for high school level, but is the student going to be involved in this discussion at all? If they, for some reason, disagree with their parent, is there going to be a way to determine if that is a disagreement in there?
[Suzanne Galusi]: It's a great question. That is a great question. And I'm really glad you raised it. And I, again, I would say that's why we need to have the conversation with the caregiver and why I did mention the impact on the student. So I wanna be careful that I don't answer you by necessarily saying yes always all the time, but that would be the goal for sure.
[SPEAKER_02]: Like, is the student going to be made aware of the conversation? 100% included in the conversation. OK.
[Jenny Graham]: Any other questions? I don't think so. OK. Member Reinfeld.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Christine's question raised another point, which is what kind of supports are available for the teachers to have these conversations in the moment? Because sometimes it's something that comes up kind of unexpectedly if we've encountered it as we're reading or so facilitating the conversations in the moment in the classroom as well, I think is a really important piece here.
[Suzanne Galusi]: So I, I would say that that's why right now it's resting with the building principal. And so if there is an accommodation made the principal is having conversations if it's it let's say if we're sticking with the high school level that conversation is had. with all the teachers that that student has on their caseload, but it may not be that there's an accommodation in every class. So the support to teachers is coming from the building principal, and the building principal is getting support from Dr. Talbot. And so there's definitely a chain, a hierarchy here, but we also need to make sure that that conversation flow is happening from Dr. Talbot to the principals to the educators.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Right, so yes, I think that's the core of it, is making sure that this is being discussed in a department meeting or a building meeting, particularly since it's new. And I know educators want support in how to
[Suzanne Galusi]: To respond has already had some meetings with principals. There's lots of ongoing one on one conversations, but there's also group conversations happening.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Thank you.
[Nicole Branley]: Member Branley. In my head. I think that this is gonna get really tricky as time goes on because I think maybe a discussion with the principal in one building with a parent is gonna be different maybe than a principal in another building with a parent just based on what the parent's needs are. And I just, I feel this tornado happening of social media. Well, this is what happened here and this was our situation here and every case is gonna be case by case. So I just feel like this is going to really open up a door to a lot of stormy waters. I think everybody has the right to obviously be able to make the decision for their child. But I think even as she said, moving forward as your older children, how do we protect a student? from being, you know, chastised or, you know, like, I mean, where are we drawing the line here? Like, this is really opening up a broad, a broad purview that we're really can't control. I mean, this is like, the more I'm hearing about this, I'm like, oh gee, this is gonna be tricky. This is gonna be tricky. I don't think it's as easy as just saying like, okay, you don't sit in math during this lesson and you can go for a walk. I would say for appropriate, like, I mean, like you said, sorry, not to trip you, but like, even like kindergarten, we won't let you go in the hall. Oh, well, we'll be like, what is, what is going to be the plan? Like, this is such a broad. Wow. Really broad.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Well, and first and foremost, I would say that like ever since COVID the adaptability that education has had to have every year of building as we're going here, and last year with a lot of the way national decisions were made, I just think that this has been the nature of education for the past couple of years, which is why the conversation and the nature of the request is really the priority and the critical part. I just can't say that enough because The chain, the communication chain of teachers going to principals and principals going to Dr. Talbot is what is making sure that there's not only like the level of support but the alignment, and it also depends on If it's high school, maybe there are experiences that they've already had that are going to be part of the conversation. That's why there's no way to answer this other than making sure we have conversations about why the request is coming in, what the nature of the request is, what the impact will be, and then trying to figure out what the accommodation needs to be, if any. Maybe sometimes it's just the conversation that needs to be had, and there isn't an accommodation that's necessary because you had the conversation.
[Nicole Branley]: I just want to make sure that our principals and our staff, along with Dr. Talbot, are really being supported in all of this. Because at the end of the day, as I always say, it's about the kids at the end of the day and supporting their families. So it's really going to have to be individual and discussion-based.
[Suzanne Galusi]: So I would say for all of you, I would just highly ask that you respect that chain of communication. And just, you know, if caregivers are coming to you, then you need to put them back to the principal. And that's where the conversation starts.
