[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: session to start. Are we recording? Yes. Thank you, Will. The second regular meeting of the Medford School Committee, Monday, January 26, 2026, will come to order. We have an executive session at 5.15 and our regular meeting's been recorded. The second regular meeting of the Medford School Committee will come to order. Today's Monday, January 26th, 2026. We have executive session at 5.15, and our regular meeting will start on or about 6 p.m. The meeting is held via Zoom due to the weather, and the meeting is being recorded. In the event that the Medford Public Schools is closed, which it is, we are doing Zoom only. The meeting can be viewed live on the Medford Public Schools YouTube channel, or through Medford Community Media on your local cable channel, Comcast Channel 9, 8, or 22, and Verizon Channel 43, 45, or 47. Participants can log or call in by using the following Zoom link, and the meeting ID is 933-7405-0945. Member Ruseau, if you could call the roll, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Here.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Mastroboni? Here. Member Olapade. Here. Member Parks. Here. Member Reinfeld.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Here.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau present. Mayor Long-Cooker.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Present. Seven present, zero absent. Dr. Galusi, I'm not sure if there's any, do we have any student reps? Let's see.
[Paul Ruseau]: We do have our student reps.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Alachi is on the call.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Oh, great. Welcome. Thanks for joining us. If we could all 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. Thank you. Number three, we have executive session. pursuant to General Laws 30A, Section A3, the Medford School Committee will convene an executive session to discuss collective bargaining with the Teamsters Local 25 custodians regarding a grievance from September 5th, 2025. And the Chair so declares executive session of the Medford School Committee pursuant to General Laws 30A, Section 21A to conduct a 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 multiple bargaining units and pending litigation. The Medford School Committee will reconvene in public session immediately following the conclusion of executive session at approximately 6 p.m.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Motion to enter executive session.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: by Member Reinfeld, seconded by? Second. Member Olapade, roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Mastroboni?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Rossell? Yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. On the affirmative, zero in the negative. We are going to go, motion for executive session has been approved. wait till it pops up on your screen to join the breakout room.
[Unidentified]: Good evening, everybody.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you for your patience while we were in executive session. I believe we have all members with us. We also invited the city council to join us at this meeting. So as members pop on, we will definitely acknowledge each member. I'm gonna go. Back to the agenda. We have good of the order. Does anybody have anything under the good of the order before I move on to section five? Other than school being canceled again tomorrow. While we clean out the lots, DPW is working very hard, but need another day. So I want to make that announcement right off the bat. Okay. We're going to move to, The consent agenda, we have approval of bills and payrolls, budget transfers, approval of capital purchases, approval of donations, Tufts University, a $1,000 donation to the Center for Citizenship and Social Responsibility. National Stuttering Association Conference, $177 donation by Elizabeth Gomez for three speech and language pathologists. We have approval of grants, Medford Arts Council grant, 3,700 Ellen McGlynn and Jason Campbell. Italian Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation has awarded $3,549 to the Metro Public Schools Italian Language Program. Approval of field trips, approval of meeting minutes from our regular meeting from January 5th, 2026. Is there a motion on the floor? Any questions? Thank you to our donors, their motion for approval.
[Aaron Olapade]: I'll motion to approve.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, Member Olapade. Seconded. Seconded by Member Mastroboni. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Mastroboni. Yes. Member Olapade.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks. Yes. Member Reinfeld. That a yes?
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yes, sorry.
[Paul Ruseau]: That's okay. Member Ruseau, yes? Mayor Longo, okay.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. The consent agenda is approved. We do not have any reports of subcommittee, and we have three reports of our superintendent. So I'm gonna turn it over to you, Dr. Glucy, for a Mustang moment, although I know it was weather permitting.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Yes, unfortunately, we had our high school best buddies club attending for this meeting, but due to the snow and the cancellation of school, they will be joining us at the next, or maybe we're rescheduling them so that they can join us for an in-person school committee meeting. So this evening, we do not have a Mustang moment, but we will make sure we have that next week.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Sounds great. We look forward to it. So I'll move on to number two. It's a summary of the Youth Behavior Risk Survey, Spring 2025. I just saw Catherine Dhingra from the City of Medford's Office of Prevention and Outreach. She's our manager. Join us. And Dr. Stacey Schulman, Director of Behavioral Health and Counseling for Medford Public Schools.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you, Catherine. Thank you, Dr. Shulman, for being here this evening and presenting about the Youth Risk Survey. I'm just double-checking that they are both able to unmute.
[Unidentified]: Yes.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Perfect. Okay, I will turn it over to the both of you. Thank you so much.
[Schulman]: Thank you. Good evening. Hi, I'm Stacey Shulman. I'm the Director of School Counseling and Behavioral Health for Medford Public Schools, and with me is Catherine Dhingra. She is the Office of Prevention and Outreach Manager. We're here to present data from our 2025 Youth Risk Behavior Survey. One big thing to note is that in 2025, Medford Public Schools transitioned to the Youth Risk Behavior Survey from the previous survey we had done, which is similar. which was the Community That Cares Youth Survey, which we had administered biannually since 2017. And the reason for doing so was to be able to have data which we could compare to like communities, state and national trends.
[Catherine Dhingra]: All right, so can everyone hear me? Okay, again, my name is Catherine Dingra, and I work out of the City of Medford's Health Department, and we are delighted to work so closely with the schools on understanding our students' health and wellness needs. And the YRBS is a nationally recognized evidence-based tool. It has anonymity, so it increases the honesty among students. Questions are rigorously tested, data is really used for identifying patterns and trends. And the findings that we found here really do align with what schools and providers are seeing. In addition to that, our public health staff facilitated four focus groups. So what we wanted to do was have some qualitative data that paired with some of the quantitative data we were seeing from the surveys. So next slide. So you can see our demographics from the middle school sample were really reflective of our student population and the demographics of the middle school so we really felt confident in the data that we were seeing from the middle school sample. And then our high school was a little different because to align with our YRBS communications and some challenges we were seeing from other districts, we pushed back the implementation date of the YRBS. which led to having less juniors and seniors participate in the survey. And where that we saw the biggest impacts of that were around substance use, particularly as we see substance use increases on as students progress through high school. And then the focus group. demographics. We had 20, 22 students participate in focus groups, but we really tried to work with school staff to identify different groups of students. And generally what we heard from the students in the focus group was that school culture and pride, especially tied to the new administration and supportive staff have improved. Many students described feeling more connected through sports, clubs, teachers, and some did mention some distressed, but they were more frustrated with things like facilities and shortened lunch. They also noted that assemblies, advisory activities, and clubs were seen as helpful for building belonging, but students wanted more active and engaging approaches. So those are just some of the highlight things that we learned from the focus groups. Next slide. So this, we're going to go into our student YRBS data. So in some of the following slides, you're going to see differences in outcomes across race and ethnicity or sexual orientation. It's just important to emphasize that these are not about deficits within the students. They really reflect how environment systems and access to support shape our young people's experiences. Our focus is on using these data points to strengthen our protective factors, which you'll hear more about, and really creating more supportive environments. So really using this data to drive how we can change the environment that our young people are in. I'll turn it over to Stacey.
[Schulman]: Thank you, Catherine. I'll talk a little bit about our student mental health data here. So overall, 19% of our middle schoolers and 20% of our high schoolers reported that their mental health was not good most of the time or always in the past 30 days. This was notably lower than the state level data, which was coming in at 31% of high schoolers reporting poor mental health in 2023. Our LGBTQ students reported significantly worse mental health outcomes than their heterosexual peers. This is, again, speaking to what Catherine was just noting, is highlighting some unequal experiences. For those students, this connects to what our literature shares with us in terms of making sure that we are making those students a priority for mental health care in our schools. Overall students reported 12-month depression symptoms. So feeling sad and hopeless almost daily for two plus weeks are the lowest since 2017, both for middle school and for high school students. You can see here that we use data from the Community That Cares Youth Survey, which we had previously asked a similar question to get that data from. So we're coming in at 25% for both high school and middle school students, which is a notable decline from previous years. Depression by race and ethnicity does have some discrepancies and differences in that data. So we wanted to highlight that the experience is not the same for everyone overall. And these are the strategies that we have within Medford Public Schools for our mental health. We have individual group counseling, of course, our Mustang All-Stars Mustang Way, which is sort of that tier one social-emotional learning levels with our circles and advisory. The PD we have for our faculty, highlighting a sense of belonging, which Catherine just spoke to was a real big highlight of our focus groups. We have our signs of suicide program in the secondary level, which is an evidence-based curriculum focusing on educating students on the signs of suicide and how to access health. Of course, our Michigan model health curriculum for K through 12. Our Nexus, which is our class for all elementary students focused on social emotional learning and executive functioning skills. And new in is we have a partnership with Cambridge Health Alliance to support our school adjustment Councilors with clinical supervision. So we have a PhD psychologist who is able to talk to our school adjustment Councilors to help them with new strategies they may need. This is another big announcement, which I'll be sending out to all caregivers this week, once we have the official QR code to send out. But through our partnership with Sandy Hook Promise and their partnership with BetterHelp, we'll be offering three months of free mental health therapy to all MHS students who are 14 and up, as well as all the adults within MPS.
[Catherine Dhingra]: Okay, so if you go to the next slide, we can see that our top alcohol remains the most used substance by Medford youth. Overall, across the country, statewide, and even here in Medford, we see that youth substance use rates are declining. So that's a really good thing. But one problem that we heard in our focus groups and our health teachers are hearing is that students perceive that everyone is doing it and that's something that we're working on. A key takeaway from our focus groups was that substance use, especially vaping and marijuana Marijuana is widely normalized among students and often framed as stress management tool, rather than a health risk. And we repeatedly heard about our bathrooms being a place of high substance use. If you look at the next slide. This slide reflects the data point that I mentioned earlier that really we can take a look at that trend data for our middle school students and get a good reflective use. We are concerned about students vaping at the middle school and we'll talk about some of the implementation strategies where we've pushed down to our middle school because of that. And then our high school data, we really don't have a good good reliable data source from this because of the lower you survey rates from our juniors and seniors this year. So we just have to be cautious with this data interpretation in our high school level for the substance use. Okay. Perceived risk of harm impacts students' use. As you can see, smoking cigarettes and using prescription drugs is seen as very harmful to our students, and we've seen that reflected in our use rates. As that's gone up, our use rates have gone down significantly. And then we've seen the perception of harm around marijuana. declined significantly in the past 10 years. And we hear it from youth that they're seeing the normalizing of it from everything from the hallways to billboards on 93. So that's just something that our health teachers and everyone is working hard at is increasing that risk of harm. So use rates go down. And then our students perceived ease of access. In general, students were most likely to see that alcohol and vapes were easy to get. And in the focus groups, we asked how they get them. And they said, It's, you know, it's seen as normalized and they're often accessed through their social networks parties, older peers, and on Snapchat that was a big source of accessing alcohol and vapes. The strategies and this is something where Medford should be really proud of the multiple tiers of strategies around substance use prevention. Rachel Perry and the health education team do a fabulous job of implementing the evidence based Michigan model, but they've also supplemented that with catch my breath. which is a vaping-specific strategy. And most recently, one of our health department staff went in and did a training for all the health teachers on utilizing all the materials within Catch My Breath and making sure everyone felt appropriately able to implement it, even pushing down into all the middle school ages. We've been implementing the tier two I decide with with the staff at the high school and we have now pushed that down to the middle school and that's for any student that gets caught using substances or is under the influence, instead of getting. getting sent to detention or getting suspended. Now they are part of this intervention strategy facilitated by some of the school staff. And we've seen over 30 students refer to this program this year. So we're seeing a lot of great things that come out of it. The school has a wellness coach, Gavin, who is able to support students whose substances are negatively impacting their lives. He's there at the high school halftime. We've got peer leaders in the high school now. We have the SBIRT screening tool where Medford's really doing the best implementation of that because they're using outside wellness coaches to screen students, and we're seeing students being really honest in their conversations, and we're able to then refer them to help. And then, of course, the vape detectors. That is one of the reasons why we have over 30 referrals to the iDecide program. They are working. Students talked about them a lot during the focus group as a strategy for kind of having students think twice. So those are some of our of the great strategies being implemented in Medford.
