Email to Board-Re: Public Input to the Board

Mr. Darrell Evans
Washington County School Board
Downsville Pike
Hagerstown, MD 21713
Dear Mr. Evans,
As Communications Director of Rising to Learn, a grassroots organization dedicated to expanding the involvement of families in the business of Washington County Schools, I am writing to express several questions and concerns relating to the proposed Public Comments policy draft which was examined at the last business meeting.  You will recall that one or more of your board member colleagues expressed several of these questions, as well.  We trust that these questions and concerns will be addressed at the July 7, 2025, Policy Committee meeting.
In the interest of making the business of Washington County Public Schools as transparent and inclusive as possible, we ask the following questions:
  • What is the purpose of reducing the amount of time a speaker will be given by twenty percent to four minutes?
  • Why is there a limit of three topics which may be addressed by public comment?
  • Why is there a limit of fifteen speakers?
  • What is the purpose of using the word "may" instead of the word "will" when referencing the position of public comment in the agenda?
  • What is the location of public comment in the agenda?
It is the position of Rising to Learn that the first three questions relate to the limitation of public input to the board, an undesirable condition.  The Board expresses in its policy and in the words of the chair that the public is sincerely invited to share their thoughts relating to Board business, and that such input is welcome.  Undertaking these limitations is inconsistent with those thoughts and policy statements.  Accordingly, we urge that the period of time allocated to each speaker remain at five minutes, that there be no limit on the number of speakers, and that the only restriction on topics be to those which are relevant to Washington County Public Schools.
Furthermore, because the Board's actions to this point suggest a disinterest in public comment, there is concern that public comment be assumed to be a part of every Board business meeting, requiring that the word "will" be used to so indicate.  It is also important for the public to know the exact position of public comments in the Board agenda, rather than simply occurring after a review of the minutes; as you know this has been interpreted differently recently, moving public comments to the end of the meeting, from which position public comments can have no impact on Board decisions which occur during each meeting.
Respectfully,
Roger Stenersen
Communications Director
Rising to Learn
cc: Dr. Zentmeyer, Mr. Guessford, Ms. Beachley, Mr. Burkett, Ms. McCusker, Ms. Murray
** As of 7/29/25, Rising to Learn has not received a response.

Public Comment: 6/17/25

At the Policy Committee Meeting on June 11, Policy JK: Student Discipline was reviewed. According to notes taken by stakeholders in attendance, both Mr. Evans and Mr. Burkett voiced support for what they described as “more aggressive” disciplinary actions from the school
system.
Mr. Burkett expressed his belief in a “three strikes and you're out” approach, while Mr. Evans stated that if a student demonstrates they cannot be in the general population, we need to utilize online tools to provide those students with education. Coincidentally, this perspective seems to align with the push to open ABLE.
As the board calls for increasingly strict measures, two important questions remain: When will the support side of the equation be addressed? How will the support side of the equation be addressed?
To be clear, Rising To Learn agrees that students who consistently disrupt the classroom should not remain in that setting. Educators and students deserve classrooms that are safe and focused on learning. However, simply removing a dysregulated student from the classroom does not resolve the underlying issues, and this is where our concern lies. For example, if a student is acting out due to trauma at home, sending them back into that environment to complete online learning only compounds the problem. We are effectively placing them back in harm’s way and expecting them to thrive academically. Students who misbehave because they’re struggling with the content are unlikely to get
meaningful academic support at home. Without robust interventions in place, we’re not solving the issue, we’re delaying it. These students will return, and their needs will still be unmet.
Relocating a disruptive child to another room within the school, while sometimes necessary, is only a temporary fix if there are no meaningful supports provided. This approach comes with real resource demands: dedicated space, trained staff, and ongoing management.
We do recognize WCPS has invested in special programming and supports for students who need more. As need grows, so too must our investment. Services must expand in both scale and accessibility if we hope to make a real difference - more trained professionals, more counseling access, and more creative, individualized interventions that meet kids where they are.
Behavioral challenges vary in severity and root cause. PLEASE recognize the complexity of behavior. It is critical that the community and particularly parents understand how the elected board plans to respond to the wide spectrum of student needs. A more aggressive discipline
policy must be matched with equally robust and compassionate support systems, or we risk creating more harm than good. Many students who display highly aggressive behavior such as throwing chairs are grappling with deeper issues. These must be acknowledged and treated, not dismissed or outsourced to an at-home or distance learning model.
Dr. Sovine, Rising to Learn will be respectfully requesting the tiered breakdown of the 16,000 referrals mentioned during the June 11 Policy Committee meeting. It is vital to understand how many of these referrals fall into Tier 3, students who are persistently violent and disruptive, and how many are more manageable Tier 1 and Tier 2 cases.
Thank you for your time, and for your commitment to making decisions that consider not only discipline, but also dignity, growth, and positive, long-term outcomes for all students.