[Jenny Graham]: I think we have one more handbook change to discuss. Dr. Galusi.
[Suzanne Galusi]: And the last one is just updating the arrival and dismissal times, which is pretty easy. It has been highlighted a lot in the Friday memos. It is reflected on our website. It is here in this lovely chart, but each individual school has also just updated the change in either or both arrival and dismissal times across the district.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you. I think we have somebody who has had their hand up online for quite some time. Will, do you think you can unmute our guest? While you do that, members of the public are welcome to speak for up to three minutes on a topic. And if you could please give us your name and address for the record.
[Jenny Graham]: Hi, we can hear you.
[SPEAKER_11]: Yes, hi. Good evening, I was calling about safety concern at the Roberts Junior High School. My name is Constantine Lombardakis. I live at 19 Joyce Road in Medford. My son's a student at the Roberts Elementary. I noticed on Park Street there's about four or five cross crossing guards. And there's flashing lights and crosswalks. And everything school signs, but there's absolutely nothing on on Court Street at the main entrance on 35, at 35 Court Street. No signs, no speed limit signs, no nothing. And that's the entrance that they use for the special needs students that enter the building. I would like to see some sort of control there, whether it be a crosswalk on Court Street and some signs that say school and a speed limit sign, maybe some flashing lights, some cones, but crossing guards would be good to have in front of the building, because that's where the special needs students go in. And I've noticed that cars go speeding on that street, and also I've noticed kids slipping out of parents' hands when they're being brought into school. And I talked to the sergeant in charge of traffic, I also reached out to the special ed department, and I also called the mayor's office last Friday. I don't know if that's something you would be able to do there, but it would be appreciated. I'm just concerned because my son enters the building there, and it's unsafe for the students. Would that be something that the school committee could do as far as getting some crossing guards and some kind of controls on that street.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you. Hi, thank you for the question. In general, a lot of those safety improvements that you're talking about would come from city resources. But what we can do and I'm going to do is ask the superintendent to be in contact with the chief of police so that if there are short term measures like a crossing guard, that we can have that conversation because that would have that would happen under the guidance of the police chief. So we can ask the superintendent to do that, and then also talk with the building leader and some of our municipal staff about the broader safety questions that you're raising. So thank you for bringing those to our attention.
[SPEAKER_11]: All right, because I watched a garbage truck speed by there last week, and it was unnerving. I was going to bring my son to the front door and it's just not good. It's very dangerous over there. Something's going to happen. It's not going to be good. God forbid if anything happens, it would be good to put something there just to keep the kids safe.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Superintendent, did you have something you wanted to add? Mr. DeSimone, is it at both arrival and dismissal that you have concerns or just one?
[SPEAKER_11]: Well, my son takes the bus home, but I bring him there in the morning and people are off and going to work. So they use that street to bypass Park Street. So they speed up there to get over towards Forest Street and Lawrence Road just to cut through the traffic in Method Square. So that street becomes a note for people that are trying to avoid the Method Square traffic and head towards Lawrence Road and towards that direction. So I see a lot of cars speeding down that street trying to get out of the school traffic on the Elm Street.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay, thank you, that's very helpful. Thank you and thank you for your patience. We've waylaid the agenda here, so appreciate you hanging in with us and the superintendent will reach out.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, thank you. Through the chair too, I know that Todd Blake, our traffic director and Sergeant Rogers have been in discussions in the last few days and are looking at this.
[SPEAKER_11]: I spoke with the sergeant last week.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Okay, I was just updating the committee as well.
[SPEAKER_11]: Okay. I'm sorry, let me interrupt.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yep, they're in discussions. I know the area is too, I have got an update today. There's no room for a crosswalk, but they're looking into the area and potential plans with you on drop off for your child. So we'll definitely stay on top of this.
[SPEAKER_11]: I appreciate that. Thank you very much. Thank you for listening. Thank you, school committee, I appreciate that.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you for your patience. Have a good night.
[SPEAKER_11]: You too, thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Is there a motion on the approval of the handbooks? Member Intoppa.