[Schulman]: Thanks, Catherine. For student safety, most of our high school students and middle school students reported thinking their neighborhood is extremely safe or safe from crime, which was nice to hear. Ninety seven percent of middle schoolers and ninety four high schoolers. They also talked about feeling safe at school. So about 83% of high school students and 87% of middle school students reported feeling very safe at school. Students who identified as Hispanic and Latino were more likely to report skipping school in the past 30 days due to feeling unsafe at or on the way to school. Because the survey was implemented last spring, we are noting that this data is likely due to ICE. So it's pretty depressing to see some of these stats come in. Although reports of bullying declined as students transitioned from middle to high school or to high school, middle schoolers who identified as black were most likely to report experiencing bullying online or on school property. Medford students reported similar rates of having Well, the question was sexual things done to them or were forced to do sexual things they did not want ever to that available state data. There's no state comparison for the middle school and high school students in 23 or middle school students in 21, but you can note here 11% of Massachusetts versus 9% of Medford. LGBTQ students were more likely to experience unwanted sexual contact. These are strategies that we have in Medford Public Schools for student safety. We have the Get Real sexual health curriculum. in our health classes, the mentors in violence prevention lessons as well. Portal to Hope, which is very well connected to Medford, comes in and does presentations about domestic violence, but also about healthy relationships, which is really important. Of course, we have our social emotional learning to include restorative practices and our Sandy Hook Promise anonymous reporting system. They've been, again, excellent partners to us.
[Unidentified]: All right.
[Catherine Dhingra]: So the risk factors that we just went over really help us understand where youth may be vulnerable, but it's really the protective factors, especially trusted adults, supportive relationships that play a critical role in buffering stress and reducing them. So when we know that when young people feel connected to caring adults, they are much more likely to seek help and build resilience and experience positive outcomes. So one thing that's great to note that Medford High School students report trusted adults and their rate of reporting that is higher than the state average and I've been looking at trusted adult data for Over two decades and you know having 81% of students that recognize a trusted adult may seem low but that is high for a high school, and we heard a lot of positive things coming out of our focus groups of why of what. the school is doing to promote that. But as you can see by the next slide, results do vary based on race and ethnicity at both the middle and the high school. So that's something that we can look at as we can see Black students experiencing the lowest rate of trusted adults at both the middle school and high school level. And this is why, you know, one of the reasons that, you know, if we look at trusted adults outside of the school, the partnership between the city, the health and outreach department, and the schools are so important because we can look at what strategies are we implementing across the city to build trusted adults, amongst different groups and what support systems can we put in. So that's something that we're taking a look at and the ways that people like our liaisons and our connectors can do some of that work. supportive relationships. We know that our overall students have supportive relationships, but that changed significantly for our LGBTQ plus population. One thing we did hear from, we did a focus group with a group of LGBTQ plus students. And they did report that they noticed an increased representation of diverse staff and clubs that help students feel seen and connected. And they noticed that change and recognizing that being a positive difference that they've seen. And sleep, something that we want to keep an eye on. We understand that sleep is directly impacted to learning, impacts learning and so many other protective factors. So knowing that less than 50% of our middle school students and only 30% of our high school students are getting the sleep they need. And I do have to say our youth action team is actually implementing a sleep update. They were taking a look at some of the preliminary data and are implementing a positive sleep norms campaign throughout the high school. So we'll see what that looks like. And then we see sleep again amongst race and ethnic groups. different outcomes. And then physical activity, something that we're looking at. Difference, both the middle school and the high school, highest amongst our white students. And then nutrition, something that we are looking at as well amongst the community partners and sharing this data across different leaders in the district. And then some strategies that have been impactful for protective factors, a lot of professional development, we're working with the schools to provide resources to provide professional development, really focusing on a sense of belonging. I know the schools recently at the last Professional Development Day had some great trainings. Breakfast carts, something simple as breakfast carts being available in the lobby so students that didn't have time to get breakfast, don't have time to go to the cafeteria, can grab something to eat. Daily movement breaks, lots of athletic opportunities. I know the high school having recess if they finish lunch has been very positive. We have a YouthWorks employment program that has been successful working with the school to recruit students that don't typically have work experience at a young age, and collaboration across the region. We are excited to launch Caregiver University this year. We'll start out with some workshops on things like social emotional topics, substance use, and even gambling to provide caregivers with the information that they need to be able to build these protective factors and reduce risk factors for their young people. And speaking of gambling, we've been doing some work around this because it is an emerging something that we're taking a look at as sports betting and online gaming have become legalized across Massachusetts. And you can see our 2023 data from Massachusetts, but we recently did a survey for young adults in Medford. And what we found was really interesting. And we heard from our students in the focus groups that online gambling and sports betting have gotten a lot of excitement amongst young people, with students naming platforms like DraftKings, FanDuel, and PrizePix as being very popular. Students described gambling as adding excitement to sports and a lot of appeal. And one student openly endorsed gambling, trying to convince other students in the focus group they should do it more. So it really shocked our staff. And we really do want to do more across the city. And we have a group that's focused on looking at gambling prevention across the city. So we're very excited about this coalition work that we're launching. And I'll turn it over to Stacey for the last slide.
[Schulman]: Thanks, Catherine. So again, the Youth Risk Behavior Survey, we hope to continue with and increase our participation, which will allow us to align with comparative local data and identify some of the challenges and strengths across Medford, but also across our communities at large. And the biggest part of it is to inform our prevention and supportive strategies, to use comparable standardized data. I'm really grateful to, obviously, Catherine and the Office of Prevention and Outreach for partnering with us. This is a big undertaking, certainly, to switch into a new survey, and we look forward to increasing data for years to come. Thank you.
[Unidentified]: Thank you, Ms.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Schulman and Ms. Dhingra for the very detailed presentation. And thank you for all the hard work you're doing on all issues facing our students. I'm gonna turn it over to members of the committee that may have questions. I believe, let's see who was first.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Member Reinfeld, okay. All right, thank you so much. I really appreciate the presentation, particularly the juxtaposition of the data and the strategies. I thought that was a really nice way of laying this out and I appreciate it. I do have some questions. about the strategies. Do we have any way of assessing how often they're used? Obviously, some of those things are built into the curriculum and how effective students find them. So those kind of tier one type things, everyone is receiving them. So how are we mapping the strategies to changes and trends?
[Schulman]: Sure, I'm happy to answer that. So we keep data, certainly all the tier one strategies is something all students are having, right? So we're looking at this data from our secondary level, certainly the use for behavior survey, are these like elementary level interventions potentially having an impact? That being said, there are so many compounding factors that go into this. So it's hard to parse out what is working in that from that large longitudinal data level. From the secondary level, we do keep data in terms of students who are accessing those tier two supports. So if you were talking about our, for example, our signs of suicide program, we track every year the number of students who are noting that they need help in the moment, they're connected with a Councilor, and then we get them the help that they need right away, right? So we're looking at that over time. and tracking how many students are connected to our wellness coach. Those are just two data points. As Catherine noted, we're using our data from the vape detectors to connect students to those services. Because some of these things are new in the last couple of years, I think it'll take us a little while. to see the impact.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Absolutely. And for context, I sat in on a joint meeting of various student councils. I think we still have one of our student reps on the call. But mental health was one of the breakout sessions that I went into. And they were talking about students' awareness and access and trying to get some information about what are students aware of as far as those extra resources and do they find them effective. So this is something that I think students really want to know as well. And then I guess similar on the strategies, what about, so you showed a couple of real discrepancies in the data and it's out and I'm curious what you have to bring those closer to a more universal picture. The vape sensors, you can proactively identify what's happening there. What about those data? And I know I've heard Dr. Galussi talk about some of the strategies happening in the administration around hiring and trusted adults. So I'm curious how that will be playing out over the next couple of
[Schulman]: more like in terms of student groups.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yeah, like in terms of what are the, to make LGBTQ students feel more connected, what kind of, I saw the GSA, I know there've been conversations and how those targeted interventions are happening based on the data without introducing stigma and feeling targeted in a negative way.
[Schulman]: Sure, absolutely. I think it's just student groups to be mindful of that they may need support and to make sure they know what supports are available for them.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Great. And I was really happy to see professional development top on the list of strategies there and awareness around the staff.
[Schulman]: Yes, absolutely.
[Erika Reinfeld]: A clarifying question on the data.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Remember, Reinfeld, could I just add on one quick thing before you go to your next question? I also do want to say two other points about your last comment. One is, I think that was also our intentional and purposeful reason for also creating and introducing rainbow clubs at the elementary level because we want to make sure we are starting a lot of this support and education at the earlier ages so that we can hopefully see some of that data trend in a different way. And I would also say that some of the data might be maybe like difficult to look at, but one of the things that we have tried to do is leverage our partnership with City Year, who this year has also put some student teachers in our schools. And those are student teachers of color. And one of the key goals for Metro Public Schools that we do not have is a diversified workforce that looks like our students. And so in some of these data points, where we want students to feel like they have a trusted adult for them to be able to go to. I would say that part of our work is also making sure that we are doing what we can to diversify our workforce. We have City Year as one of those ways to do it. And Dr. Talbot is also working with a lot of higher educational institutions to make sure that we're able to have a workforce that represents our students.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Great, thank you. Yes, I remember that from your report last time and I appreciate putting it in the context of this. A clarifying question on the year-to-year comparisons. When we're seeing the state data, is that YRBS data or is that the comparable survey to what we had been using previously as well. I think I'm mostly wondering what the error bars are and how comparable it is with the new survey. How many grains of salt do we need to be saying this 4% jump is meaningful?
[Catherine Dhingra]: That is YRBS data. So we we did the state YRBS data. They typically don't have middle school data available.
[Erika Reinfeld]: So we have that for this. We're using that for the state, but when we're looking at our trend, we're looking at I decide and or communities that care, sorry.
[Catherine Dhingra]: Right, yeah. So past 30-day use. Some things we could do trend data on and some things we couldn't. We had to look at how the question was asked. And one thing I did want to note too is that we recently got a Partnerships for Success grant for the federal grant that's 1.25 million over the next five years. And that is where we could bring in outside evaluators to help us put a lot of this data together. So we can look to the school committee and say, what type of data would you like to see? And they will be available to put school culture data together and some of the other data going forward. So we just got that grant. starting in November so stay tuned for more.
[Erika Reinfeld]: That's really exciting because I know part of the shift to YRBS meant we were losing some of the panorama questions that we had before that were really specifically focused on school culture based on the analysis that was done before my time on the school committee but was still really relevant. A quick on the focus groups, were those done in parallel with the survey or were they done as a response to the survey? So were you asking the focus groups about things you saw in the survey or were you just collecting that same baseline data with the focus groups?
[Catherine Dhingra]: We actually met with the school administration team, and we looked at some of the preliminary data coming out of the YRBS, but also wanting more contextual data around things. So that's where we came up with a list of questions. And we could provide an executive report of the focus group for you.
[Erika Reinfeld]: OK. And then when you say students want actively engaging approaches, is that referring to in classrooms, in clubs? What does that mean? It was a great comment, and I see it coming in our education plan for the high school, but where were they requesting actively engaging approaches?
[Catherine Dhingra]: I think that was in reference to some of the school cultural building activities.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Okay. And then my very last comment is just, I think there is a huge amount of information and questions on this sleep idea, and I would love to explore that further. I'm not going to take the time in this meeting because I see lots of hands up after me, but that is really important to talk about in terms of culture, in terms of academic homework loads, school start times, scheduling of activities, all of that. So thank you for highlighting it to be continued. Thank you so much.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, Member Reinfeld. We have Member Ruseau, Member Olapade, Member Parks, and then our student reps. So I'll turn it over to you, Member Ruseau.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you. I don't have as many questions. Actually, I probably do. Gambling thing is something that is deeply disturbing. And I'm wondering what efforts, are we including a lot of parent education in that? Because I think a lot of parents, if they're not gamblers themselves, assume my kid can't even get a lottery ticket or a scratch ticket. That's just not a thing because stores don't want to lose their licenses. And so to know that kids can gamble as if they're millionaires, frankly, with these apps, I think parents are going to be a bit shocked, is my guess. I mean, I only heard about it on the radio recently, the amount of kids that are actually using apps in middle school, even though all the apps say you have to be 18, or what is it, 21 even, I don't know. So I just wanted to ask, is there Is there an actual program? And I mean, it's such a relatively new problem, there may not be something we can buy off the shelf, but whatever it is, I just hope we can include parent education in that, because I think that's, there's only so much we can do when it comes to kids and their phones.
[Catherine Dhingra]: I'm glad you said that because that is actually going to be one of our first Caregiver University workshops that we're offering this spring. And that is something we use some of the Gaming Commission funds to do that intensive study on youth and young adult gambling in Medford. We actually have 150 page report coming out on our findings and We heard from a lot of students, coaches, things that helped drive our strategies that we'll be rolling out. But that is something that we found out what, you know, the spectrum, like what, you know, video gaming to online betting to playing poker and this parent and caregiver education will address all of that.
