C. Wright reviewed recent communications with potential board members. She highlighted their strengths, backgrounds, interests, and possible committee and officer roles. She suggested next steps for prospective board members, including attending a future board meeting, invitations to join a committee, and speaking with a current board member. Committee members reviewed board needs, present and future.  K. Sved emphasized importance of candidates observing board meetings. He expanded upon the candidates' strengths and skill sets.  A. Gallegos Fambrini mentioned importance of defining direction of the board and being proactive to add members in relation to that direction. Members discussed the level of urgency related to board expansion and related timelines.  JP Anderson mentioned further positive, personal qualities of the candidates. 

C. Wright will invite two candidates to our next board meeting and connect them with other board members.
 

Members reviewed the document listing LCAP goals and potential dashboard components.  C. Wright recommended adding an additional column to the the table of components to denote the frequency of each data report (annually or quarterly, for example).  S. Martin will add the column as a next step.  C. Wright also discussed with attendees the possibility that it might not be best to include MTSS data in the dashboard at this stage. The members also discussed NWEA MAP with similar concerns. These two components will not be included in the dashboard based on consensus reached during the discussion. 

A. Gallegos Fambrini sought more information on the proposed coaching component and its connection to the LCAP. As the discussion progressed, she suggested, in addition to collecting data relating to the number of coaching sessions completed, that teachers provide feedback on the value of the coaching that they have received. Members also discussed the development of teacher rubrics, and K. Sved provided clarity on the timeline for such a project. 

Members agreed that, in the case of tracking achievement, three components (as proposed) might be too numerous. The committee agreed that NS weekly assessments are an achievement metric of paramount importance. The committee noted alignment between development of the dashboard and the implementation of a new Academic Success Committee.

C. Wright expressed support for the Academic Success Committee (ASC), as did JP Anderson and A. Gallegos Fambrini. The latter asked if membership was limited to existing board members.  K. Sved shared his views on the advantages of providing an additional venue for board members to explore and discuss academic matters in greater detail and depth beyond what is provided during regular board meetings.

This topic was not discussed at the meeting.

The committee will meet on Monday, December 17th, from 10:30 am to 11:30 am.