[John Intoppa]: I'd like to make a motion to sever the AI policy from the handbook as we are currently discussing a lot of the AI possibilities in another policy and I'm afraid that they will clash with one another in terms of development we have with the second reading of the policy.
[Jenny Graham]: The motion is to sever the AI policy from the handbook approval. Is your motion also to otherwise move approval?
[John Intoppa]: Yeah, move for approval, but sever the AI policy.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay. Motion by Member Intoppa to move approval of the handbooks with the exception of the AI policy, which will be on hold for now. Seconded by Member Branley. Member Ruseau?
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes, so the handbooks will not get published then, correct?
[Suzanne Galusi]: So the handbooks are available on school websites and Medford Public Schools website. I would say the distinction right now is that the MPS AI guidance tool is listed in the handbooks, not as a policy, but as the guidance for caregivers and students to reference. And maybe that is the distinction right now.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. And that just as soon as you said that, I remembered that, you know, until a school committee actually has a policy, you have full policy authority. And so the absence of us adopting an AI policy means you set AI policy. You literally can say, this is our policy until we adopt a policy or, well, that's just the way it works. So.
[Suzanne Galusi]: I would just maybe just say that that document as created by the committee was guidance. And so that's what's in the handbook right now. And I think that it's, important to make sure that caregivers and students are aware of what the guidance is. And then we proceed with the reading of the policy.
[Jenny Graham]: So the motion on the floor is to approve the handbooks with the exception of the AI component of the handbook. Is that correct? By member Intoppa, seconded by member Branley. Will you call the roll?
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley? Yes. Member Graham?
[Jenny Graham]: No.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade? No. Member Reinfeld?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: No.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau? No. Mayor Lungo-Koehn?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: And I do wish the AI would figure out how to interpret member Mayor Lungo-Koehn, because what it says is just a horrible, it gets all this wrong.
[Jenny Graham]: So three in the affirmative, four in the negative, motion does not pass. Is there another motion on the floor?
[Paul Ruseau]: Motion to approve the handbooks.
[Jenny Graham]: Motion to approve the handbooks by member Rousseau. Is there a second?
[Unidentified]: Second.
[Jenny Graham]: Seconded by member LaPotte. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley?
[Nicole Branley]: No.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham?
[Nicole Branley]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa? No. Member LaPotte? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau, yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. Four in the affirmative, three in the negative. The handbooks are approved.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Five in the affirmative. No, five, two.
[Jenny Graham]: Five, two, sorry, sorry. Five in the affirmative, two in the negative. The handbooks are approved. I will also just add that I think part of what just happened is we approved handbooks. We've never done that before on the floor. And that is a job that we should be doing every year. And it previously amidst many, many requests to do so has never come forward to us. So I think we're, a little out of order which is hence the urgency of some of the work to get these handbooks approved because school is in session. Ideally we would be doing this long before school starts and I hope that we will chart a better path next year. Member Ruseau, please be brief.
[Paul Ruseau]: I will be brief. I just want to remind the superintendent not to need to necessarily that we did adopt a handbook review and approval schedule last year. And so this hopefully can be the beginning of us following that process. So these approved policies should be, somebody should create a copy and we should go through the process we approved so that we do have them approved in plenty of time. I would also like to make a motion to take 2025-30 out of order.
[Jenny Graham]: Motion to take 2025-30 out of order by member Rousseau, seconded by our professionals, seconded by member Reinfeld roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Bramley. Remember Graham. Yes, I'm running top. Remember all about it. Yes. Remember I felt member so yes Marilyn go current.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. We will take item 2025-30 out of order. Offered by me, whereas the school committee recently reached a four-year agreement with the Medford Paraprofessionals Union that introduced a schedule that provides additional hours to the district beyond the school day for select paras at the elementary and high school levels. And whereas MPS signed a new bus contract in the spring. And whereas bus supervision is an ongoing area of need across the district at various points during the year. Therefore, be it resolved that the superintendent will provide a report at the next meeting to discuss plans to ensure the safety of students on our buses and respond to areas of need at the next regularly scheduled meeting. So this was a motion that I put forward because one of the central things that we have been asked about as we have talked about the override funds in particular is enhanced supervision on our buses. I believe there are some parents in the audience who would like to speak. And if you would not mind stepping forward to the podium, we would love to hear from you. And we apologize for the delay. Your name and address for the record. And we just need to wait for a red light to come on on your thing there. There you go.
