To put this post in context, last year we streamlined our committee structures to create three major committees, all of which meet on the same night. This has helped to focus discussions and vet issues before we cast our final votes at the monthly board meeting the following week. As we try to accomplish even more, however, this has meant some long meetings as we try to do the work that was formerly spread among 6 committees that met on different day.
So, a few items of note on the January 4 agendas (believe it or not, there is even more on the full agendas that are available on-line.). I will be writing separate entries about some of the more complex topics.
Planning and Development Committee
- Proposed changes to the policies on intra-district student transfers between schools and full-time inter-district open enrollment
- The Initial Proposal for an Environmentally-focused Charter School
- Proposed MOU to be signed agreeing to participate in the federally-funded Race to the Top initiative
Operational Support Committee
- Report on allocation of Title I resources over the past five years
- Shorewood Hills requests to amend Tax Incremental District # 3 and create a new TID
- 4K financing proposals (per December meetings where BOE rejected the initial proposals that would not have fully reimbursed community providers until the third year of operation)
- Proposed changes to the budget development timeline and processes beginning with the 2010-11 budget
- Proposed revisions to the approved spending of American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funds, and alternative uses of ARRA funds that were originally designated for 4K and other purposes that have been declared ineligible for ARRA resources
- Proposed measures to address bullying and promote safe learning environments
- TAG plan update
- Report on Infinite Campus use and what it would take to improve participation
1 comment:
I was interested in looking at the Report on allocation of Title I resources, so I printed a few pages. There is considerable data in the tables accounting for the allocation, but I was suprised at the derth of policy and descriptive information in the cover memo.
For example, what can Title I resources be used for, which academic areas are allowable for expenditures, how did and does the District make its decisions about allocating Title I resources among the myriad of categories and opportunities, are revenues for Title I included in budget planning and if not, how are Title I staff resources and non-staff expenditures treated so unnecessary cuts are not made. These are a few of the questions that came to mind. I'm not sure how the School Board, or the community, is to get an understanding of the process for the allocation of these resources.
During the discussions of the Fine Arts Task Force, we inquired about Title I dollars being used for arts education, because the arts is an academic area that would qualify for these funds. We were told, there was not any money in Title I for this. Clearly, looking at the tables, you can see how the Title I resources are allocated. That was not the intent of our question. We wanted to know what was discussed and decided before resources were allocated.
For me, having the numbers alone is absolute necessary (and appreciated) but not sufficient to my understanding of how these resources are allocated, how their effectiveness (where appropriate) is evaluated, etc.
Post a Comment