[Unidentified]: Thank you so much.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Remember old potty.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you. And thank you so much for this report. I think this is really comprehensive and is giving us, the committee and myself, a really good idea about where we are. I had a couple of questions. So I know towards the beginning of the presentation, you did note how to interpret the data, given the fact that there's some subjectivity to it. And I understand that this does not always include or does not always indicate things inherently. There's some understanding that needs to be added before we can kind of pull away any immediate expectations. One of the things I did wonder about was the general mental health section. So just really, really early on, you know, it's noting that there is 19% of middle schoolers are noting some, you know, not good mental health and then 20% of high schoolers. When we talk about generalizations like that, and again, like we're using sample sizes, was there any follow-up questions that were added to kind of clarify what not good meant, or is it just the student's interpretation of the question that you allowed to be used?
[Schulman]: That's a great question. So I wrestle with this as a mental health clinician myself with all of these surveys, because this is not a clinical diagnosis. It's certainly a very short question that we're asking them, but it is left to their interpretation. And then what I, you know, we need to remind ourselves, that's how they're perceiving themselves. So whether they're clinically depressed or they're clinically anxious, doesn't really matter. They're feeling like themselves that they're not doing well. And I think that's really important.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you. Yeah. And I had the same question or wonder is that regardless of how, you know, we may want to interpret it, I think that the student's response to that question, I think is what's important to kind of be a good indicator of kind of how we're going to move forward. The second portion is more of a recognition more than a question, but I do appreciate it being added. When we move towards, I think slide 15, the strategies for student mental health, I did really appreciate that there's recognition that how we're going to offer some additional responses to this, to these questions, is by also including the adults in the conversation. A lot of research has been done in the last couple decades from DESE, from the Department of Ed, from the federal government, for example. A lot of private organizations and institutes have talked about the link between parent-guardian support as to how they impact student success rates. And not just parents, but, you know, caregivers and faculty in the classrooms as well. how we're linking those successes directly improve chronic absenteeism, for example, student outcomes, testing scores, graduation rates, and college pursuit. So I did appreciate that because I know that a lot of people are having some questions about how we're being impacted. To move on a little bit, this is a question I think for our central admin, but I think also potentially might be something we want to develop going forward. If we move on to slide 30, the trusted adults section. Is there any professional development that's been woven into our general standard for our staff about how to, I think, create and develop those relationships with students or to continue being sources of support other than just being the kind of daily teacher in the classroom? I don't know if the superintendent knows at all if that's built in or if there's any separated teaching about that.
[Suzanne Galusi]: I would probably, the way I would answer that is to say specifically like separated to that exact context, um, not to date what we have done for the past, uh, I would say two years has really been focusing on the, the global piece of that whole child by bringing in, as previously stated in some of the presentations to this body, bringing in, uh, the gleam network and where we're focusing on our instructional practices to make sure that students feel that sense of affirmation and engagement and meaning in their learning spaces is something that's been a big priority for us in these past two years. I would say that there are other additional supports in which teachers are there and available for students. in terms of like the content that is given to students through the advisory, through Nexus, through health curriculum. There are pieces of that woven into times of the day like that, but it also could be a growth area in terms of like specifically to your point about trusted adults. That's an area that I can have conversations with Ms. Schulman, Dr. Talbot, and the principals. and directors.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thank you. And I do note that I think, especially given right now, I think there's a lot of questions about the safety of our students and faculty. You can see that some of the concern about the Hispanic and Latino population are feeling heightened concern and anxiety about safety in the schools, about going to school. We don't need to get into a whole conversation about the specifics about why that may be right now. I think we all can kind of pull some assumption by that. But I do think that trying to have a conversation about how we are making sure that our staff feel like they can provide additional support to our students socially, emotionally, intellectually, what have you, especially in times of heightened concern and anxiety. I think it's probably a really good thing to kind of think about a little bit as we move forward. But I think to your point, it's kind of already built into you know, just being a teacher in general and a staff member in our schools, that is an expectation about providing that safe space. But obviously the questions that some students may be having and parents may be adding some additional questions. And then the last question slash point is, if we move on to slide, I think 38, you know, the strategies for protective factors. The breakfast carts I think is a phenomenal idea, just because you know again we talked a lot about creating the space for students be successful and I think having having a good meal in the morning is probably a good starting point. And obviously I'd like to see all these populations increase especially our lower our lower population percentages. When we talk about, you know, and there's a lot of conversation at the state level about the cost of things and about our universal food free meal programs and how there's some question or concern from the state delegation, if we can actually afford to maintain our universal free food plan just because of budget cuts and things like that. With breakfast carts, at this particular moment, I would wonder or hope that that would be covered under the free plan. But if we move forward and there's some change, and God forbid, I hope that we can have a conversation about moving forward, about finding other ways to source that food if we want to move forward with breakfast cards. How we do that, obviously, is not quite there yet, but I'm just conscious of the fact that we're going to, if we want to provide that strategy for the students, we need to be careful about what that will look like financially if things change. That's all I got. Thank you so much.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, Member Olpade. Our student rep, Olachi, and then Member Reinfeld.
[Alachie Yeager]: Okay, I'm going to hopefully you can hear me. I'm sorry. My voice is a bit. Um, but sick, but, um, yeah, I, I just, I guess I just really wanted to say, like. You know, whenever we look at these, the same data at the regional or the state level, it's always really, really insightful. And this is sort of my 1st time seeing it on the district level. And so I think that it's really important that this data is collected. I think. Um, like personally as, uh, maybe a target of, you know, some of the, uh, someone who's, um, maybe in some of those more marginalized groups that has been subject to a lot of those things that, you know, you, uh, try and target for on the survey. Um, it does mean a lot. I think it means maybe more than it would otherwise. Um, is there any effort currently to make this data accessible to students or like more accessible to students?
[Schulman]: Thank you, yes, we can certainly figure out a way to make that accessible to our students. Great, thank you so much.
[Catherine Dhingra]: Cool, great question. And I did wanna say something now that we have the youth action teams, both at the high school and the middle school, one thing they do, they do a lot of education, they do the Mustang Newsflash, I forget what the newsletter is called, but they actually put information about, they feature a trusted adult And they'll start to take some of the data from this and spin it in a positive way, showing students that most students are making healthy choices, things like that. So communicating this data in ways that is meaningful to students. But we'd love to have students look at this data and help them interpret it.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Great. Thank you. Member Reinfeld and Member Mastroboni.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yes, I realized I had wanted to ask to what extent you're studying and or exploring the nuance of. in person versus online. I know the bullying stats have bullying on school property and bullying online, but I'm curious what kind of data you're collecting around social media and just general digital health, both for students and also for the caregiver university. But that's a huge piece of this. I imagine if I get into the data, I'll see a lot more of it. But if you could speak about that component, that is really important for how students go through the world right now.
[Schulman]: It's unbelievably important. And I also want to go back to your previous point of how much it connects to sleep. And how what we're finding, this is not in the report, but just from like a anecdotal portion of it. We're finding students reporting they're not sleeping because they're up on their devices and they're either playing games or they're trying to connect with other peers. But there's a lot of device use that's happening during the evenings when they should be sleeping. The question around bullying did have a differential in terms of in person and online. That was a question that highlighted that I don't think that the survey pulls out much more information related to a differential around that and I would have to go back to look at. if they were asking around social media use. But yes, this is a huge thing that we're looking at. This is certainly impacting our youth in many ways. And it's connected to all of these factors.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yeah, great. Because I think the interpersonal components look different. I think we all know this. They look different face to face than they do online. Even as adults, we see that.
[Schulman]: Yes, absolutely. But one thing I will highlight about online use is that our anonymous reporting system has been immensely helpful in terms of students having a platform to either tell us about something that's going on with themselves or a peer.
[Erika Reinfeld]: And are there specific strategies in place? You mentioned a lot of the protective strategies and the interventions, but to the digital education and help people be aware of their digital health and what this does, the relationship with their mental health.
[Schulman]: Yes, I believe it is part of the health curriculum.
[SPEAKER_14]: I know we recommended it when we did the health curriculum review, and I see a lot of those changes in these lists, which is great. But I'm curious where that shows up.
[Schulman]: I would have to defer to Rachel Perry to speak about that.
[SPEAKER_14]: All right. Thank you.
[Unidentified]: Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Again, very appreciative of the presentation. Great questions, great work. If nobody has any further questions, we can move on to the next agenda item. But again, thank you so much for all the hard work. I'm going to turn it over to Dr. Galusi, interim superintendent, and Dr. Kim Talbot, assistant superintendent for academics and instruction to update us on the proposed educational plan for the Medford High School building project.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you so much. As Mr. Pippicelli works on screen sharing, I'm just going to take this opportunity to say good evening and thank you for this opportunity to share the work behind Medford High School's educational plan, which is a core deliverable as part of the MSBA process and a critical step in the PDP phase, which we'll talk about tonight. Dr. Kim Talbot, our Assistant Superintendent for Academics and Instruction, and I are going to walk through how this plan captures our district's educational priorities and translates them into the learning environments, student supports, program needs that are all going to help shape the design of the new high school. Tonight, we are also joined by members of Medford City Council. Thank you so much, member Leming and Mulaney. Hope nobody else popped on since I first kind of scanned. For joining us for this really important meeting and conversation, we really greatly appreciate the support. We also are joined by our owners project manager, Leftfield, and our design team, SMMA, who I'm going to introduce in just a minute. And we do, again, just want to thank everybody for being here and appreciate the support. So our goal this evening is to provide clarity on the educational plan, highlight those key themes that emerged from our work, and show how the educational plan are going to guide the next phases of this MSBA process and our decision making.
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: The screen's good, right?
