At the forefront of the meeting was the intricate issue of cell phone usage in schools. The policy, aimed at restricting student cell phone use during school hours, has been met with challenges, particularly at the high school level. Teachers expressed concerns about confiscating phones, especially from students who may have familial responsibilities or work commitments.

The debate extended to whether students should be allowed to take phones to the bathroom, acknowledging the potential for confrontation. The committee stressed the importance of students learning to self-regulate their phone use and the relevance of this skill for future workplace environments. The committee also discussed the connection between cell phone use and classroom attendance, with some students potentially using their phones as a reason to leave the classroom frequently.

The conversation about cell phone policy wasn’t limited to enforcement concerns. Outreach strategies were proposed to better manage students who consistently conflict over phone usage. The committee suggested that setting clear expectations at the start of the school year could mitigate classroom issues. Furthermore, the committee saw the need for a community-wide conversation about cell phone use, especially considering the 200 students who had their phones taken away in the previous year.

Challenges of enforcing the policy during passing times and crowded hallways were also acknowledged. Consistent messaging and reminders for both students and teachers were deemed critical. Additionally, collaboration with the Revere Teachers Association was proposed to address behavior and classroom management. The committee agreed on the necessity of ongoing meetings with teachers to ensure clarity on policy expectations and to provide them with the necessary support. Engaging parents in the conversation, particularly for high school students, was also considered vital.

Beyond the cell phone policy discourse, the committee discussed the adoption of illustrative math at the elementary level and the decision by middle school teachers to also use the program. However, high school teachers opted for reveal math, a program designed to cater to students needing additional support as well as those ready for more challenging work. This divergence in math programs sparked a conversation about the need for consistency across grade levels and the potential complexities of using multiple math programs.

The meeting also touched on the results of a caregiver survey, which highlighted a high level of satisfaction among parents interacting with the Parent Information Center, with 91% feeling supported by someone who spoke their language. On the subject of special education, nearly 90% of parents felt that the information in their child’s IEP meeting was explained in a way they understood. However, there was a notable gap in understanding for English learner services, with only 72.3% of parents feeling informed about how their child received these services.

Updates from the Equity Advisory Board were presented, detailing ongoing projects to promote a culture of belonging and inclusivity within the school community. Efforts included creating a staff resource website for culturally relevant holidays and celebrations, developing equity interview questions for the hiring process, and implementing an equity course for new teachers. The board also underscored the importance of family engagement in special education and the monitoring of caregiver communication practices over time.

Additionally, the superintendent presented data from classroom observations, which identified areas of strength and improvement in student engagement and instructional practices.

While the committee covered a breadth of topics, including the successful implementation of the Open and Sayed program in middle and high school science classes and the positive culture of learning observed in the Gleam program, a decision was made to defer some items to the next meeting owing to the lengthy discussions.