[Patricia Chery]: Patricia Cherry, 20 Wellesley Street, Medford. So we just kind of wanted to get an update. I know, Jenny, thank you so much for reaching out to us. So we do appreciate that. We wanted to get an update on what this was going to look like. I know that we came to you with some asks last year. Best buddies programs going great. Thank you very much. But as far as I've had some feedback about the buses and the Paris and the safety on the buses already and we're only two weeks into school. So if you could just kind of give us what you're thinking or what what you have plans to go forward with, what this is gonna look like.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Absolutely, thank you very much. So right now what we're doing is having some internal conversations based on what this resolution said by member Graham. We've had lots of conversations internally around need. and making sure where the coverage, where we have to schedule the coverage. Right now, Ms. Bowen has been, Director Bowen has been working with school leaders on the schedule as reflected in this resolution based on the new CBA for the paraprofessionals where looking at the individual schedules at each school so that we can create assignments for bus monitors, especially starting with the prioritized areas first. We also did look into what it would mean for the company, the bus company that we have the contract with, to be able to supply that, which is an astronomical cost. So this is where we've between the flexibility that we have with some of the schedules of our staff members, as well as maybe the potential need for stipend depositions, we are now creating the schedules at each school.
[Patricia Chery]: So I just want to make sure because I don't want this to be, we've kind of noticed that we're seeing more door-to-door this year.
[Suzanne Galusi]: What do you mean by that?
[Patricia Chery]: More offers for kids to take alternative vans.
[Unidentified]: Oh.
[Patricia Chery]: Okay. And I'm just hoping that that's not the answer, taking our kids off the other buses and putting them on vans that some kids are now in the city of Medford on for an hour and some change on the way just to get home. So that's where I'm a little bit concerned that we are.
[Suzanne Galusi]: That has not been part of the conversation, just to put that right out there and to clarify. No, right now it's just once the CBA passed, it's looking at what the schedules are at each school so that we can create the coverage that's needed at each school.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay. Did you have other things you would like to infuse into the conversation so that when the report comes back at our next meeting, it can anticipate some of the other questions that you have about this coverage.
[Patricia Chery]: I think that was what I was- Regarding the paras and the buses. The buses, that was my biggest concern, is that kids are getting on buses at 2.30 in the afternoon, say from the high school, and then they're on the bus going to a middle school to pick up other kids. And then they're, you know, and all because we now have larger amounts of kids on the vans. So kids that were taking, you know, the buses, but the other buses back and forth to school. I was just concerned that I want to make sure that we're not taking those kids off rather than getting them a safety person on the bus. We're not taking them off that bus that they're in inclusion with other kids and putting them on an already overcrowded van to solve the problem.
[Jenny Graham]: That's very helpful context. Thank you.
[Patricia Chery]: Yeah. And then that's for the buses. As far as the power is, we're still moving forward with them doing the professional development days with you guys. That's all I really have on that.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you.
[Patricia Chery]: Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Is there a motion to approve or questions from the committee? So motion to approve by member Rousseau, seconded by member, member, sorry, member Intoppa. I saw him first, I heard you first. My brain can't do them both right now. Yeah. Roll call, please.
[Patricia Chery]: One other thing, though, and we can save it for another meeting, because I know it's late. The school inclusion specialist, is that job still on the books? I know it was there, and then we looked, and we haven't seen it yet for this school year. Has the position been filled? We can get back to you. Yes. All right. Yeah, that'd be great if somebody could get back to us, because I think we have some other issues that really would be helpful with. All right.
[Jenny Graham]: Got it. Thank you. Thanks for your patience. Member Ruseau, roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Just sick of hearing my voice yet? Just kidding. Don't answer that. Member Branley.
[Nicole Branley]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham.
[Nicole Branley]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes. Sure, as I hope you approve it.
