Ms. Clark reported on attendance data, which is lower than earlier in the year. More students are calling out sick than earlier in the year. She reviewed chronic absenteeism rate, which is better than our chronic absenteeism rate in in person learning. She outlined the process of what happens at different points in student absences: at number 3, 5, 7.

Mr. Janes inquired about staff well-being. Ms. Clark shared how we are adjusting schedules and required tasks for teachers in order to accommodate different needs coming up for staff during this unpredictable time. Ms. Martin shared that the mid year teacher survey data will be available for the committee to look at next month.

Ms. Clark then followed up on interim assessment data from ANet for special education students, which we said last month we would do. There is a gap between general education student performance and special education student performance at 6th grade in particular and in reading at 7th and 8th. In order to put the data in perspective, a strong average that is related to strong performance on MCAS tends to be mid fifties to low sixties. The committee would like to look at MAP Growth data for special education students next to their interim assessment data.

Mr. Swan shared how this tiered focus monitoring system is a replacement for the state's coordinated program review that they did with each district. Now, the tiered focused monitoring approach is differentiated by districts based on the evidence districts submit each year. Although this is a still a six year process, what ESE focuses on in each three year cycle varies. The monitoring system looks at special education, civil rights, and English Learner compliance. Our school recently submitted a self assessment this fall (October 30) around different indicators for special education compliance. When ESE visits in the spring, they will be doing interviews with staff and parents around the self assessment we submitted. The self assessment focuses on a sample of 15 individual student records as a sample from the school as a whole. There are three indicators that the state gives a rating on before their site visit, two of which are relevant for our school. These indicators are related to meeting timelines for meetings and IEP completion and on transition goals for students. We met the requirements for 100% compliance on these indicators. Based on our self assessment data submitted in the fall, ESE assigned us to tier 1, which means we have the lowest level of intervention and monitoring required. The on-site visit will be in March via phone or Zoom. This information from this tiered monitoring report is a part of our five year charter renewal.

Ms. Martin shared how we have brought back a pod of six students who all have IEPs and for whom remote learning is not working. We hired an academic tutor to support those students and our operations team has put in place COVID procedures for that group. 

Ms. Sela shared the components of the accountability system for high schools as it exists now, though it could evolve by the time our high school opens. The state designed the accountability system to look at all students and the lowest quartile of students.  The first three indicators are absolute performance indicators (i.e. how students did on state end of year assessments), which is true for both middle school and high school. The next set of indicators are focused on student growth on end of year assessments. This is similar to middle school performance as well. The next indicator is focused on English Learners, who can often be the most vulnerable learners. This indicator focuses on their progress in their English language development. The last indicator that is the same between middle school and high school is chronic absenteeism.

Four year cohort graduation rate, extended engagement rate, annual drop out rate, and advanced coursework participation rate are the four indicators that are additional for high schools. Ms. Sela emphasized we will build our knowledge of these over the coming months. We discussed how next time we could talk more about the types of questions we as a board could be asking the design team and need to ask to govern effectively once the high school launches.