Policy Committee Meeting held on 6/11/25

The Policy Review and Development Committee met on Wednesday, June 11th. Board member Darrell Evans is the Committee Chair. These were the items on the agenda for discussion:

1. Review of Policy JK – “Student Discipline” (Student Discipline Regulation JK-R)
2. Review of proposed changes to Policy KD - “Opportunity for Public Comment at Board Business Meetings, Town Meetings, and Public Hearings and the Procedures Governing Such Proceedings”
3. Policy DLC – “Employee Expenses”
4. Policy DN – “Disposal of Surplus, Salvage, or Obsolete Equipment and/or Materials”
5. Review of proposed changes to Policy IMDA – “Silent Meditation”
6. Review of proposed changes to Policy IKE – “Promotion, Acceleration, and Retention of Students”
7. Review of proposed changes to Administrative Regulations BEE-R(1), (2), (3) – Rules of Procedures in Appeals and Hearings (§§7-305, 6-202, 4-205)
8. Review of Policy JFCA – “Student Dress Code” (Student Dress Code Regulation JFCA-R)
9. Date of next meeting

Policy KD Proposed Changes

Tuesday, June 17, 2025

At this afternoon’s BOE meeting that begins at 4:00 p.m. the Board will consider changes to Policy KD. Ask questions or express your concerns by writing the BOE at boe@wcps.k12.md.us or attend the meeting and speak during Public Comment.

You can read the proposed changes HERE.

 

Public Comment: 5/20/25

Roger Stenersen, Communications Director for RTL, read the following comments during public comment at the 5/20/25 business meeting:
----


Dr. Zentmeyer, Board Members and Dr. Sovine,

My name, as I shared at your last meeting, is Roger Stenersen.  I am representing the organization, Rising to Learn (RTL), a grassroots group which has as its mission to share your actions with as many people as possible who are vested in the decisions you make as the Board of Education which governs the school system delivering educational programming to their children.  We currently have over 560 followers to our Facebook page, considerably more than the number of individuals commenting on the Board’s web site about the most recent policy changes. and the number is rapidly growing.  Individuals interested in learning more about our organization may go to Risingtolearn.com. That’s Risingtolearn.com.

Last month I urged that you not only SAY you value public input, but that your ACTIONS reflect such an interest.  It is RTL’s current assessment that, making the new meeting time during the workday for most constituents and requiring that they sign up a day in advance if they wish to address the Board, your ACTIONS do NOT reflect your stated interest in receiving public input, as these changes to policy further limit constituents’ input.  It is a matter of Board Policy (ABA) that “all persons are encouraged” to present input to the Board; the policy changes you have adopted and are considering are in direct opposition to this statement. Wouldn’t it behoove you to be more inviting of public comment than to further restrict it? 