[Suzanne Galusi]: Yes, I can see it. Thank you so much, Will. You can go to the next one. Perfect. So I spoke a little bit about this, but our agenda, we're going to talk about the timeline and kind of how we got to the place that we're at, as well as introduce our partners. We're going to do a review of the educational plan and a discussion around that. And you can just say, thank you. So this slide really highlights those key milestones that moved Medford Public Schools from the beginning of the MSBA process to establishing the project scope and team. So it began in April 2023 when we submitted our statement of interest for Medford High School and really began the MSBA partnership process. In December of 2023, the MSBA Board of Directors approved us and we were able to move forward in this process, which is a really big, major step in advancing the project. And then April 2024, we formed the School Building Committee. which was created in essence to provide oversight, transparency, and an asset in community-aligned decision-making throughout this process. Module one, as you can see here, is the eligibility period. And during that time, Medford and MSBA worked on project goals. We had to produce things around enrollment and projections. really narrowed down around our enrollment. We were approved with a little back and forth for an enrollment at Medford High School through grades 9 through 12 at about $13.95. And in addition to that number, we were also approved for the centralization of an early childhood center, which would be comprised of our existing and expanding MEEP, which is our preschool programming, Kids Corner, which is our municipal daycare, as well as Medford Family Network. As we advanced to module two, which was the forming of this team, the district selected Left Field as our project, our owner's project management team, and began working with them last summer and maybe end of spring, but June of 2025 for this educational plan. And SMMA came on board as our design team and really began working with us on the development of our educational plan around October of 2025. Next slide, thank you. So this slide, as previously stated in April, the school committee appointed a 25-member school committee, excuse me, school building committee, which is made up of Medford's educational leaders, elected and city officials, as well as community members that are listed here. This committee reflects a strong cross section of voices and expertise and for the core areas needed in this process, which is going to help guide the project. Through the level of engagement of this team and the thoughtful dialogue and collaboration throughout this process has been essential in moving the work forward. And even though we may have seen some people leave the committee and new members join the committee, both for past members as well as present members, we are deeply appreciative of their dedication and leadership. that they have shown throughout this process thus far and their investment to really make sure that we are building a flagship for the Medford community. So thank you to the Medford Comprehensive School Building Committee. This brings us to our owners project manager group left field. On the call with us tonight is Macalino, Jen Carlson, and Linda Laporto. I hope nobody else kind of sneaked on before I looked. But you can see that they are the project managers for this work and have been deeply involved in every phase thus far since they have joined us. Their expertise and guidance have been essential to us in helping us navigate each step of this MSBA process. We're grateful for their partnership, their professionalism, their responsiveness, and look forward to continued partnership through each phase of this work. From SMMA tonight joining us is Matt Rice and Rosemary Park. Matt Rice is a project manager and Rosemary Park is one of the educational experts and architects, we are grateful to our design team. for their leadership and expertise in guiding us through the design and the educational planning work that is associated with this MSBA process. And it's important work because that's the work that really reflects Medford's vision and continued work in making sure that we are building something that meets the needs of all of our students, our staff, and our community. So thank you, SMMA and left field. As we move on, if people have joined our community presentations previously, they may have seen a slide very similar to this. This shows the MSBA project a little bit like in breath. What we're doing tonight is we're really kind of drilling down to the pieces that is highlighted here. So this is the phase right now that we're in, in the development and the definition of the educational plan. the educational program and what options that we have for us moving forward. This is the preliminary design program phase that we're in right now. And it is during this phase in which the educational plan is developed. And that is what we're going to speak about tonight. It is through this plan that captures our district vision for learning and ensures that the design matches what that vision is. for our building and what we need now and into the future. Thank you. So you can go to the next slide, Mr. Pippicelli. Thank you. So this slide really talks a lot about what is the educational plan? What are those key dates that we're here to discuss tonight? And so in summary, the key pieces of what an educational plan is throughout this MSBA process, if I were to put it simply, I would say it's our North Star. So it is a document that is going to ensure that our new high school is designed around our current and future pedagogy and instructional practices and vision for that in our schools and our student experience. It is not a generic fill-in-the-blank template. it is something that is targeted specifically for Medford Public Schools and the Medford community. This document is something that for all intensive purposes needs to be the bridge between what our vision is and what the reality is of the building. So it clarifies the why behind our teaching practices and our learning practices, and then the how of how the spaces need to support that vision. So the educational plan, is the why and the how. The work of the educational plan was grounded, and I think this is really important to note in the voices of our students, our educators, our community members, and our staff, because we want and need to make sure that this plan reflects the real needs and the real experiences within Medford Public Schools. So the result of the educational plan should be that we are able to create a future-ready, sustainable high school that functions not only as a school, but as a welcoming community, hub, and a place built for flexibility, student agency, and purposeful, joyful learning. Now, all that said, I think it's important to note that the key submission date. So right now, the purpose for this meeting is the initial submission of the educational plan. That will be next school committee meeting on February 2nd. That allows this to go for some draft revisions and then February 25th. The final submission after those revisions as part of MSBA will be at the end of June, as you see here, June 25th. So right now, this is the initial submission. You can go to the next slide. Thank you. This slide, I think, is really important for you to see the intersection of how the educational plan, which we are here for tonight, informs the educational program and vice versa. It really reflects the iterative process that this is in developing an educational plan. And so it really also mirrors intentionally how we approach things here too within the district, which is with collaboration, with reflection, and with refinement over time when we're getting stakeholder input. So you can see that the educational plan, as I've previously stated, the why and the how, That is going to inform the educational program, which really talks about what those spaces should be. And you can see how they talk to one another on this slide. Both of those documents are going to inform the overall building size and design. Thank you. And so in this slide, tonight, we're here and we're going to speak about three phases of the process. I am going to, I have kind of covered the beginning phase. I'm going to speak about phase one here, and then I'm going to turn it over to Dr. Talbot to talk about phase two and phase three. So phase one of the educational plan was everything we started before SMMA came on. So you can see here with this timeline, left field joined us. during our administrative retreats last June 2025. And that's when they laid out what the scope of this work is. They introduced the educational plan work to our administrative team and our directors who worked on the initial draft of compiling what instructional practices and education looks like now and what we hope for it to be and what we are working for it to be and so that was initially done in June and then July, August, and September, directors worked on that with their teams and their teachers. In order to help build some of that context that is just helpful in building and developing an educational plan, Left Field also helped us I'm sorry, blanking on the words, schedule building tours of other newly built high schools. And we had a bunch of them scheduled throughout the summer. We had administrators, we had some teachers join us so that they were able to tour high schools, get an understanding for what is possible and where we can dream and what matches our current context and where we've been working through our professional development to get. All of that knowledge and work from the summer came in at the beginning of the school year. And the first two months of school was directors working with teachers in their specific departments around developing this educational plan for what it is now and what we want it to be. And all of that feedback went into the development of that plan. Then around November, October, SMMA came in and we moved into phase two and phase three of the development of the educational plan. And Dr. Talbot is going to lead us through phase two and phase three.
[yGcuIBQZTjc_SPEAKER_00]: So in phase two, we are so grateful to working with SMMA on the visioning process because they led us through a rigorous 48 hours worth of visioning across a variety of stakeholders. And we really appreciate their work. So we had 60 department program meetings. We engaged in a student shadow day. There were four educational leadership team meetings. There were three building tours, two visioning days with staff and students. And I want to underscore again, you can see in some of these pictures, the collaborative nature of our work together. There were students, teachers, administrators, and central office administrators working together to imagine what the future of Medford High School could be. Slide, Will. So here are some scenes of the different kinds of ways that SMMA engaged our team in designing a Medford High School that was gonna meet the needs of our students. We started with a shadow day in November, and I have to say this for me was one of the most professionally rewarding experiences. My team followed Emily, you can see her pictured in the center picture here, and we followed her through three periods of the day. There were multiple teams following students from arrival, through their days, navigating the cafeteria for lunch to really get a sense for what education is at Medford High School currently and how the building supports it. And we were really excited to hear about the students in our debrief about what they felt the barriers were from the building and from instruction for helping them to thrive. SMMA also engaged our ed leadership team in school tours. We visited three schools in one day of new construction, not all high school, but all of them were comprehensive schools. The purpose of these tours was to help our teams dream as to how space could really help students unlock their potential. And we saw some things that we loved, and we saw some things that gave us pause. Our visioning team met on two full days. You can see us here pictured with post-it notes, and standing up, and markers, and building with blocks, and filling in squares, and really elevating the voices of our students. These visioning sessions also included community members, members of the building committee, and members of school committee. It should be noted that Marta Cabral, the principal of the high school, took great care in ensuring that all staff were invited into this process, whether in the tours or the ed visioning sessions or the educational leadership sessions, so that everybody's voice could be seen and elevated. Slide, please. So through that exhaustive work, 48 hours we counted, so through that exhaustive work and looking at the strong foundation that the department directors had set in their initial draft of the educational plan, we came to the vision that a comprehensive, integrated high school where academics, CTE learning and accessibility flourish to support multiple pathways and identities within a school community is the future that we wanted for the city of Medford and for Medford High School. Through those visioning sessions, our partners at SMMA helped us to elevate these six goals here, which you will see woven throughout the 60-page ed plan that's attached. Our goals for the future are to create a school where every student, educator, and family feel seen, valued, and belongs, to create a welcome and accessible community hub that supports learning, engagement, and connection during and beyond the school day, where learning experiences that are purposeful, relevant, rigorous, joyful, and connected to the real world happen every day. to create a building that is flexible, purposeful, and human-centered with spaces that support collaboration, movement, and multiple modes of teaching and learning. We're developing a building today that's going to last us for 30 years. And so we know we need to be flexible. Most of all, we want to create a space that centers student voice and agency and leadership. And there was no more rewarding moments in all of those 48 hours of work together where students stood up and spoke their truth. The rooms weren't silent listening to what they had to say and taking to heart their thoughtful considerations for what they wanted the students who come behind them to experience. And finally, we want a future ready building that is adaptable, sustainable, and able to evolve with the changing student needs and educational practices. You can find, by the way, the full version of this report on the building project website under phase three. The full version of the report has all of those beautiful charts and prioritization work that we did together is all laid out as well as these goals. So here's what you'll see in this version of our Medford educational plan. As a reminder, this plan serves as a reflection of the current way of instruction and envisions a mode of instruction that students really deserve. So in this plan, we've imagined several enhancements to programming over the next couple of decades. And we're focused on designing a building where these changes are possible. So on this slide, what you see is a table of contents for the education plan. While it is not a cookie cutter mold, it is the format that the MSBA needs to see what our vision is, our current practice, and future practice. So this is the table of contents of what you'll find in the report. It's lengthy, so we'll call out a few key enhancements that you might want to be on the look for as they connect with the six goals that I said on the previous slide. You'll want to be on the lookout for key enhancements to instructional practices. Instructional shifts that elevate student collaboration and agency, This, by the way, as a note to our prior presentation, is also a way to build trust between students and adults in the building. Doing the work through the work, working together on complex real-world problems, that's the instruction that our students deserve. Other key enhancements to instructional practices are flexible and intentional use of learning spaces for both students and staff. We recognize this is going to represent a change in how our community approaches teaching and learning. And also the expansion of CTE programming, something that we were all excited about in every meeting, every stakeholder in that space. You'll also notice in this document some key enhancements to instructional operations. You'll see a thoughtful integration of specialized programming throughout the building, both in space and in concept. You'll see the integration of CTE programming. When you look through the visioning report and you see grown adults stacking colored blocks to show where the adjacencies could be of CTE programming and arts programming to elevate the experience of all of our students, I think you'll find it quite insightful. Other key enhancements to instructional operations you'll find in this document is the plan to co-locate Curtis Tufts on this campus, bringing all of our nine through 12 students together in the same community. An expanded use and imagination of the library and media center. And as Dr. Galusi pointed out earlier, a centralized space for early childhood to grow and thrive.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you so much, Dr. Talbot. So I think at this time, we would love to field any questions that anybody may have about the educational plan. We also know it is up for discussion at the next school committee meeting and there'll be an opportunity for questions and comments at that time as well. I would also like to just initially call out, I'm glad we have our left field and SMMA have turned their cameras on so you can see them here and they've joined the meeting. I also do want to call out a lot of this work in the visioning sessions was also led by their educational consultant, Mike Parolo, who worked with us really on the The report that Dr. Talbot spoke about that you can find on the website under phase three was written and compiled by Mike and his partner and really kind of digs down into the work and the data that was revealed through all of the visioning sessions throughout this phase.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, and before I turn it over to Member Graham, I just want to thank you, Dr. Galussi and Dr. Talbot for the presentation. Thank SMMA and left field for running more meetings than I could even keep up with. So between the whole school staff and everybody that attended those meetings, it was a lot crammed into a short amount of time because I know we really want to move this high school forward as fast as we can. And thank you again to Councilors Leming and Mullane who joined us this evening. So thank you to everybody involved in getting this hard work done in such a short amount of time. Member Graham.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you. Thanks for the presentation. I just had one procedural question. If people have, as they're reviewing, if they have questions and comments, do you want them to send those questions and comments to you ahead of time? Because the expectation, what we need to do next week is, Provide a vote of approval that can be shared with the building committee and ultimately with. The, so I just wanted to. Sort of highlight that and talk a little bit about how you want it to handle questions and any editing that's going to go on between now and then.
[Suzanne Galusi]: No, I think that's a very great question. Thank you very much. I would say that people can reach out to Dr. Talbot or myself. And I would probably say since this does have to be turned around for the next school committee meeting next Monday, we would appreciate comments probably by Thursday, which gives us ample time to respond. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Great. Member Mastroboni.
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: Thank you. And thank you for the presentation. And thanks to the whole team for putting this together. It's a really big document. So I have two questions. The first is, is the solution to creating this ed plan building a high school? Or are there other things that we would want to be considering along with building a high school to implement this ed plan? Are there policy pieces there? And that's the first question.
[yGcuIBQZTjc_SPEAKER_00]: That's such a great question. So our SMMA consultant, Mike, brought that up at every single meeting. Do not wait for 2030 to implement these visionary practices that you see start right away. And that is something that we're excited to do. So thank you for that question, member Mastroboni. co-location, moving classrooms around, that is going to have to wait for the new building. But the instructional practices, we can start right away. We heard our students loud and clear. They want agency. They want choice. They want to take leadership roles. And we need to respond to that by designing instruction that fits their needs. So some yes and some no.
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: That makes sense to me. And I think to the extent, you know, we'll be reading through this, but really highlighting that these are the things that we're gonna go forward with immediately that we've identified will be really helpful in, you know, the next year while we wait for the school. The second question is, it's a long document. I'm thinking about from the perspective of a member of the public, like how would you read this document? It's got 20 sections. If I've got time for a few, like are there really key pieces here that can't be missed, and you're not allowed to say the whole document, which I think would be fair.
[yGcuIBQZTjc_SPEAKER_00]: I would say, I'll start first, Suzanne, and then maybe you could pop in to clean up. So I'm gonna say in this very messy way that 60 pages is a lot for anyone to read, but everybody in Medford is passionate about something. So I would say approach that document with the section that you're passionate about. If you are passionate about school counseling and mental health, start there. If lunch is your thing, start there. If it really matters to you about the arts, EE academics, which is where I would start, that is where you should start so that you don't run out of steam on the way through. I would look for places where you can feel inspired by what the students and faculty are saying about what they'd like to see instruction look like. And I would urge you to not get lost in the weeds of the document, because I think that could really kind of pull you under and make it not as joyful as the process was. What am I missing there.
