HomeMy WebLinkAbout2023-02-15 ad Hoc - School Committee Policy Subcommittee Minutesg�4 nHta��.
t Town of Reading RECEIVED
fi P^ Meeting Minutes R WN AMNIG,`ERA M
Board -Committee -Commission -Council:
2923 MAR -6 PM 3!58
School Committee Policy Subcommittee
Date: 2023-02-15 Time: 8:30 AM
Building: Location:
Address: Session:
Purpose: Open Session Version: Final
Attendees: Members - Present:
Erin Gaffen, Tom Wise, and Chuck Robinson
Members - Not Present:
Others Present:
Director of Human Resources Michelle Roach, Assistant Superintendent
Jennifer Stys
Minutes Respectfully Submitted By: Tom Wise, Chair
Topics of Discussion:
The meeting was held remotely via Zoom. A recording of the meeting can be found here.
Chair Wise called the meeting to order at approximately 8:34 a.m. via roll call. Mr. Wise walked through the
agenda.
B.1. Consent Agenda
Mr. Wise moved to approve the Consent Agenda. Mr. Robinson seconded. The motion was carried 3.0
via roll call vote.
E.1. New Business — Review. Revise. and ADprove MASC and Legal changes to Policy GBA— Equal
Opportunity Employment
Mr. Wise outlined the brief legal counsel feedback on Policy GBA. He then outlined the changes from MASC in
alignment with the Acts of 2012. Mr. Robinson asked a clarifying question about the Acts of 2012. Mr. Wise
connected himself to say Acts of 2022.
The Subcommittee agreed to remove the comma between "pregnancy" and "or pregnancy -related condition" in
the protected classes. They also agreed to move the adoption sections below the legal and cross-references.
Mr. Wise moved that we submit Policy GBA- Equal Opportunity Employment to the full School
Committee for adoption. Mrs. Gaffen seconded. The motion was carried 3-0 via roll call vote.
E.2. New Business- Review Revise. and Approve Administration And Legal chances to Policy GCJ -
Professional Teacher Professional Teacher Status
Mr. Wise introduced the policy and shared legal counsel feedback. Mrs. Roach then introduced the
administrative need to change the policy with a specific focus on the policy's original first sentence, which set
three consecutive years of employment as the requirement. Mr. Wise outlined the changes from MASC policy
alignment. MASC did not have the opening sentence. Mr. Wise outlined legal counsel's concems with the
Policy which concurred and went further than administrative suggestions.
Page 1 1
Mr. Robinson asked whether legal counsel suggests revoking the entire policy. Mr. Wise confirmed that was an
option but mentioned he wasn't a fan of doing so himself.
Mrs. Roach provided specific feedback for discussion. Her feedback included:
• She raised a concern about professional teacher status for those coming from other districts with said
status as that has not been practiced over the preceding 18 months.
• She raised a concern about the last sentence of the first paragraph pointing out that the law allows for
non -renewal for any reason in the first three years.
• She added "Professional Teaching Status qualifying" in the first sentence of the second paragraph.
• She added "and good conduct" to the first sentence of the third paragraph.
• She requested adding a "subject to availability" to the last sentence of the third paragraph.
Mr. Robinson asked questions about the process of hiring somebody from another district and raised a concern
about losing professional teacher status when a teacher changes districts. Mrs. Roach mentioned we haven't
come across that situation yet. Mr. Wise mentioned his inclination to keep the clause as it is an optional "or"
clause as he believed it would be an important lever to pull in the recruitment process. Mrs. Roach wanted to
make sure this was objective, not subjective, and without bias. Mrs. Gaffen expressed a strong belief that staff
must work in Reading for at least one year before attaining professional teacher status. Mr. Wise pointed out
that the sentence in question was standard MASC language so other districts have the option as well.
Discussions around subjective vs. objective measures and preferences of the Subcommittee and the
administration, In the end, there was an agreement that a procedure could be developed by the administration
to build in the objective measure while keeping the "or" clause in the first sentence of the first paragraph.
Mr. Wise requested the Subcommittee discuss the definition of "qualifying years" as atltletl by Mrs. Roach. The
qualifying clause is trying to correct for long-term leaves. Mrs. Gaffen asked a clarifying question about the
three years and whether it was always at year-end. Mrs. Roach mentioned it was rolling based on the hire date,
but also raised questions to clarify the leave concern as well. The Subcommittee atltletl a set of defining bullets
around the Qualifying PTS years including the execution of the years under full licensure and exclusion of leave
greater than 30 days. Mr. Wise asked clarifying questions about the definition of "other professional staff" and
examples provided were Specialists and Nurses. Nurses, Psychologists, etc. that may not have leaching
licenses were discussed. The Subcommittee agreed on "full teaching or another appropriate licensure.' There
was a discussion around the 30 days clause and the Subcommittee, with guidance from Mrs. Roach, agreed on
30 calendar days as the second portion of the definition for qualifying PTS years.