RTL has surveyed the public to share their views about recently approved and considered policy changes via the survey website, SurveyPlanet. We received over 200 responses, here are the questions and results:

Q1: The Board of Education changed the start time of its monthly Business meetings from 6:00 p.m. to 4:00 p.m. This makes it more difficult for working parents, WCPS staff, and other stakeholders to attend these meetings. Which start time do you favor 6:00 p.m. or 4:00 p.m.?
6pm: 198 (94.7%)
4pm: 11 (5.3%)

Q2: Previously, the Public Comment portion of the BOE’s monthly Business meeting was at the beginning of the meeting. This allowed stakeholders to share their concerns and suggestions regarding any agenda items that the Board would be voting on or discussing during the meeting. Public Comment has been moved to the end of the meeting and now occurs after both Old Business and New Business agenda items. Do you think Public Comment should be at the beginning of the meeting or at the end of the Business meeting?
Beginning: 197 (93.4%)
End: 14 (6.6%)

Q3: Board of Education Policy KD has been under review by the Board’s Policy Committee and a revised version of the policy had an approved first reading. The Board of Education decided to not have a second reading of the policy. The policy will undergo further review and possible revision by the Board’s Policy Committee and possibly brought back for a first reading by the Board. One revision under consideration would change the current policy and would require anyone wishing to speak during Public Comment to sign up by 4:00 p.m. the day before the meeting. Under the existing policy, speakers are encouraged to sign up in advance or they may sign up upon arrival at the meeting. Current practice under the existing policy has been to allow anyone who wishes to speak to be able to do so after those who signed up in advance have spoken. Do you think Policy KD should be written to maintain the current practice or be changed to require signing up by 4:00 p.m. the day before the meeting?
Maintain: 174 (83.3%)
Change: 35 (16.7%)

Rising to Learn knows the value of stakeholder input and feedback in the decision making that will occur and expects that you will consider these survey results as you discuss and deliberate.

Any annual budget is an amazingly complex undertaking, and we certainly commend staff who assisted you in providing the data to help guide your decision-making; their work in providing clarity is indeed, very  impressive.  But there are aspects of the school system’s budget development which, we believe, were missed opportunities.  For example, the Budget Advocacy and Review Advisory Committee commended the Board for including in its original draft budget funding earmarked for safety and security; that funding, despite such recognition, was removed. Indeed, given the testimony of behavioral management staff at your work session on May, school safety and security personnel are one of the most valuable factors which limit untoward behavior on the part of students; your elimination of the proposed safety and security positions from the budget which,  perhaps, reflects a contradiction in values - that is, you say you want to curtail untoward student behavior, but, on the contrary, you cut the positions which you are told can make a difference in reducing such behavior.  Furthermore, if the Board is going to employ a Budget Advisory Committee, it should be incumbent upon you to acknowledge the suggestions and be transparent when not following the suggestions made by the committee. It’s RTL’s recollection that during the election campaign, several of you even shared an interest in strengthening safety and security, but then you eliminated the proposed expansion of safety and security officers which would have provided equitable resources among all high schools as reflected in the superintendent’s proposed budget.

RTL is quite concerned about your elimination of the position of Supervisor of Equity and Excellence. It is our understanding that each school system in Maryland is mandated to have an individual who bears the responsibility of administering this program, and we ask, “who will address this responsibility?”  Will those responsibilities be added to the job description of another staff member, whose workload is already barely manageable?  Will that work be delegated to others whose plates are already full?  When will the Board update this COMAR-mandated plan and share it publicly; when will the annual report be published and made public?

RTL thanks you for your kind attention, and we look forward to our continuing dialog with you.

Update: Email to Board- Re: Questions About Budget Proposals

This is an update to the original email we sent to the BOE email address on April 5th. The entire thread is in this post and the last entry is where we are as of 5/3/25.

> Response from Dr. Sovine:

Hello Ms. Gruhler,
First, I have to apologize that you did not receive a response to your email from myself or the Board in a timely manner. According to our Technology team, your email address was identified as being from outside of the country, and the IP was likely flagged as being high-risk. Your communication was released from quarantine and distributed to email inboxes just this morning.

I have taken the opportunity to address some of your questions that are pertinent to operations in my role. I have included your questions and my responses in blue here:

  1. Regarding the proposed 1% across-the-board cut to the FY 2026 Budget by some BOE members:

Please define “across the board” in this context.
Given that employee salaries and benefits represent the largest portion of the budget, how will these cuts impact staff compensation and benefits?
Before any programs or positions are reduced or eliminated, what data-driven rationale is being used to justify those decisions?
How are potential advantages and disadvantages of such cuts being fully assessed and documented before implementation?
The Board did not reach consensus on this scenario.  Therefore, the 1% across the board cut is no longer being considered by the Board.