[Nicole Branley]: Yes. Member.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes. Member. Yes. Member. Yes. Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Seven any affirmative zero negative motion passes. Okay, we still have a ways to go here, folks. So I'm going to take number seven, which is new business, we have an MSBA update, I'm going to try to give you a lightning update, so that we don't have to here for too long. On Thursday of this week and then again on the 7th of October, Dr. Galusi, the mayor and I will be attending the designer selection panel with 10 colleagues from the MSBA and out of those two meetings will come a decision about who our designer will be and we will execute the contract in the month of October. With that designer on board, they will do two things that are sort of broadly called the feasibility study. One is they will prepare for a January submission where we talk about, essentially, what is our goal and what are we trying to do? So it includes things like, what is the educational program? What is our space summary? What are the existing conditions of the building? What are we trying to accomplish with this bill? That is January 2026. In June of 2026, we will do the second half of the feasibility study. which will answer the question of what would a repair look like that is required by the MSBA? What would an ad reno look like? And what would a new building look like? Those three choices are required by the MSBA. And those answers will be part of the report that we are targeting to the MSBA in June of 2026. From there, we will then go into the sort of heavier design where we will be picking the actual systems that go into the building based on the preferred design, either repair, ad reno, or new. Based on that, we'll start what they call schematic design, which is where we will look at the actual systems and the details and all of the nitty gritty that bring that box to life in a school building. We will, that's where we will onboard the construction manager more than likely, who will work alongside us as we do schematic design. And that process for schematic design will provide a scope and budget submission to the MSBA as well as ultimately a budget agreement. Our plan for schematic design submission is January 2027 with board approval in April of 2027 and a vote to authorize the project to move forward presumably by debt exclusion in May of 2027. That may spring vote will require approval by the building committee, it will come here, it will require a two thirds vote at the council and the agreement of the mayor to put those things on the ballot for decision by the taxpayers. And then shovels can go in the ground once the project is greenlighted by the taxpayers and the funding sources are secured in collaboration with MSBA and the public. So between now and June of 2027, there is a lot to do. But I just wanted to give you that update because the most exciting part is we get to start the feasibility study very soon. That is the question people are asking. Are we going to build new? Where is it going to go? Are we going to keep the pool? All of those questions get answered in feasibility. So between now and June of next year, we will have those answers. And then we will begin moving forward based on a particular design. Questions?
[Erika Reinfeld]: Member Reinfeld. You answered my question about what is required of city council may or school committee, particularly with the mind to there's an election going on and who we elect is going to affect this project. My other question is when are the community conversations happening.
[Jenny Graham]: Once the designer is onboarded, they will lay out a schedule for all of that community input, which will be sort of many layers and phases, including time with educators, time with RCTE, time with the public, info sessions, all of those things. So all of that will start once that team is onboarded. We have four proposals, all very qualified designers. to work with us. And we will know who that is at the beginning of October, and then we'll execute an agreement. And then it will really be a question of timing in terms of do we start those kinds of engagement conversations before Thanksgiving, between Thanksgiving and the winter break, or something else. So that is a conversation that the building committee will have with the designer and the OPM so that we can keep on this tight timeline. We are advancing some of the work due in January already, so that work is ongoing. But the OPM feels good that our timeline can be met and will be met by whoever is selected at the designer selection panel on the 7th of October. this year of this year. Thank you. Yeah, so there's so the first meeting is this week. It is sort of a roundtable like review of all of the proposals and then specific vendors will be invited back on the seventh. And at that meeting, they'll be invited to answer some specific questions and provide a presentation and then the panel of 16 will vote.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Right. And I would like to motion that this committee hear from the final designer about their thoughts or via the building committee. And I was going to put a date on that, but now I'm not, I think perhaps before the feasibility study would make sense sometime between October 7th and the feasibility study. And I defer to the building committee members to say what that,
[Jenny Graham]: So there's a should be so the motion is to hear from the chosen designer at a school committee meeting upcoming as they commence their work, yes. By Member Reinfeld seconded by Member Intoppa. Roll call.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley? Member Graham?
