Pierce Lowden’s recognition was a celebrated moment during the meeting, with educators sharing their experiences of his leadership and kindness. However, the report was not without its concerns, as it highlighted an issue with incomplete health screening records for five out-of-district students, prompting the development of an internal protocol to rectify the oversight.

The board’s satisfaction with the district’s overall performance contrasted with individual concerns about the assessment scores in core academic subjects. The superintendent acknowledged flaws in the assessment formula. Furthermore, the board discussed future projects, including solar expansion, and the need for further information on funding for such initiatives.

Another focal point of the meeting was the district’s approach to reading instruction, brought to the forefront by Coco Shaw’s impassioned plea for a curriculum revision. Shaw contended that the current reading method, which includes queuing, was not serving the needs of struggling readers and those with dyslexia. She emphasized the importance of evidence-based phonics instruction and urged the board to act in alignment with state laws regarding dyslexia screening and intervention. The superintendent responded by outlining the screening tools and intervention programs currently in use, such as Wilson Reading and Just Words, and discussed the district’s multi-tiered approach to literacy instruction.

The debate on curriculum effectiveness extended to the discussion of various literacy programs, including the pilot of the units of study program, and the controversy surrounding the Lucy Calkins program’s effectiveness. The board highlighted the district’s performance in literacy, which reportedly outperforms other districts in the county and state. However, questions were raised about the potential confusion caused by using different programs for students with varying needs. The board stressed the importance of offering diverse programs and assured that there are sufficient trained personnel to administer interventions like the Wilson Reading program for students with Individualized Education Programs (IEPs).

The meeting also tackled operational aspects such as summer 2024 capital projects, health and dental insurance renewals, and budget updates for the upcoming fiscal year. Communication was another key issue, with plans to distribute a survey after spring break and organize focus groups for board members and parents. Additionally, there was a discussion on policy revisions related to equity, non-discrimination, and hiring practices.

Legal services policy was debated, with board members expressing concerns over the use of multiple attorneys and the need for clearer guidelines on consulting legal counsel. The superintendent defended the necessity of direct communication with the attorney but agreed on the need for precise policy guidelines. The responsiveness of the current attorney and the potential transition to a new law firm were also discussed.

The next committee meetings were scheduled for May 7th, with the next full board meetings on May 10th and July 18th. The board’s ongoing self-evaluation process and upcoming certifications and awards were mentioned as well. The meeting concluded with a roll call for adjournment and the suggestion of a group picture to capture the board’s collegiality.