[Suzanne Galusi]: No, I think you absolutely nailed it. I was pretty much going to say the same thing as well as just expand upon your first question. There are pieces of what we're already doing now and not waiting for the new high school build woven into many different departments. I mean, CTE is another example. So some programs are starting now. Some, because of space constraints, have to wait for the new build. I wouldn't want to limit someone to those things. We did try to highlight that above and beyond the academic components or maybe some of the space components of this high school, there are some of the things that we're trying to do, which is like co-locate Curtis Tufts up here, our therapeutic day high school, as well as creating an early childhood center. So Those are some of the two big items, as well as maintain our Welcome Center and our Parent Information Center for families. But I really think Dr. Talbot nailed the advice.
[SPEAKER_13]: Thanks so much. That's really helpful, I think. I appreciate it.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. Member Reinfeld?
[Erika Reinfeld]: There we go. I was, what level of feedback questions are you looking for in terms of, like, I did find a typo probably because I haven't been staring this forever. So do you want that kind of level? Do you, are the goals set and there's no room to tweak those? What level of feedback are you wanting for the next, meeting and is that on the document itself or on the plan in general and how that will play out in this process.
[Suzanne Galusi]: So let's do the reverse Dr. Talbot. I'll start and then you can clean up. So I would say Any and all, we're always open to feedback from typos to larger ideas and concepts. The only thing that I would like be mindful of is that, as stated through this presentation, It's an iterative process. This is draft one. So we do want to inform the future and soon final draft of this document. So we do want to hear your feedback. But also, too, this is a plan that was created by various stakeholders. So we want your feedback, but we also don't want to minimize the work. and the input that went into the writing of this plan, if that makes sense.
[Erika Reinfeld]: That makes sense. And I will say, I really appreciate all the work and all the people who contributed to this. And I see that. And I see opportunities to take a lot of this and expand it out as we do our strategic planning work, which is already underway. So I am seeing that as well. But I just kind of wanted to clarify what the expectation was and how people could expect to see any feedback.
[Suzanne Galusi]: No, we appreciate that very much. Thank you. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Great. Thank you so much.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: So next week, a vote. Much appreciate the presentation. Next, we don't have any presentations, but we do have continued business. So I'll move on to continued business. A interim superintendents evaluation and goals feedback. That over.
[Aaron Olapade]: Mayor, I'm gonna, I'm gonna take this. Thank you. So this is going to be a very dense conversation, but I'm going to ask everyone to bear with me, please. So we've been discussing the superintendent eval for a couple of weeks now. Intern superintendent Lucy submitted her self-evaluation before the end of the calendar year. We had a school committee meeting that incorporated that into our discussion. And then from that, we were then able to put together our school committee member evals individually and then we were to combine them all into what we're going to be looking at tonight. So a couple clarifying points, and then we're going to have it cast on the screen so we can kind of go each by point by point. What is the standard for school committees in public districts is that on an annual basis, you will put together a set of goals that the district will be working towards. The school committee will work in tandem with the superintendent of that district and their senior staff and their central administration to kind of figure out what is best for both sides. The school committee's responsibility is to make sure that those things align with the state standards, and then what is the general strategic plan of the district, and the superintendent is then tasked with implementing those on a daily basis and then quarterly. Given the nature of the intern superintendent's position, we recognize that it'd be a bit difficult to put together that annual goal-setting explicit description because she came in in January of 25, and so in October, or in September of 25, we acknowledged that we did not put together a comprehensive description of those goals, at least in explicit nature. But in January, at the entry point, the superintendent put together a slide deck that discussed what types of things that she had been noticing prior to her interim position, and then what she wanted to work towards going forward for the remainder of that academic year, and then the one we're in currently. In October, we were able to discuss that, and she gave her finding slide deck to us, and we were able to discuss that. I believe the meeting was October. Let me just pull this up. At some point in October. I don't have the exact dates in front of me. I have a bunch of notes in front of me, so please bear with me as I look at all of them as we kind of go through. Each goal that the superintendent discussed in September and that we then discussed further in October is considered what's called a SMART goal. That is what DESE recommends as best practice when we discuss discernible goals that any person can look through and understand where the district is working towards. SMART stands for, the S is specific and strategic, M is measurable, A is action oriented, R is rigorous, realistic, and results focused, and T is timed and tracked. So again, that's what we use in our district and what is kind of the standard according to DESE. So we understand what goals are being implemented, what's the pursuit of them, the timetable for them to be achieved, and the review process that we'll be using ideally to understand if they've been achieved. If they haven't been achieved, for example, is there notable or is there measurable work towards those goals? Realistically, most goals that are set at any given time, especially district-wide goals, are not going to always be achieved in any one academic year because they're district-wide goals. But we want to see those notable goals being pursued over time. And we use that SMART goal framework to understand how they're being achieved over time. A couple other clarifying things. The evaluation that we use as a school committee members is again, we use the general framework that DESE recommends, so it's not vastly different. We do use Medford specific goals in a Medford framework, but we follow the general guidelines that DESE recommends. After the superintendent in December submitted her self-eval, I then worked to compile all the information necessary, clarify as general as possible and explicit as possible what those goals were going to look like. Again, being clear that we did not set explicit district-wide goals in the same timeline that you would in an annual year when there isn't professional shifting in the superintendent's role. But because of how our interim came in, it's a little bit different. I then sent out self evals or evals to each member. They then had about two weeks or so to fill them out. So a little bit post the holidays up until the 18th of January to fill them out. No committee member was able to look at any other committee members evals. I was the only one that was able to see them. So for clarifying information. Committee members were allowed to communicate with the superintendent at any given time during their evaluation period if they needed to get some information or any slide decks, for example, if they have clarifying questions, or if they felt as though they were not informed properly on any one section or subsection of the evaluation. They were also allowed to communicate with one other school committee member if needed. I recommended, and Desi does as well, that you try your best to not interact with other school committee members because of open meeting laws. So I don't, to my knowledge, no one has done that. They can communicate with me about clarifying questions about the evaluation or how they're supposed to fill it out, which happened more than once. But again, no committee member, to my knowledge, has communicated with anybody else other than maybe the superintendent or me specifically about the protocol. That's the first thing. The second thing is that all the evaluations are still unavailable to each other. I'm the only one that's seen them, but we're going to see what the combined school committee evals are going to look like in a moment. What's happened is that after each committee member filled out their eval, I then went in, I took their reported ratings, put them into the eval, and then took their feedback synthesize them with everybody else's responses for that respective section or subsection and you'll see that on the on the public email in a moment. It's important to note that I in no way change the wording other than synthesizing them but I did not added any additional embellishment or emboldening of any one perspective. It's not going to be clear who said what with these evaluations because they've been combined and synthesized to be a little more narrative driven. The language is going to be somewhat the same because DESI recommends you do that for just general professionalism and posterity so it's clear. And the criteria that we're using is going to be clear for everyone so that the public and the school committee members as well understand that we're all using the same criteria. So the subjectivity of how you read the question is your own, but everyone has the same understanding about what we're basing our ratings on. Does that make sense so far? Sweet. All right. I'm talking a lot. We're going to keep going. A couple of other really important things to understand is that committee members were given a handful of links and references PDFs for consideration so they can kind of have the most formal understanding possible. So we had a couple of things from the State Department about evaluating educators and superintendents. The evaluation that the superintendent uses is similar to what teachers and professional staff use. So you're going to see some of that. We have a general rubric that is used across the state that they were provided that, and they were also provided a general idea about what it will look like with a filled out evaluation. So they had a general idea about how it should look. The other important thing to note is that committee members who decided to give a rating other than proficient, so there's two scales we use for our superintendent. There's a scale of one to five and a scale of one to four. In the example of the one to five scale, 4 is your proficient. Anything above or below that, so 1 through 3 or 5, you were asked or expected to give feedback. If you give a proficient score of 4 on that 1 to 5 scale, no feedback is required. It's allowed, but there's no requirement. For the scale of 1 to 4, 3 is proficient. Again, 1 to 2 or 4 of that 1 to 4 rating, you're asked to give feedback. But three on that scale is proficient, which means you don't need to add feedback. If a member chose not to add feedback because they gave that proficient score, their consideration or their opinion was not added into that synthesized feedback section because I got no feedback from them. Again, they weren't required to do that, but they could if they so chose. Some members decided to add feedback, some members didn't. That's not going to be, again, I don't clarify who said what, so there's no specific expectation of that. But that's important to understand that this feedback is the combination and synthesization of certain members who added feedback for those respective sections, not everyone's necessarily. Okay, can we have that please on the screen and I'll kind of keep adding things as we go.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Member Olapade, did you clarify for anyone watching that this incorporates feedback from people who are not currently on the school committee but had
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes, thank you, I really appreciate that clarification. Yes, this was member, former member John Atapa and former member Nicole Branley were asked to give their respective evaluations. Given the fact that our current members, member Mastroboni and member Parks were not participating in the district at the time, we didn't ask them to fill this out. This is from the former six from the previous term of school community members were asked to fill this out. So again, we're gonna see some of the, the feedback from those former members in the feedback form. And let me just pull up so I have this so it's clear for everybody. So as I mentioned, We're on a scale of one to five for the first section. This is a superintendent performance goals. These are the goals that generally we as a district would work together with the superintendent's office to put together and make explicitly clear what they were. As I mentioned, given the nature of the appointment, we didn't do that. But the superintendent did set aside a handful of goals that are relatively aligned with Desi's recommendations. So we were able to put together this evaluation. The first goal in front of us is the student learning goal. That generally is to establish high expectations for all students that promote critical thinking and problem solving. It aligns to grade level state standards and ensures that instruction meets to individual needs of students. I should also clarify that we use focus indicators. There's upwards of, I believe, 20 indicators that are used to kind of form our SMART goal framework, as I mentioned. Each district is allowed to specify what indicators they'd like to focus primarily on. Realistically you're not going to be able to use all 20 indicators for every goal because certain goals have certain expectations. We used six. We clarified in October. or September, I'm sorry, in September we clarified six to eight indicators we wanted to focus primarily on. Six of those eight, as I just mentioned, were used for the five goals that are going to be listed below. We didn't use two of them because they didn't necessarily align as easily with the goals that are set, and I want to make that clear. I had a question about that. So the first indicator that we're using for this goal right now is 1-B or instruction. The feedback reads, during a period of significant transition, including several months without a full academic leadership team, the superintendent maintained consistency in student experience and instructional expectations across the district. Educators and administrators were appropriately engaged in this work, resulting in the establishment of clear norms that supported stable and successful learning environments. Despite these changes, gaps in student outcomes were identified, along with concrete steps to begin addressing them. The recent hiring of a new assistant superintendent of curriculum and instruction has brought renewed focus, expertise, and strategic direction to the district's academic work. With consistent practices and foundational conditions for learning now more firmly in place, and with both a full central leadership team and individual instructional leadership teams established, the district is well positioned to move forward. Moving ahead or going ahead there is a clear opportunity and expectation to prioritize more intentional personalization of learning to ensure instruction is consistently aligned to grade level standards while meeting the diverse needs of individual students. I'm gonna pause for