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa? Yes. Member Olapade? Yes. Member Reinfeld? Yes. Member Sayes? Mayor Lungo-Koehn?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, motion passes. Okay, we are moving on. 2025-29 offered by Member Reinfeld, whereas the Medford School Committee is responsible for hiring the superintendent of schools, and whereas the interim superintendent Oh, I did. Oh my goodness. Sorry. 2025-28 offered by Member Reinfeld. Be it resolved that the strategic and capital planning subcommittee will meet to create a policy for intra-district elementary enrollment approvals and that this policy shall be presented to the full school committee for adoption in advance of the 25-26 kindergarten registration. Member Reinfeld.
[Erika Reinfeld]: This is basic housekeeping from our May 20th meeting. We were very quick to authorize the space utilization study and fix the enrollment challenges at the Roberts. This got lost in the sauce, and so I'm putting it on the table now to make it happen.
[Jenny Graham]: Are there questions or a motion from the committee? Motion to approve by Member Olapade. Second by Member Branley. Roll call.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Bramley. Oh, one second, I'm putting it in the wrong place. One moment. Okay, Member Bramley with a yes, Member Graham.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa. Member Olapade. Yes. Member Reinfeldt. Yes. Member Ruseau, yes. Mayor Landau-Kern.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, motion passes. 2025 20-29 offered by member Reinfeld, whereas the Medford school committee is responsible for hiring superintendent school of schools, and whereas the interim superintendent was appointed on December 11 2024 to serve in this leadership role from January 17, 2025 through June 30, 2026. And whereas the interim superintendent has collected input from the greater MPS community through listening sessions, observation and communications. And whereas additional leadership positions, including the assistant superintendent and a chief operating officer have been hired since this interim appointment. And whereas the district's most recently developed strategic plan did not look beyond 2024. Whereas the district's recently developed instructional vision and capital plan do not include information about the ongoing operational activities of the district or measures of accountability and whereas the district had to engage in components of strategic planning for advancement of the feasibility study including a pre-K to 12 educational profile, enrollment projection study for pre-K to 12 programming, approval to continue all existing programs and create five new vocational programs, recommendation to co-locate the Curtis Tufts High School on the high school campus to increase access and opportunity, and the creation of a centralized early childhood learning center at the MHS campus. And whereas the feasibility study is in progress and will include significant community input, and the creation of an educational plan for pre-K and grades nine through 12 programming. And whereas members of the MPS community have the right and responsibility to provide input into the direction and leadership of the needs of the district for all grades. And whereas the school committee desires to make a data informed approach to appointing a superintendent on July 1st, 2026. Be it resolved that the strategic planning subcommittee will meet with district leadership to discuss a timeline and process for creating a new strategic plan for Medford public schools. Be it further resolved that this process will include significant stakeholder input to inform the plans content and the hiring and evaluation of the permanent superintendent in Medford. Such input could include community surveys, a public hearing or special meeting of the Medford School Committee, focus groups with district leadership, union members, and students, and or open comment period to be discussed as part of the subcommittee meeting described herein. This meeting shall occur no later than is needed to present proposed planning process at the regular school committee meeting on October 20th, 2025. Member Reinfeld.
[Erika Reinfeld]: So I think we, um. We know that our district needs a strategic plan. This resolution is written the way it is to frame kind of why we are where we are in the strategic planning process and to lay out that plan, recognizing that there is currently an interim leader, an interim person in the The superintendent position is currently interim and so the strategic planning subcommittee by definition defines a lot of the strategic planning and so the idea here is that the My vision here is that the strategic planning committee, that the school committee will be leading the vision setting, and then a superintendent, once appointed, will do the how we get there component of the planning. So that's the thought here. But what does that process look like, given all of the community meetings that we need to be having anyway all of the content that has already been developed that is in service of a strategic plan. It's this resolution is here because it's time to start the process and we have completed a lot of these other components that will feed into it and I think it's time to synthesize it. That's that's my recap very quickly knowing that it's late but happy to questions, comments, etc.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Ruseau?
[Paul Ruseau]: Motion to approve as amended for the year.