  1. On the proposed reinstatement of ABLE (cost: $609,455):

Student enrollment in the elementary ABLE program declined from 161 in 2021 to 58 in 2023. What was the cost per pupil in the elementary ABLE program during the 2023–2024 school year?
Cost per pupil in FY2024 was approximately $13,022.56.  This includes the cost of staff, utilities for the Funkstown school, maintenance expenses, professional development etc.

What academic and social outcome data are being used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the K–5 ABLE program prior to its closure?
Dr. Zentmeyer suggested advertising ABLE starting with homeschoolers. What is the no-cost advertising strategy being proposed to “do more with less”?
Why is the focus specifically on homeschoolers?
Attracting homeschooled students is necessary as those students can be counted in our enrollment, making them eligible for state and local funding.  If only current students enroll in the elementary ConnectED program, the school system will realize additional salary costs, without new revenue to support the expense.

For transparency, do any current board members have children or grandchildren who are homeschooled?

  1. Please explain the concept of “goal-oriented budgeting.”

How do the board members advocating for this approach see its goals differing from those laid out annually by the superintendent, the full BOE, and in the WCPS Strategic Plan?

  1. Budget Reduction Totals:

What is the total dollar amount being cut from the FY 2026 budget?
The Superintendent reduced expenses from the FY25 Budget by $1,613,276 when creating the recommended budget for the Board of Education to consider.  Based on the consensus reached by the Board members during the April 8, 2025, work session, the Board is reducing the FY26 draft budget by another $955,900 by eliminating the expansion of the security assistant program and leaving the Cascade administrative assistant as a 10-month position.  Additionally, the $2.24M allocation to the bus replacement cycle is being redeployed to the Other Post Employment Benefits (OPEB) line item due to the county’s indication that it will pay for the bus replacements in FY26 through the Capital Improvement Program. 

Considering both the 1% across-the-board cut and the reductions included in the Superintendent’s Recommended Budget (adopted as the BOE Draft Budget), what is the total amount being cut from the Board’s adopted FY 2026 Draft Budget?
Since the recommendation of the 1% across the board reduction did not reach consensus among the Board, the reduction from the BOE’s Draft Budget is $955,900 as noted above.

----

> Response from President Zentmeyer:

Good morning,
Thank you for your questions.

----

> Response from Rising to Learn:

Thank you for your response Dr. Sovine.

It is odd that other WCPS addresses had no problem receiving my email from this address prior to me sending this one to the boe address.
I look forward to getting a response to the rest of my questions.
I also want to acknowledge Dr. Zentmeyer for her response. I do want to point out that Dr. Zentmeyer’s response was sent to my school employee email and did not include the BOE email.
I see no reason for any response to be sent to my school employee email since there was nothing wrong with the email address itself as it was received, it was just being held in quarantine.
I would appreciate future responses not be sent to my employee email address, as they are not being sent from there.
----
> Response from President Zentmeyer:
Good morning,
There was some tech glitch that would not allow me to respond to your email. I did want you to know that I had received your input. As always, your feedback is important.
----
> Response from Rising to Learn:

Hello!
It is my hope that the email glitch has been resolved. We have a few additional questions and will also be including those from our previous email that were not yet addressed, aside from the one Dr. Sovine responded to.

Specifically, we would like to know all meetings (e.g., advisory committees) that are held outside of school hours during the school year, and which staff members attend them.
For example, the Budget Advisory Committee meets in the evenings with various community members, and is attended by Jeff Proulx, his administrative assistant Karen Kretzer, and others.

Previous questions awaiting answers:

  • What academic and social outcome data are being used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the K–5 ABLE program prior to its closure?
  • Dr. Zentmeyer suggested advertising ABLE starting with homeschoolers. What is the no-cost advertising strategy being proposed to “do more with less”?
  • Please explain the concept of “goal-oriented budgeting. How do the board members advocating for this approach see its goals differing from those laid out annually by the superintendent, the full BOE, and in the WCPS Strategic Plan? This was mentioned by several board members.