a moment. The rating that's listed there was taken from the second tab on this sheet, which is the member ratings. They're just the aggregate of all seven members who gave ratings. Again, four is what's considered proficient. If a member or members used decimal points, so 3.5 or 4.5, for example, you're gonna see that with the rating that's allowed. Four is what we're, is the minimum, is that proficient number. Five is, of course, exemplary, what you want to work towards always. But anything under four is what we have to have a conversation about needs improvement or working towards. So that's why there's a 4.07. I'm going to use the number to the left of the decimal point, and I'm not going to necessarily round up or round down. I'm just going to try to use, or I'm going to round up or down just for the conversation. So that's the first one. Thank you. The second goal. This is considered the professional practice goal. It reads, enhance understanding of district operations, collaboratively identify key priorities, and foster a culture of trust, transparency, and efficiency. The focus indicator that we use for this one is 2-D, laws, ethics, and policies. And this one reads, Throughout her tenure, the superintendent has demonstrated a strong and consistent commitment to transparent, accessible leadership. She made it a clear priority to explain district processes and policies to families and the broader community, whether the matter at hand was complex or routine. This approach reinforced a belief that transparency is not situational, but foundational, and helped build trust by ensuring stakeholders understood not only decisions, but the reasoning behind them. In her day-to-day leadership, the superintendent was consistently prepared, able to respond thoughtfully to questions, and, when necessary, able to identify where additional information could be found. She demonstrated an ability to anticipate questions and concerns, clearly communicate the context and impact of district actions, and follow through on commitments. Importantly, she also modeled these expectations for staff, reinforcing a culture of accountability and follow-up across the organization. This emphasis on trust and belonging extended beyond students who include district staff. The superintendent received consistent positive feedback for her focus on relationship building, ensuring staff felt heard, respected, and meaningfully included in decisions that affected their work. By fostering these conditions and engaging staff as partners, she built a leadership team capable of addressing operational challenges collaboratively and effectively. Taken together, these practices strengthened understanding of district operations, promoted shared ownership of priorities, and advance a culture grounded in transparency, inclusion, and operational effectiveness. So that's goal two, and that's the professional practice goal. Goal three. So those, and again, I want to pause for a moment. So DESE's recommendation is that you have student learning goal, you have just one general one, and then you have your professional practice goal. That's, again, a general one. You then are allowed two to four district improvement goals. We worked to about three or so. Again, the framework that the superintendent used in her entry slide deck in January used that framework, but it wasn't explicitly communicated to the public, and we didn't work to kind of cultivate those with her office. She set these based off of what she had already been working towards in her prior role during that academic year. So district improvement goal number one is to continue and further the ongoing MSBA process. We just had a very nice presentation about it. So this is similar to what we've been talking about. The indicator that we're using for this one is 4-E, which is shared vision. And it reads the interim superintendent has demonstrated exceptional leadership and commitment in advancing the process, recognizing it not merely as facilities project, but as a rare and transforming opportunity to reimagine the future of public schools. She's consistently approach the work as a. as a springboard for meaningful system-wide change, challenging longstanding practices and helping the district alliance physical infrastructure with evolving educational goals. Her ability to engage a wide range of stakeholders in developing a shared vision grounded in community values and best practices has been a defining strength of this process. Throughout the MSBA journey, she has shown unwavering dedication, attending and actively participating in every MSBA meeting, arriving prepared, informed, and deeply engaged. Committee members noted the extraordinary time commitment this work has required and her remarkable capacity to balance immediate district needs, supporting staff, students, and families, while simultaneously advancing a long-term vision for a stronger, more innovative school system. Her leadership has been marked by clarity, transparency, and thoughtfulness in representing decisions, uncertainties, and next steps to both the school committee and the broader community. Importantly, this work has already translated into tangible progress. By working proactively with her team, the Interim Superintendent has accelerated implementation timelines, including the launch of new vocational programming years ahead of schedule. Her energy, perseverance, and collaborative spirit have been instrumental in moving this complex process forward, and her role as a committed thought partner has helped ensure that the MSBA process serves not only as a building project, but as a catalyst for lasting educational improvement. So again, that's district improvement goal number one. Goal number two for the district improvement is contract negotiations, engage in negotiations with bargaining units to build collaborative relationships, address the interests and concerns of varying employee units within the district, and improve district operations and outcomes. The focus indicator that we're using for this one is 2-B, HR management and development. And it reads, Dr. Galussi has demonstrated strong, effective leadership in contract negotiations, marked by preparation, professionalism, and a clear commitment to collaborative labor relations. Over multiple negotiation cycles, including all 10 bargaining units, I don't want to say 10, I should say 11, that's my mistake. She's consistently brought a calm, steady presence and data-driven approach that has helped foster trust, productive dialogue, and timely outcomes. Most notably, the district successfully negotiated one of the most significant teacher contracts in many years, introducing substantial changes to educator work while avoiding the escalation, work actions, and public conflict that have challenged many peer districts. This represents a meaningful departure from prior negotiation cycles and reflects a healthier, more constructive labor environment. Committee feedback reflects a healthier, more constructive labor environment. Oh, sorry. Committee feedback highlights Dr. Pelosi's deep knowledge of Medford Public Schools and its contracts, as well as her integral role on the negotiating team. She approaches negotiations prepared and with an open mind, thoughtfully considering multiple perspectives and working to reconcile competing needs in service of the district goals. Her willingness to move beyond past practices while remaining grounded in the principle that supporting educators ultimately supports students to strengthen both relationships and outcomes. Additionally, her leadership has contributed to necessary and effective adjustments in staffing structures, improving clarity of roles, efficiency, and teamwork across the district. Overall, Dr. Galusi's approach to contract negotiations has advanced district operations while reinforcing a collaborative culture focused on student success. All right, the third district goal is, the description is continued relationship development and stakeholder communication. And the focus indicator that we're using is 3-C communication. Oh, there's two, 3-C is communication and then 3-A is engagement. And it reads, over the course of this evaluation period, Dr. Galussi has demonstrated a strong intentional commitment to relationship building and transparent communication across the district. Her listening sessions and on-site visits were widely viewed as successful and meaningful, helping to ensure continuity of district operations while strengthening trust with staff, families, and community members. Through regular weekly and ad hoc memos, as well as the use of task forces, committees, and structured input opportunities, she's elevated the standard for two-way communication and stakeholder engagement. Equally notable has been Dr. Galussi's leadership in moments of challenge. Rather than deflecting responsibility, she has consistently modeled accountability, acknowledging when missteps occur, and taking ownership of solutions. This willingness to accept responsibility and focus on improvement has fostered credibility and confidence in her leadership. As the district continues to grow in this area, further attention will be needed to situational and time sensitive communications, particularly in supporting school leaders and central admin in clearly communicating protocols and addressing caregiver concerns while navigating the necessary constraints of confidentiality. Overall, Dr. Colucci's work in this goal area reflects a thoughtful, responsive, and relationship-centered leadership style that has positively impacted the district. Okay, so I'm going to pause for a moment. Are there any questions from anyone in the committee for this moment, or I'm going to move on? Sweet. Okay, so We're going to move along. So again, that's the first portion. That's the superintendent performance goals. Now we're moving on to the superintendent performance on standards. As I mentioned, that first section is on a scale of one to five, four being proficient. Going forward, our performance on standards for the superintendent, it's on a scale of one to four. Three is your proficient. Four is exemplary, one and two are under that. So we're aiming at minimum three, but we're shooting for four, at least in my interpretation of it. So the first, also bear with me, I'm a little sick, so I'm, if I sound a little under the weather, I apologize. Now I'm actually gonna do one thing.
[Erika Reinfeld]: There's a lot of weather to be under right now.
[Aaron Olapade]: This is true, this is true. Let me also grab this ferryway, so we're all looking at the same thing. Okay. Okay. So for the superintendent performance on standards, what committee members were doing is this is just the general DESI guidelines. This is in no way an interpretation of what, you know, the way that the community members were evaluating is based off of their understanding of what the superintendent did. We did not have to set these goals or these standards. This is what DESE uses as a framework. We follow suit with what DESE recommends. So standard one is instructional leadership. And then there's going to be subsections for each standard or, you know, four to five-ish substandards, let's call them. Standard one, again, is instructional leadership. It reads, and this is a combination of what everyone said for each individual subsection that was combined for the total standard. Our superintendent has continued to strengthen instructional leadership across the district, building on prior work to increase rigor and align instruction to standards across subject areas. Committee members recognize this work as complex and ongoing, and note clear evidence of thoughtful progress, strengthened systems, and growing momentum. Under her leadership, the district has improved instructional leadership structures, data systems, and the use of evidence to guide curriculum, instruction, and assessment, increasing leadership capacity, and shared accountability for student learning. She has also elevated the quality of professional learning by expanding collaborative planning time and responding directly to educators' identified problems of practice, including through collective bargaining. The first-year implementation of middle school challenge courses reflects heightened expectations and has been well-received, earning state-level recognition. While continued attention is needed to ensure rigor and effective practices are fully inclusive of students with disabilities and consistently translate into personalized learning and measurable outcomes, Committee members observe positive district-wide change and a clear trajectory towards sustained instructional improvement. So that's, again, that's a general synopsis of what the, this is, there's five substandards in this standard section. That's the kind of the combination of all five substandards. So substandard one, or 1.1, is curriculum. It reads, Dr. Galusi has continued district-wide efforts to strengthen curriculum rigor and alignment to standards across content areas, building on work initiated during her prior role as assistant superintendent. Progress is evident through increased coherence in curriculum design and implementation of new instructional offerings, including middle school challenge courses, as mentioned prior, which has been positively received and recognized at the state level. Committee members acknowledge that this work is ongoing and note the importance of further applying a rigor-focused lens to special education programming to ensure equitable access to the highest standards for all students. Subsection 2, or substandard 2, 1.2 is instruction. Dr. Galusi has established and supported systems that promote high-quality instructional practice and shared expectations for teaching and learning. Through the development of instructional leadership teams and expanded opportunities for collaborative planning, she has strengthened instructional leadership capacity at the school and district level. Committee members also know her responsiveness to educator-identified needs and her efforts to improve the quality and relevance of professional development. Continued growth in personalized instructional practices remains an area of ongoing focus. Substandard 3, or 1.3, is assessment. It reads, Dr. DeLucy has strengthened district structures that support the use of multiple measures of student learning to inform instructional practice. Principals and administrators are increasingly supported in facilitating data-informed conversations and in using assessment results to adjust instruction when students are not meeting expectations. While assessment practices continue to develop, the foundational systems necessary to support consistent and effective use of data are in place. Substandard 4, or 1.4, is evaluation. It reads, Dr. Galussi has supported effective supervision and evaluation practices aligned with state regulations and contractual requirements. Through clear expectations and strengthened leadership structures, she has enabled administrators to engage in evaluative practices that emphasize instructional quality, professional growth, and accountability. Committee members note increased consistency in evaluation practices across the district. And the final substandard for this section is 1.5, data-informed decision-making. Dr. Colussi has prioritized the use of data to guide district and school-level planning and decision-making. Committee members highlight her role in strengthening data systems and establishing structures that support analysis of student learning and growth. These practices have informed goal-setting, instructional improvement efforts, and organizational performance. While the full impact on student outcomes is still emerging, the district is positioned to leverage these systems for sustained improvement. I'm going to pause for a second. Are there any questions from the committee before we continue on to the next standard?