[Jenny Graham]: Motion to approve as amended by Member Ruseau. Seconded by Member Olapade. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley. Member Graham. Yes. Member Intoppa. Yes. Member Olapade.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Reinfeld.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau, yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Motion passes and we will get the strategic planning subcommittee meeting on the calendar ASAP. Okay, we've got one more folks. 2025-31 offered by me, whereas an interim superintendent was appointed on December 11th, 2024 to serve in the leadership role from January 17th, 2025 through June 30th, 2026. yes, sorry, with immediate needs to stabilize the district in transition. And whereas the MCHSBC eligibility period union negotiations and the expansion of the school day at all levels became an immediate priority. And whereas the school committee is required to evaluate the superintendent- Motion to waive the reading. Motion to waive the reading by member- So long. Is there a second? Seconded by member Intoppa. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, the motion to waive the reading passes. So I will just give a quick introduction to what's here. Member Ruseau and I are the only ones who have ever gone through a superintendent evaluation process. So the goal of this was to do two things. One is to give us a timeline for doing that because we are somewhat off cycle. These things typically happen in May or June for the school year. But we want to make sure that we are evaluating the superintendent at the one year mark as important input to our coming decisions about the superintendent, the permanent appointment of a superintendent on July one, that Jesse does also require that you set goals and then you measure progress against those goals. Because of where we are in the process, this asks that we will use DESE's goals for evaluating new superintendents. And it also identifies the focus indicators on which I am proposing that we evaluate the superintendents. So there are many There are many focused indicators on the evaluation and school committees are instructed to pick one or two per category. So the resolution lists the recommendation that I made around the one or two from each category. There are four standards, but it also, for your reference, lists all the rest of the focus indicators that are possibly ones that we would use. and it does ask that the superintendent provide herself evaluation by the end of the calendar year this year, and that the superintendent's evaluation committee lead the process so that we are having this conversation by the end of January. In a nutshell. Happy to take any questions. Member Ruseau.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. One of the questions I have is for the focus indicators, Does the superintendent find that the list, those selected by member Graham in this resolution are acceptable? What do you think about those?
[Suzanne Galusi]: Dr. Melissi. Thank you. I don't know if I was expecting that question. I did review, of course, when the agenda was posted. It's work that's ongoing and that I am engaged in doing, and I find them completely appropriate.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. I thought they were appropriate as well, but I figured I should ask you in case you had thoughts on changing any of them.
[Suzanne Galusi]: No, I do not. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Member Olapade?
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you. It's a question, I think, for both the chair and I think member Ruseau, just as a clarifying question, as you both have had prior experience, I know that you mentioned that DESE has their own valuating criteria. Are we allowed to incorporate our own criteria or things that we believe as Medford specific district would benefit from having? That may also just be what you listed out as the prior experience, but I wanted to know, is that also been incorporated into this?
[Jenny Graham]: I can answer that. So in a typical cycle, the entire process starts with a goal setting where the superintendent says, this is what I think my goal should be. And we say, yes, we agree. So that's the Medford specific piece. And then at that time, we also say, and these indicators are the things that will Additionally, tell us that these goals are being met. So that's what you would do in a typical process. Because we did not do that. My proposal here is that we use the Jesse's rubric essentially for new superintendents in terms of what they should be doing in their first year, so that we're not deciding in October to on goals. and then we're going to evaluate them basically in December. So the idea behind that shift was because we did not do the formal goal setting when she started for all the reasons that the resolution lays out. So this is like a one-time kind of difference in the process. Thank you. Member Reinfeld.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yes, I'm hoping you can clarify, maybe for people watching and people new to the process, what is the role of community input into this evaluation process?
[Jenny Graham]: Sure. The role of community input can be any number of things. And when the evaluation subcommittee meets, they may choose to work with the superintendent to identify something like that. Her evaluation the superintendent's reflection on her own performance. It happens in this meeting, it is a matter of public record, the public is welcome to come speak for three minutes on any topic on our agenda so that stands and we can be really explicit about that. If we want to be, I think it's sort of a general standing rule but given where we are at in this process, that could be something that we want to take some extra care to describe. And then the committee goes through a process where we all individually evaluate based on the rubric, and then that gets aggregated to a single evaluation and that comes before this committee and then this committee has to accept that. So that is another opportunity for community input that is built into the process. But if the evaluation subcommittee wants to do something different, I think we are able to do those things if we want to.