----

> Response from President Zentmeyer:

Good morning,
Thank you for your continued interest in WCPS. Your questions have been forwarded to Dr. Sovine. I am confident that he will address your concerns as they are operational in nature.
----

> Response from Dr. Sovine:
Ms. Gruhler,

Staff have prepared responses to your questions that involve school operations. In particular, I am providing charts that include information about the Board’s citizen advisory committee meetings and ABLE student data.

BOE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETINGS

COMMITTEE LIAISON ADDITIONAL STAFF DATE(S) START TIME
Budget Review and Advisory Committee Jeff Proulx Eric Sisler

Kameron Shives

Karen Kretzer

 2/25/25

3/5/25

 6:00 PM
Calendar Advisory Committee Dr. Webster Ashley Barron

Kevin Grimm

Identified school staff per Committee guidelines

 9/5/24

9/19/24

9/26/24

 4:00 PM
Citizens Advisory Council Committee Dr. Webster N/A N/A
Ethics Advisory Panel Committee Ilissa Ramm Attending staff depends on the nature of the ethics concern N/A N/A
Facilities and Enrollment Advisory Committee Rob Rollins

Chad Criswell

 Wendy Smith

Erin Anderson

 6/6/24 (cancelled)

1/15/25

 6:00 PM
Family Life Advisory Committee Eric Michael N/A N/A
Finance and Audit Review Advisory Committee Eric Sisler Jeff Proulx

Karen Kretzer

Accountants

 6/6/24

9/20/24

 12:00 PM
Safe Schools Advisory Committee Steve Ganley N/A N/A
District Technology Planning Advisory Committee Joe Allen

Danielle Kelley

 Jeanette Brill

Identified school staff per Committee Guidelines

 2/12/25 (postponed)

2/19/25

 5:00 PM

END OF YEAR ACADEMY OF BLENDED LEARNING ATTENDANCE (2023-2024)

GRADE 1 2 3 4 5
WCPS 92.7% 92.9% 93.2% 92.8% 92.8%
ABLE 90.1% 90.7% 92.6% 83.2% 85.8%

ABLE ELA 2023-2024 MCAP DATA

GRADE TOTAL STUDENTS TESTED AT ABLE ABLE % PROFICIENT WCPS % PROFICIENT
3 *SUPPRESSED TO PROTECT STUDENT PRIVACY*
4 11 36.4% 50.5%
5 17 23.5% 46.3%
TOTAL 28 28.6% 48.0%*

*Includes Grade 3 data

ABLE MATH 2023-2024 MCAP DATA

GRADE TOTAL STUDENTS TESTED AT ABLE ABLE % PROFICIENT WCPS % PROFICIENT
3 *SUPPRESSED TO PROTECT STUDENT PRIVACY*
4 11 18.2% 34.1%
5 16 *SUPPRESSED* 30.3%
TOTAL 27 11.1% 34.6%*

*Includes Grade 3 data

In regards to the budget, as superintendent, I propose expenditures and investments to the Board that I believe are necessary to serve students to the best of our ability. The superintendent’s general fund draft budget is developed after completing a line-by-line review of expenditures with department leaders, considering available resources, and aligning proposed expenditures with the goals of the WCPS strategic plan.

----

> Response from Rising to Learn: 

Thank you, Dr. Sovine, for your response.
Dr. Zentmeyer, I am seeking clarification on the following questions from the elected Board, as these matters were initiated by Board members themselves.

First, the concept of “goal-oriented budgeting” was introduced by an elected Board member. Could you please explain what is meant by this term? Additionally, how do the Board members advocating for this approach view its objectives as differing from the annual goals established by the Superintendent, the full Board of Education, and those outlined in the WCPS Strategic Plan?

Second, the decision to reopen the ABLE program was driven by the elected Board. While Dr. Sovine has provided data as requested, it was ultimately the elected Board that voted to reopen the program. We would appreciate clarification on what data the Board is using to evaluate and support the effectiveness of the ABLE program.