Mr. Wise suggested that it may be best to put this policy on the table and go back with the changes to legal
counsel for strengthening and cleanup. Mr. Robinson raised concerns about the relationship with the RTA on
this topic.
Mr. Wise moved that we table Policy GCJ — Professional Teacher Status until further legal evaluation
and updates am complete. Mrs. Gaffen seconded. The motion was carried 3-0 via roll call vote.
E.3. New Business — Discuss & Review NSBA Policy Classification System
Mr. Wise quickly covered the NEPN (typo in the agenda) policy coding system. He outlined the differences
between MASC for JIC vs. JK and demonstrated how JIC is aligned with all sorts of Student Conduct.
Conversely, JK aligns with discipline.
E.4. New Business— Discuss MASC Feedback on Policv JIC & Policv JK
Mr. Wise confirmed that in his follow-up with MASC, they confirmed they have no idea why there was a change
between the JIC and JK policies. They changed in 2014 or early and do not have notes on why the change
happened.
E.5. New Business — Discuss and Review Options for Policy JK and Subordinate Policies (JKB JKD JKE and
JJ1F)
Mr. Wise outlined the options for how to handle JK and potential subordinate policies — JKB, JKD, JKE, and
JKF. Legal counsel confirmed that we could break up JK or go with just one JK. Legal counsel was inclined to
stick with one JK due to all the MGL intertwined laws.
The Subcommittee discussed the two options. Multiple members pointed out how unwieldy a nine or ten -page
policy can be. Mr. Robinson voiced a preference to break down JK into JK and subordinate policies. Mrs.
Geffen agreed and focused on ease of use as well. Dr. Stys agreed to break it down as it would be easier to
add links to the spec sections. Mr. Wise agreed with that inclination but pointed out how difficult this will be
to break down for suspension and expulsion as those two are extremely intertwined in MGL.
Page 1 2
E.B. New Business — Review. Revise. and ADDrove MASC and Legal changes to Policv JK— Student Discioline
Mr. Wise started walking through the nine -page version of JK, section by section, demonstrating the
intertwining of the expulsion and suspension between MGL c. 71 s. 37H, s 37H%:, and s 37H%.
Mr. Robinson asked a clarifying question about a felony committed outside of school. Mr. Wise confirmed the
felony doesn't have to be at school.
Mr. Wise noticed that the expulsion section in 37H% was already covered in 37H and 37H% so he wanted to
follow up with legal counsel about why that section is included again.
Mrs. Gaffen asked a clarifying question about expelled students and whether the teachers must confinue to
give them work. Dr. Stys thought that expelled students didn't need makeup work. In practice, the district would
suggest they go to Job Core or something else. Mrs. Gaffen asked to get clarification about our responsibilities
in this case.
Mr. Robinson asked clarifying questions about in -school vs. out-of-school suspension. Dr. Stys mentioned it is
part of the new law with requires us to try multiple steps to resolve the issue before a suspension. Dr. Stys also
mentioned that they are working to make sure the school administration members are thoughtful about
suspensions and aligning punishment to the problem.
Mr. Wise motioned that the subcommittee table Policy JK, JKD, JKE, and JKF until available from legal
counsel. Mrs. Gaffen seconded the motion. The motion was carried 3-0 via roll call vote.
E.7. New Business — Review. Revise. and Approve Creation of Policy JKB — Detention of Studentsz
necessary
Mr. Wise mentioned he would be making a motion to indefinitely postpone this policy. Mr. Robinson asked for
background information on that recommendation. Mr. Wise mentioned it was because JK doesn't include any
information on detentions as currently crafted by legal counsel and legal counsel said we could have full local
control. However, we haven't worked to craft anything yet and could do so at any time in the future if we
decided to bring this back.
Mr. Wise motioned to Indefinitely postpone Policy JKB — Detention of Students. Mrs. Gaffen seconded
the motion. The motion was carried 3-0 via roll call vote.
E.B. New Business— Review. Revise. and Approve Creation of Policy JKD — Suspension of Students, if
necessary
Tabled per previous motion.
E.9. New Business— Review Revise and Approve Creation of Policy JKE — Expulsion of Students. if
necessary
Tabled per previous motion.
EA 0New Business — Review Revise and Approve Creation of Policy JKF — Discipline of Students with
Disabilities if necessary
Tabled per previous motion.
Motion to adjourn by Mrs. Gaffen, seconded by Mr. Robinson at approximately 9:59 a.m. The motion
was carried by a roll call vote of 3-0.
Page 1 3