[Nicole Branley]: Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Welcome. Member Branley.
[Nicole Branley]: I just looked at the website knowing that I'm on that superintendent evaluation member Olapati as the chair, but it says his name twice on our website instead of a third member. So who, I'm assuming it's either.
[Jenny Graham]: It's actually member Intoppa.
[Nicole Branley]: Intoppa, okay, perfect.
[Jenny Graham]: But member Rousseau and I have done this before and we do have templates and we'll make sure that member Olapati has what he needs to do this. Perfect.
[Nicole Branley]: And then I had just asked Will if he could update the webpage. Yes. with that.
[Jenny Graham]: He's probably doing it right now.
[Nicole Branley]: We had that talk earlier. I was like, I can send you an email. I know it. And then we could just, since I'm on this and I had already asked him if we could just update the voting and non-voting members on the MSBA process. Those aren't updated also. So if we could just add that to the website. Thank you. Thank you.
[Jenny Graham]: Any other questions? Member Ruseau.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes. The mayor also was a person who has done evaluations too.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes. I'm sorry.
[Paul Ruseau]: She's not in front of us. So it's, I did want to point that out. And I, I do have templates. I'm a template man. So a lot of, yes. I do think it's important to, you know, one of the things you'll discover doing an evaluation is that, you know, in literally no other setting, probably on the planet, you are evaluating in public on TV. So it is a very, when you have constructive criticism or just criticism, it's a very uncomfortable thing to do. Hopefully we won't have much, but it is a very, I do wish the legislature had found another way to do this. Are they working? Oh, okay. Oh, good. Oh, good. For the time being, right. I don't still think it's beneficial for the superintendent being evaluated. It's not beneficial for us. It's not a beneficial for the students if we're pulling our punches and, you know, and it's just not good. I also will say that our individual evaluations that we provide that gets combined, those are actually discoverable as well. So I mean, public record not discoverable. So, you know, just that'll be included in the instructions that you get, because I have a template for that too. So that nobody gets confused. Because it is, it is confusing. And if you've done any evaluation of anybody in your life, it will have never been like this before.
[Jenny Graham]: So certainly not. Member Intoppa.
[John Intoppa]: No further comment, motion to approve.
[Jenny Graham]: OK. Motion to approve by Member Intoppa, seconded by Member Reinfeld. Any other questions? Please call the roll.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Bramley. Member Graham.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Intoppa. Yes. Member Olipate. Yes. Member Reinfeld. Yes. Member Ruseau. Yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Motion passes. There are happily no reports requested tonight. I know you probably all share my excitement on that. We do have one condolence though. The members of the Medford School Committee expressed their sincerest condolences to the family of Patricia Ford, sister of Michael Ford, Medford High School custodian, and sister-in-law to recently retired administrative assistant, Mary Ann Ford. Pat was also a dedicated Medford public school teacher for more than 35 years, specializing in Title I special education. May we all please rise for a moment of silence. Our next regular meeting is on October 6th at Alden Memorial Chambers, Medford City Hall, in addition to Zoom. Sadly, it's the day before the DSP meeting, so we will not have an answer to who was selected until the meeting on the 20th. But please join us on the 6th. And is there a motion to adjourn? Motion to adjourn by member Reinfeld, unanimously seconded by member Branley. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Branley. Member Graham.
[Jenny Graham]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member and tapa. Remember all the party. Yes. Remember I felt. Remember so yes Maryland go curtain. Yes.
[Jenny Graham]: Seven in the affirmative zero in the negative, the meeting is adjourned. Have a good night everyone. Thank you for your patience.
|
total time: 74.2 minutes total words: 3132  |
total time: 22.52 minutes total words: 1509  |
total time: 0.95 minutes total words: 95  |
total time: 31.35 minutes total words: 2173  |
|
total time: 11.01 minutes total words: 918  |
total time: 16.51 minutes total words: 1503  |
total time: 2.17 minutes total words: 410  |
total time: 4.24 minutes total words: 459  |