Thank you for your time and attention to these matters. I look forward to the Board’s response.

 

###

 

Email to Board- Re: Questions About Budget Proposals

Greetings,

After watching the April 1 BOE work session, the public is left with many questions. It is understood that there is to be another BOE work session before the BOE business meeting on April 15. We would appreciate having these questions addressed and answered during that work session or answered in an email prior to the April 15 BOE Business Meeting. 

Thank you.
Dottie Gruhler, Chairperson
Rising To Learn, Inc.

——————

1. Regarding the proposed 1% across-the-board cut to the FY 2026 Budget by some BOE members:

• Please define “across the board” in this context.

• Given that employee salaries and benefits represent the largest portion of the budget, how will these cuts impact staff compensation and benefits?

• Before any programs or positions are reduced or eliminated, what data-driven rationale is being used to justify those decisions?

• How are potential advantages and disadvantages of such cuts being fully assessed and documented before implementation?

2. On the proposed reinstatement of ABLE (cost: $609,455):

• Student enrollment in the elementary ABLE program declined from 161 in 2021 to 58 in 2023. What was the cost per pupil in the elementary ABLE program during the 2023–2024 school year?

• What academic and social outcome data are being used to demonstrate the effectiveness of the K–5 ABLE program prior to its closure?

• Dr. Zentmeyer suggested advertising ABLE starting with homeschoolers. What is the no-cost advertising strategy being proposed to “do more with less”?

• Why is the focus specifically on homeschoolers?

• For transparency, do any current board members have children or grandchildren who are homeschooled?

3. Please explain the concept of “goal-oriented budgeting.”

• How do the board members advocating for this approach see its goals differing from those laid out annually by the superintendent, the full BOE, and in the WCPS Strategic Plan?

4. Budget Reduction Totals:

• What is the total dollar amount being cut from the FY 2026 budget?

• Considering both the 1% across-the-board cut and the reductions included in the Superintendent’s Recommended Budget (adopted as the BOE Draft Budget), what is the total amount being cut from the Board’s adopted FY 2026 Draft Budget?

School Board Meeting Changes- How They Affect You

One of the first actions taken by the newly elected school board was to adjust the timing of business meetings and shift the schedule for public comment. Previously, business meetings started at 6:00 pm, with public comment at the beginning. Now, business meetings begin at 4:00 pm, and public comment has been moved to the end of the meeting.

This change impacts stakeholders’ ability to voice their opinions and concerns. Holding the meeting at 4:00 pm makes it difficult for many staff members to attend or watch the meeting live due to after-school commitments, community club activities, and extended work hours. 

Shifting public comment to the end of the meeting further diminishes the opportunity for stakeholders to have an effective impact. Board members will discuss, amend, and vote on agenda items before hearing public input. So, if a stakeholder reads the agenda and wants to raise valid concerns, it becomes too late — the board will have already voted before they can speak.

This issue is particularly concerning regarding the upcoming budget meetings. The school board will hold a budget work session on April 1st, with no public comment allowed. The next meeting, on April 15th, will include public comment, at the end of the meeting. This means the board will discuss, amend, and vote on issues without giving stakeholders the opportunity to voice their opinions beforehand.

What can you do? You can send an email, but your ability to publicly express your thoughts and concerns before the board votes has been significantly limited.

Furthermore, on March 18th, additional changes were made that further restrict stakeholders’ ability to participate. Policy KD, which is currently under revision, has already undergone its first reading. While some proposed changes to the policy are positive, a particular concern is the reduced window for signing up to speak.

Under the current policy, speakers are not required to sign up before the meeting, but are expected to sign the log at the speakers’ table. The proposed change now requires speakers to sign up by 4 PM on the Monday before a business meeting, shortening the time available to sign up.

These changes do not expand opportunities for stakeholder participation; rather, they limit it.

These changes impact staff, parents, community members, and students. Given our diverse community with its varying schedules and commitments, we seek greater flexibility to express our voices, not less.

Here is the link to the policy. The proposed changes are in blue.