[Erika Reinfeld]: It's not a question, but I do want to note one of the instructions that, or one of the guidelines that DESE gives is that to aim to have the proficient in every, to not put everything at level four. They recommend a sparse use of the rating of four.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yeah, that's a really good thing to note. I think it's important to also understand that realistically, shooting for exemplary is a really hard thing to kind of rate on. It's entirely possible some districts, including ours, can really do some great work and be exemplary in certain areas. But I would argue that we should always be working to do better. And realistically, not every single student, staff member, and stakeholder is going to feel the same way that we may as individuals feel. And so we're always working to be better. But I think Member Reinfeld's right that members are supposed to be careful when using the exemplary rating or the highest rating because that's a high bar to hit, but we of course are always working towards that. So we're gonna move on to the next standard. This is standard two, management and operations. Again, the first section is gonna be just a general synopsis of all of the, I think there's five also in this, yeah, there's five substandards. So the first kind of read back is gonna be just the combination of all that stuff. So it reads, the superintendent has demonstrated strong operational leadership by stabilizing and strengthening district systems that support student safety, well-being, and daily functioning while advancing sustainable long-term improvements. She addressed longstanding operational challenges while managing complex concurrent demands, including schedule restructuring, contract negotiations, and a major building project with a small central team and a focus on thoughtful planning and stakeholder engagement. She's implemented a strategic approach to human capital management by strengthening the organizational structure, building central office capacity, and maintaining fair personal practices and productive labor relationships. Through improved scheduling and management systems, she has enhanced the district's ability to manage time, resources, and information in support of instructional priorities. She has also demonstrated strong legal, ethical, and fiscal stewardship, allying resources to district goals, responsibly implementing override funds, and developing a student-centered FY26 budget in collaboration with city leadership. So the first substandard is 2.1, which is environment. It reads, the superintendent has demonstrated strong operational leadership in stabilizing and strengthening district systems that support student safety, well-being, and daily functioning. Upon assuming leadership, she confronted multiple longstanding operational challenges, such as limited after-school capacity and systemic inefficiencies, choosing to pursue sustainable long-term solutions rather than short-term fixes. Despite a small central team during her initial months, she's worked diligently to improve district operations and communication while managing significant concurrent demands, including schedule restructuring, contract negotiations, and a fast-paced high school building project. Her approach has emphasized thoughtful planning, stakeholder engagement, and system-level coherence. The next substandard is 2.2, human resources management and development. It reads, the superintendent has implemented a cohesive and strategic approach to human capital management. She has prioritized hiring the right leaders for the district, even when inclusive and collaborative processes increase short-term complexity. Her restructuring of the organizational framework and intentional development of a strong central leadership team has significantly increased her district's operational capacity. She's articulated clear goals for future hiring and career growth, oversees personal decisions fairly, and maintains productive, respectful relations with staff, unions, and negotiation teams. She's reflective in her practice and open to feedback, including consideration of historical context and past practices when evaluating opportunities for improvement. Substandard 3 is 2.3, scheduling and management information systems. Through thoughtful coordination and system redesign, the superintendent has improved the district's ability to manage time, resources, and information in service of teaching and learning. The successful implementation of changes to the length of the school day and the alignment of operational systems reflect a commitment to minimizing disruption while supporting collaboration and instructional priorities. Her leadership has resulted in a more effective and responsive central office structure that better supports school-level staff. Subsection four is, or subsection standard four is 2.4, laws, ethics, and policies. The superintendent has demonstrated a strong understanding of and adherence to state and federal requirements, school committee policies, collective bargaining agreements, and ethical standards. She has led complex contract negotiations responsibly and collaboratively, ensuring compliance while maintaining trust and professionalism across stakeholder groups. Her leadership reflects a transparency, ethical decision-making, and respect for governance role. rules. And the last substandard for this section is 2.5 fiscal systems. The superintendent has shown fiscal stewardship and a clear commitment to aligning resources while district priorities with district priorities. She successfully implemented override funds and developed a student centered FY 26 budget that reflects the district vision mission and the goals. She works collaboratively with city leadership to ensure schools are appropriately resourced while maintaining fiscal responsibility and staying within available funding. Her approach reflects an understanding that effective financial management is a shared responsibility and that disciplined planning is essential to long-term sustainability. I'm going to pause again. Are there any questions for this standard section? I'm seeing none. Love it. All right. We're going to go, we're going to go to substandard. We're going to go standard three, which is engagement. The feedback form reads, the superintendent demonstrates a strong commitment to family and community engagement by intentionally creating inclusive, accessible opportunities for participation, particularly among historical underrepresented voices, through listening sessions, surveys, and varied engagement formats, especially during major initiatives such as the Medford High School Project. She's expanded community input and reinforced shared responsibility in district planning and decision-making. Her communication with families and stakeholders is proactive, respectful, and culturally responsive, supported by strengthened district-wide coordination and leadership. Families report appreciation for accessibility and responsiveness to concerns. And while communication systems are generally effective, there is an opportunity to further normalize response protocol to ensure consistent, timely follow-up during periods of high volume. So the substandard for this section reads 3.1, or engagement. The superintendent demonstrates a clear commitment to ensuring that families are welcomed as active members of the school and district community through intentional planning and inclusive engagement strategies, particularly in large-scale initiatives such as the Medford High School Project. She has prioritized reaching families and community members who are historically underrepresented in district feedback. Her use of multiple engagement formats, including surveys and listening sessions, has expanded access to participation beyond those able to attend in-person meetings, resulting in broader and more representative community input. substandard. The second substandard is 3.2, sharing responsibility. The superintendent consistently collaborates with families and community stakeholders to support student learning and district decision-making. During her initial months, she conducted numerous listening sessions that informed subsequent work on the strategic plan, MSBA processes, and advisory groups. When the school committee requested additional community input before advancing decisions, she responded by creating additional avenues for engagement, reinforcing a shared responsibility model that values family and community voice as integral to district planning and improvement. 3.3 substandard reads communication. The superintendent's communication with families and community stakeholders is proactive, clear, and culturally responsive. She maintains an open and respectful posture towards family input and feedback and has worked to strengthen district-wide communication by effectively leveraging the directive communications and supporting improved consistency among district leaders. Communication efforts reach a broad range of stakeholders, including families, staff, and community partners. While overall communication is strong, feedback indicates an opportunity to further develop consistent norms and supports for situational or individualized communication, particularly in cases without established protocols, and to strengthen response systems to ensure timely follow-up. The last substandard is 3.4, family concerns. The superintendent addresses family and community concerns with professionalism, respect, and care. Families report appreciation for her responsiveness and accessibility, including direct responses to calls and emails. She has articulated expectations for timely communication and follow-up, and there's an opportunity to formalize systems such as delegated support or automated acknowledgements to ensure equitable, efficient responses during periods of high volume. Overall, her approach reflects a commitment to addressing concerns in a manner that is fair, thoughtful, and aligned with the needs of the community. All right, that's standard three. We're almost home. Are there any questions I can answer right now before I go to last standard? Sweet. All right.
[Unidentified]: Thanks, guys.
[Aaron Olapade]: Thanks for letting me ramble. All right, standard four is professional culture. Her general feedback reads, Dr. Galussi has established a strong culture of high expectations grounded in collaboration, professionalism, and continuous improvement. She has earned the trust of district leadership, the school committee, and labor partners by strengthening systems that support effective teaching and learning while skillfully navigating labor relations, legal requirements, and budget development. Her leadership intentionally centers cultural proficiency, belonging, and respect, and she actively seeks diverse perspectives when shaping policy and practice. Dr. Galussi communicates clearly and excessively with stakeholders and has significantly improved district-wide communication with continued opportunity to strengthen consistency and timeliness through formalized supports. She models reflective practice and data-informed decision-making, fostering a shared commitment to learning and growth. Through a collaborative yet decisive leadership style, she advances a shared vision focused on student achievement, post-secondary readiness, and civic engagement while managing conflict with integrity and respect. The first substandard of the section is 4.1, commitment to high standards. It reads, Dr. Glucy has established a clear, consistent culture of high expectations across the district. She has quickly earned the trust and respect of the leadership team, the school committee, and union partners by centering her work on improving systems that enable effective teaching and learning. Her ability to navigate complex areas such as labor relations, legal requirements, and budget development has strengthened organizational stability and removed barriers that can impede the instructional progress. She sets clear expectations, holds staff accountable, and ensures that operational effectiveness supports high quality educational outcomes for all students. The next standard is 4.2, cultural proficiency. Dr. Galussi has intentionally embedded cultural proficiency into both instructional and operational practices. She has emphasized the importance of belonging and respect for students and staff members' diverse backgrounds, identities, strengths, and challenges. Her leadership reflects an understanding that inclusive practices are foundational to student achievement and staff effectiveness, and she actively seeks out and values perspectives that differ from her own when shaping policy and practice. The third substandard is 4.3, communications. Dr. Gallucci demonstrates strong interpersonal and verbal communication skills and has meaningfully improved communication across the district. She's accessible, responsive, and makes herself available to address questions, concerns, and issues raised by staff and stakeholders. Committee feedback notes that while communication has improved significantly, continued attention to timeliness, particularly in written communication, will further strengthen trust and transparency. Leveraging support staff to acknowledge inquiries and provide clear timelines for follow-up may enhance consistency and effectiveness. The next substandard is 4.4, continuous learning. Dr. Galusi consistently models reflective practices and fosters a culture in which continuous improvement is expected and supported. She encourages staff to examine their work, engage with current research and best practices, and use data to inform instructional and operational decisions. Her own openness to feedback and willingness to adapt her practice reinforces a district-wide commitment to learning and growth. Next substandard is 4.5, shared vision. Dr. Galussi has successfully promoted a shared vision grounded in collaboration, achievement, and belonging. She engages stakeholders across the district in shaping and advancing this vision, ensuring alignment between instructional priorities and organizational practices. Her leadership reflects a clear focus on preparing all students for post-secondary success and active civic participation while maintaining coherence across district initiatives. And the last substandard is 4.6, managing conflicts. Dr. Galusi employs thoughtful and effective strategies to manage disagreement and resolve conflict. Her leadership style is collaborative and consensus-oriented, yet she demonstrates the ability to make difficult decisions when necessary. She approaches challenging conversations with integrity, openness, and respect, fostering trust while guiding the district forward through periods of change. All right, that was a mouthful. So that's the end of all the feedback forms. I don't believe that we have to look at individual member ratings because the coalescing of all those were evident on this form. So I don't feel we need to do that. But you can take off the screen share now. Thank you so much. Are there any questions that I can answer through all that before I kind of do the next little portion of what we got to talk about briefly?
[Jenny Graham]: Yeah. Just wanted to say thank you for putting that together. We've done, I've gone through this a couple of different ways over the years. And 1 of the things that's always been missing is like. A cohesive voice that represents what the committee thinks about. Um, all of these various things, and you're the, the way that you like, well, everyone's commentary together, I thought was really effective and does paint. really a better picture than any one person's comments could. So thank you for that. Great job. And great job to Dr. Galussi too.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, wonderful job, Dr. Galussi. And thank you, member Olapade, very well put together. We appreciate all the hard work you put into that over the last few weeks. I don't see any questions. Other questions from the committee? Oh, member Reinfeld?
[Erika Reinfeld]: I just, actually, I want to give a shout out to Dr. Glucy. She had her camera on the whole time and this is probably one of the most excruciating pieces of the job. And so I really appreciate the thoughtful comments of my committee, fellow committee members. I wanted to ask member Olapade if there were any sections that were, where there was a large variation. to reconcile particular comments. I thought the narrative was incredibly cohesive and it sounds like people were really quite aligned on the feedback. And I just wondered if there were any areas where it was particularly difficult to reconcile.
[Aaron Olapade]: For the most part, so that's a great question. Given the nature of how the interim superintendent was appointed, it's a bit of a different, we've only had one year. And so with that, I think adds, and this is just my own personal perspective on it, not necessarily what Desi kind of has experienced over time. I reached out to one member of Desi to kind of have some clarifying questions answered. With only one year of the superintendent's tenure under their belt, it's a bit difficult sometimes to determine how comprehensive people's ratings may be sometimes because, you know, comparatively, a superintendent who's been in district for, let's say, a decade, many years worth of their tenure allows for maybe a more developed understanding about what specific things we're looking for. Even though the district goals and student goals change every year based off of what the framework generally is recommended by DESE, if I have 10 years worth of experience with my superintendent, I'm gonna look for certain things that may not be as evident with only one year of tenure. That being said, the only section that I felt as though that there was more notable variance, but not vast variance, but slight variance was the standard three engagement, most notably communication and family concerns. The engagement in general and the shared responsibility, that seemed pretty consistent across the board. But communication and family concerns, that's where I think men, not most members, but there were more members who had something to say about having conversations with families and stakeholders in the public who were concerned about X, Y, and Z. And then how was the superintendent responding to those concerns? We can understand that as parents and stakeholders in the community. when we have concerns, if they're not met immediately, the anxiety of that concern can kind of continue to increase. So that's my understanding at least sometimes. And so if there is an ongoing discussion about how to improve upon a concern from a stakeholder, but because of contract negotiations or other things that may be going on behind the scenes that we're still working towards, the concerns may not be answered immediately, which I think may be why some members of the committee evaluate saying that there is room for growth there because families have continued to communicate saying there is there's improvement in communication but we want to see more. You can kind of always communicate, you can always improve communication. I think we all know that. That was like one of the biggest things we learned. I know that many members went to the our annual school committee conference and basically the name of the game is communication, communication, communication, right? And I think that that is always the case. But other than that substandard or that standard with the two noted substandards, for the most part, committee members were pretty much across the board in agreement with either proficient or some really notable exemplary standards. We didn't have any not meeting expectations in any section, which I thought was a real good thing to note. And of course, there's one or two places for growth has been noted, but there's more growth to be had. Even with the communication substandards, those were still proficient. There wasn't any massive denotes where someone said this isn't working and we need to start over. which I thought is an important clarifying question. When we talk a lot about going forward, I know we're going to talk a little bit later on the agenda about our long-term superintendent position. when we as individual members are gonna make a decision, it's important to note what's been done in just one short year's time and what we're hoping to accomplish in the next handful of years. And I think that thus far, at least with the six, the seven committee members who vote, who have given their rankings, it seems to be there's some solid consensus that our interim superintendent has been doing a really good job with places to grow, but nowhere where people felt as though that there was no growth And there's some concern about how that's going to be moving us forward. Does that answer your question?