A Guide to Understanding Diversity, Equity and Inclusion in Schools

The concepts of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) have become increasingly prominent in education, sparking conversations among parents about their implications for their children’s schooling. Whether you are a supporter of these initiatives or have concerns about their effects, understanding DEI is essential for engaging in meaningful discussions about your child’s education. This article will break down the definitions of DEI, explore its intended goals, address common concerns, and highlight the importance of DEI in fostering a positive learning environment.

#Definitions

**Diversity**
Diversity refers to the acknowledgment and celebration of differences among students, including race, religion, sexual orientation, and socioeconomic status (SES). The intent behind promoting diversity is to create a respectful environment where every student feels valued. However, some parents worry that an overemphasis on diversity might lead to divisions rather than unity, potentially detracting from academic focus.

**Equity**
Equity focuses on ensuring that all students have equal access to educational opportunities and resources, with varying levels of support based on individual needs. While the aim is to provide tailored assistance, critics argue that equity initiatives could lower academic standards or create perceived unfair advantages for certain groups, raising questions about maintaining rigorous academic expectations.

**Inclusion**
Inclusion means that all students are welcomed and valued in our schools and classrooms, regardless of their unique needs or backgrounds. While inclusion is vital for fostering a sense of belonging, some parents express concerns that it may lead to challenges in classroom management and academic performance, particularly when diverse needs are not adequately met.

**Equality**
Equality involves treating all students the same, regardless of their individual circumstances. While this approach seems fair, it can result in inequities in educational outcomes. For instance, if all students receive the same level of support, those who require additional assistance may struggle, compromising their educational experience.

# Significance of DEI initiatives

Understanding the significance of DEI initiatives is crucial for fostering a well-rounded educational experience. Here are several reasons why DEI is essential in schools:

– Preparing Global Citizens: In an increasingly interconnected world, students will encounter diverse perspectives and cultures throughout their lives. DEI initiatives help prepare students to navigate and thrive in this global society, promoting mutual respect and understanding among peers.
– Enhancing Academic Performance: Research has shown that diverse learning environments can lead to improved academic outcomes. Students exposed to varied perspectives are more likely to develop critical thinking skills, creativity, and problem-solving abilities, which are essential in today’s job market.
– Fostering a Positive School Climate: DEI initiatives contribute to a more inclusive and positive school environment. When students feel accepted and valued, they are more likely to engage in their learning, participate in school activities, and build healthy relationships with peers and teachers.
– Reducing Discrimination and Bullying: Schools that actively promote DEI are often better equipped to address issues of discrimination and bullying. By fostering a culture of respect and understanding, students learn the importance of empathy and are less likely to engage in harmful behaviors.
– Supporting All Learners: DEI initiatives recognize that students come from various backgrounds and have different needs. By providing tailored support and resources, schools can ensure that every student has the opportunity to succeed, leading to more equitable educational outcomes.
– Encouraging Civic Engagement: An inclusive education fosters a sense of responsibility and civic engagement among students. Understanding diverse perspectives encourages students to participate actively in their communities and advocate for social justice and equity.

#Practical Examples of DEI in Schools

DEI principles are implemented in schools through various programs and resources aimed at supporting all students. Examples include:

– GATE (Gifted and Talented Education): Programs designed to challenge and engage gifted students through advanced learning opportunities.
– Interventions: Targeted support for students who may be struggling academically, providing them with the necessary tools to succeed.
– Accessibility Features: Infrastructure such as wheelchair ramps that ensure all students can navigate the school safely and easily.
– 1:1 Support: Individualized assistance for students who need tailored help, such as those with learning disabilities.
– Behavior Support Programs: Initiatives designed to help students develop positive behavior and social skills.
– Specialized Programs: Such as Marshall Street, Summit, Connections, STEP, and RISE, which cater to specific student needs, providing customized educational experiences.
– Nutritional Support: Allergy-friendly breakfasts, lunches, and snacks to ensure that all students have access to safe and healthy food options.
– Transportation Services: Buses designed for students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs) or Section 504 plans, ensuring they can access school effectively.

# Concerns About DEI in Schools

While DEI initiatives aim to create a supportive and engaging environment for all students, there are several concerns that parents may have:

– Academic Standards: Some parents worry that DEI initiatives could lead to lowered academic expectations, potentially diminishing the overall quality of education.
– Focus on Identity: The emphasis on diversity can sometimes lead to a focus on identity rather than shared values and goals, which may create divisions among students.
– Resource Allocation: Programs designed to support specific groups can raise concerns about the allocation of resources, leading parents to question whether funds and attention are being diverted from essential core education.
– Classroom Dynamics: Inclusion policies may challenge classroom dynamics, particularly when addressing the needs of students with vastly different abilities, leading to concerns about teachers being stretched too thin.
– Perceived Political Agenda: Some parents see DEI initiatives as part of a broader political agenda, fearing that educational content may shift to reflect particular ideologies rather than focusing on academic achievement.

# Conclusion
Understanding DEI in schools is crucial for parents, as it shapes the educational landscape your child navigates. Engaging with educators and school administrators about DEI initiatives can help clarify their implementation and impact on your child’s learning experience. Whether you support or question these initiatives, open dialogue is vital for advocating for educational practices that prioritize academic excellence while ensuring that all students feel respected and valued. Ultimately, the goal is to foster a balanced approach that supports both individual needs and high academic standards, creating an environment where every child can thrive.

Author:
Ellen McKerrow
Ellen is a counselor and has a Masters in School Counselling and a Masters in Trauma-Informed Education

Types and Notifications of Board of Education Meetings

The following is a copy of Policy BD. This policy explains the types of meetings that are held by the Board of Education, and how the community is notified of such meetings. You can view the policy on BoardDocs.

I. Purpose
The purpose of Policy BD is to establish a framework governing the meetings of the Board of Education.

II. Policy Statement/Procedures

A. The Board of Education will hold regularly scheduled meetings throughout the year. Those meetings include the following:

1. Business Meetings:
a. Business meetings are for the discharge of the Board of Education’s legal responsibilities and include, but are not limited to, discussions of policy, system business, planning, educational program, and matters of community interest.
b. Business meetings of the Board of Education shall be held on Tuesdays in the Center for Education Services auditorium, or at other such locations as designated by the Board, at times to be determined by the Board. The Board may, from time to time, change the day on which a meeting is conducted.

2. Closed Sessions:
a. The discussion of matters relative to land and site acquisition, personnel, consultation with legal counsel, labor relations, and safety and security shall take place in closed sessions. No formal action may be taken on topics discussed in closed sessions; provision for statements of position or questions on points of order shall be made in open meetings.
b. Closed sessions shall be called as needed. Attendance at closed meetings will be restricted to Board of Education members, the Superintendent, the Board’s attorney, and those persons invited by the Board and/or Superintendent.

B. The Board of Education may also convene additional meetings in accordance with state law. Meetings may be called by the President of the Board of Education, the Superintendent, or at the written request of a majority of Board members, with the purpose given in the call of the meeting to be provided as soon as feasible. Additional meetings include the following:

1. Special Meetings:
Special meetings of the Board of Education shall be conducted as the duties and business of the Board require. No business shall be transacted except that for which the special meeting was convened unless by consensus of the Board members present.
2. Work Sessions:
These sessions may be scheduled, as needed, to provide Board of Education members with opportunities for planning and informally discussing, in detail, proposed policies, program changes, or other items of information requiring in-depth examination. Formal action by the Board may not be taken at work sessions.
3. Town Meeting:
Town meetings provide information and dialogue on a specific topic or topics pertinent to community concerns. A meeting open to the public may be scheduled for the purpose of enhancing communications between the Board of Education, as a body politic, and the school community. 
4. Public Hearings:
Public hearings may be conducted, as needed, to assure adequate time for the public to express their views regarding a specific issue. There will be no dialogue between the Board of Education and the public at public hearings.

C. All meetings shall comply with the Open Meetings Act and are open to the public unless closed under the Open Meetings Act provisions.

D. The public will be notified of meetings and notice provided as soon as possible in accordance with the Open Meetings Act.