[Erika Reinfeld]: It does. Thank you. And I know it was an awkward question. This whole thing feels very awkward, but I do appreciate it.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yeah, absolutely. It's an awkward process. This is also public, not just in this very moment, but this is now going to be public in general. So any member of the public can ask to see this evaluation, which I think is both a transparent thing but also a difficult thing because it's a performance review in some ways, but that is a part of what it means to be a school committee member. That was something that was declared very explicitly when I started this process is that this is one of our main jobs is to do this and so I think it's important that we are as impartial and professional as we could possibly be. And I found that's what happened with these reviews. I found when I read through everything and I took all the feedback and scoring, at no point was I concerned about any one members, including myself, with any type of bias that was evident in the feedback forms. So hopefully what I put together is cohesive enough where people can kind of hold their own understanding. I'm happy to answer any other questions members may have. If not, I should also, oh, the last thing I'll say before I stop talking for a while, because I'm talked out, is this is now going to go to DESI, this eval, this is a part of their process. They want to see these annually as well. I'll clarify to them what I've said multiple times is that we didn't have the typical process to get to this point, but they're aware of that already. They'll be made aware of that again when I submit this to them for review. But this is also part of the process that every time we do one of these, that they get to see where we are as a district and where our superintendent's office is, so that they are also informed. So we're not behind the eight ball about the new moving forward standards or protocols for the state, and that we're in line with them as best we can. So that'll go to them, and then we'll move on with the next step of this evaluation process. All right, I'm done. Thank you.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you. Thank you very much. Is there a motion for- Get a drink.
[Aaron Olapade]: Sorry. I think the superintendent has something to say, actually.
[Suzanne Galusi]: Dr. Galuski? I'm new at all this, but if it's appropriate, I would just like to thank you all, because I know this, though it might be an awkward process, it's kind of awkward all the way around, and I do really want to thank you all for your time and your thought and effort that went into this evaluation and provision of feedback. I do pride myself on being a lifelong learner so I really truly do appreciate the candor and the feedback because I do need it to guide my growth. I do want to take an opportunity since this was a really unique year and there were a lot of comments throughout the process to just thank the administration and the staff, especially at the beginning for their collaboration and support. Medford truly is a remarkable community and the manner in which people came together to support during that time. I really just wanted to acknowledge that and appreciate it. It really did take a village from last January to this August. um and that was really exemplified and I just wanted to say thank you and then I also wanted to just acknowledge that the team um we have put in place I'm just so grateful for um and all the work they've accomplished in such a short amount of time but the continued work that's to come I am really grateful for the team we are establishing and do feel that Medford's in really strong, capable, knowledgeable hands. And I hear the feedback, and I will work really diligently to ensure that continued consistency, coherence, and belonging throughout the district. And I did note it in my self-evaluation. I do really appreciate the piece about communication. I commit to working with the team on building better systems. I don't want caregivers to feel that they are not heard. So that's real and that's important. As well as now that we have a team in place, and those systems are there working for the outcomes for ensuring that we have the rigor and effective practices so that all of our students feel fully included in a personalized manner with measurable outcomes is really the work. So thank you very much. I really do appreciate the thoughtful feedback.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, Dr. Lucey. Is there a motion for approval of the compiled evaluation form by member Olapade?
[Aaron Olapade]: I'll motion to approve it, if I can do that.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Absolutely. Seconded by? I'll second it. By member Rousseau. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham. Was that a yes? She said yes. Oh, sorry. Member Mastroboni.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks. Yes. Member Reinfeld.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Risseau, yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Self-evaluation has been approved. Awesome job to all of the above. Next up, let's see. We have under nine continued business B election of school committee officers. Member Rusco?
[Paul Ruseau]: Yes. I would like to say that in light of a new charter and some less than clear understanding of when things go into effect. I'd like to make a motion to elect you as the chair of the school committee.
[Jenny Graham]: Okay.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, members. I appreciate it. I'm honored. Seconded by member Graham. Members, if you could call the roll.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham? Yes. Member Mastroboni?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau? Yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Abstain, yes, but yes. Seven in the affirmative, negative. Thank you, I appreciate it. And I'm honored. Member Mastroboni?
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: Madam Chair, if I may, in recognition of her immense work and service to this committee, I nominate Jenny Graham for vice chair of the school committee.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Member Graham has been nominated for vice chair. Is there a second?
[Aaron Olapade]: Second.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Seconded by Member Olapade. If we could call the roll, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Oh, I'm so fast. Member Graham?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Mastromoni?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Rossell? Yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Congratulations, Vice Chair Graham. Thank you. And is there a motion for a secretary? Member Olapade?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yeah, I'll make a motion that Paul Rousseau is our secretary.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, Member Olapade. Seconded by Member Graham. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham? Yes. Member Mastropone?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau, yes. Mayor Long-Gilkert?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Congratulations, Secretary Rousseau.
[Paul Ruseau]: Thank you very much.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Cheers to a continued good job.
[Erika Reinfeld]: I don't know if we noted in the minutes that we have another student representative on the call. I'm not sure when she joined, but Christine is here.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Oh, thank you for acknowledging me, Mayor Long-Gilkert. Thank you for joining us, Christine. Next up, we have a new business resolution offered by member Rousseau, 2026-2. Medford School Committee appoints Paul Rousseau as the representative to the Shore Educational Collaboratives Board of Directors. Is there a motion for approval?
[SPEAKER_14]: Motion to approve.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Second. Seconded by member Graham. Seconded by member Reinfeld. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham. Yes. Member Mastroboni.
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Reinfeld. Yes. Members say yes. Mayor Lango-Caperni.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Did we call Member Parks?
[Paul Ruseau]: No. Oh, I'm sorry. We didn't. I'm sorry.
[Erika Reinfeld]: I'm so used to being after Member Olapade. Sorry.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Last but not least, so seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative, motion passes. Thank you. Offered by member Graham, 2026-3, recommendation for the formation of the below subcommittee chairs and membership, strategic planning, Chair Graham, members Reinfeld and Parks, facilities and capital planning, Chair Master Boney, members Rousseau and Parks, curriculum and instruction, Chair Reinfeld, members Parks and Olapade, Communications and Community Engagement, Chair Reinfeld, members Graham and Mastroboni. DEIA, Chair Olapade, members Reinfeld and Mastroboni. Rules and Policy, Chair Rousseau, members Graham and Mastroboni. Superintendent Evaluation, Chair Olapade, members Rousseau and Graham. And last but not least, Behavioral Health and Special Education, Chair Parks, and members Olapade and Rousseau. Is there a motion on the floor for approval of committees offered by member Graham? Motion to approve. Member Reinfeld, seconded by?
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: Second.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Member Mastraboni. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham? Yes. Member Mastraboni?
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade?
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Rossell? Yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Committees have been approved. Thank you, everybody. Offered by member Reinfeld, 2026-4, whereas the Medford School Committee will soon vote on a path forward for permanent leadership within Medford Public Schools. And whereas the recently issued strategic planning survey includes questions about the broader MPS community's priorities for district leadership. Be it therefore resolved that the chair of the strategic planning subcommittee will compile the responses relevant to this deliberation and share the data with the full school committee. Be it further resolved that this content be delivered to the committee no later than the February 2nd meeting and reviewed by all members prior to the aforementioned vote. Member Reinfeld.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Sure, hopefully this resolution speaks mostly for itself, but it builds on the resolution passed in October that the strategic planning process include input as to district leadership to inform our appointment of a permanent superintendent for the upcoming fiscal year. As you saw, we've done the evaluation with the committee. We have been hearing from members of the administration, members of the community on kind of an ad hoc basis, but we need to make this decision soon, particularly as we look across the state at what is happening with superintendent searches. And just, we know that there is a lot of data out there about people's hopes. Our job as the school committee is to match district leadership with the vision for the district, and this data exists, and I think it is time for us to look at it. I don't know, is there more? Does anyone have any questions about this?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Perfect explanation. Thank you, Member Reinfeld. Motion to approve? If there's no questions, is there a motion to approve by Member Graham, seconded by? Second. Member Parks, roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Could I get the item number? I lost the agenda on my menu screen. 2026-4. Thank you so much. Member Graham?
[Alachie Yeager]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Mesterbaum?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Olapade?
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau? Yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. Seven in the affirmative, zero in the negative. Resolution 2026-04 passes. 2026-05 offered by Member Graham. Whereas the Medford School Committee recognizes the importance of establishing a thoughtful process for deciding how to appoint a permanent superintendent on July 1st, 2026. And whereas the Medford School Committee wishes to ensure opportunities for public input and community engagement as part of this process. Now therefore be it resolved that the Medford School Committee will determine its approach to appointing a permanent superintendent at its public meeting on February 2nd, 2026. And be it further resolved that the school committee invites feedback from the public during this meeting and be it for the resolve that members of the community who are unable to attend the meeting but wish to provide input may submit feedback via email to the Medford School Committee at medfordsc.medford.k12.ma.us. Member Graham.
[Jenny Graham]: Thank you. Now that we have completed the superintendent's evaluation I feel like it is time for us to make some decisions about how we will move forward so that we have a permanent leader in place by July 1st. And that's like, I know today's not the day to talk about warm sun in July, but it will be here before we know it and the snow will melt too. I promise, but. I do think it's important for the community to know when we're going to sort of consider all of these things and invite people to tell us what they're thinking, especially given the presentations that we've had over the last couple of weeks via the superintendent's self-evaluation and then the compilation of the school committee evaluation that rated the superintendent across 29 different categories. Um, and I think it's time for us at our next meeting to make some decisions about how to move forward. So my proposal is just simply that we're going to do that in the next meeting and that this is sort of us giving the community time, um, and a heads up to know that that's coming. And that is what will, one of the things that we will be focused on in our February 2nd meeting.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you, member Graham. member of master to approve.
[Mike Mastrobuoni]: So, if I may just reminding folks watching at home that that's in a week, we don't have extra time in between the meetings. So, you know, feedback, just the timing is really really important on this.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, and from the chair, I could point out I agree with you I know I've received 10 to 20 emails myself already with feedback so I don't know if we'll, we'll be even doing a post or be in the superintendents, which is another awkward thing, but in the superintendents Friday memo, just as an additional heads up so that we know people have the opportunity to email us if they have opinions.
[Paul Ruseau]: Yeah, I can work with Dr. Bellucci to strike the right tone on that wording. Great. And what number was this, 2026 dot?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Five.
[Paul Ruseau]: Five. Thank you. I was going to guess.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Okay, so that was by member Graham. So motion for approval by member Graham. Is there a second?
[Paul Ruseau]: Second.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: By member Rousseau. Roll call, please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Mastropone. Yes. Member Olapade.
[Aaron Olapade]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Parks. Yes. Member Reinfeld.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau. Yes.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes, some of the affirmative, zero in the negative. Motion passes. We do not have any reports requested, and we do have a few condolences, unfortunately. So if you don't mind, I'm gonna read them. The members of the Medford School Committee express their sincerest condolences to the family of Beverly Gressinger, Medford Public School Payroll Administrative Assistant, Jennifer Durow's grandmother. The members of the Medford School Committee expressed their sincerest condolences to the family of Robert A. Carbone, whose Medford Public Schools career spanned over 25 years as an English teacher and assistant principal. Also, the members of the Medford School Committee expressed their sincerest condolences to the family of Pamela Kilbride, McGlynn Middle School teacher, Patricia Kilbride's mother-in-law. And lastly, the members of the Medford School Committee express their sincerest condolences to the family of Michelle A. Andrea Tola-Pothier, who was a graduate of Medford High School and beloved teacher at the Medford Family Network. If you all may please take a moment of silence. Thank you. Our next regular meeting, which has been mentioned is next Monday, February 2nd, 2026 in the Alden Memorial chambers, uh, Medford city hall, in addition to zoom. And we do have a MSBA, um, meeting in the library this Wednesday, the 28th at six 30.
[Jenny Graham]: Otherwise, is there any mayor? Yes, the meeting this week is the communications and community engagement meeting. And it is on zoom only. So it is a subcommittee meeting.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Thank you for letting me know. Okay, so it's a subcommittee meeting on zoom only.
[Erika Reinfeld]: Yeah, to be clear, that's the building committee subcommittee, not this body's subcommittee for similar things.
[Jenny Graham]: The next building committee meeting is February 11.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Motion to adjourn. Glad I brought that up. Motion to adjourn by Member Reinfeld. Seconded by?
[Aaron Olapade]: Second.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: I think Member Graham, gotcha. Member Olapade, roll call please.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Graham?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Mastroboni? Yes. Member Olapade? Yes. Member Parks? Yes. Member Reinfeld?
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes.
[Paul Ruseau]: Member Ruseau, yes. Mayor Lungo-Koehn.
[Breanna Lungo-Koehn]: Yes. Seven the affirmative, zero the negative. Meetings adjourned. Have a wonderful night, everybody. Stay warm. Snow day.
|
total time: 16.2 minutes total words: 1501 |
total time: 4.67 minutes total words: 444 |
total time: 9.29 minutes total words: 920 |
total time: 53.22 minutes total words: 3708 |
|
total time: 3.12 minutes total words: 252 |
|||