GBAPSD Board of Education Meeting: November 4, 2019


NARRATOR: The views and
opinions in this program are not those of
CESA7 or Spectrum. (bright music) Brenda: Six board members
in attendance tonight and also two inter-city
student council members: Luke Pazani, our president
who’s from Southwest and Jasmine Zarate
from East High School. Also, at the table to my left
is Dr. Michelle Langenfeld and our board
secretary, Sandy Heller. (paper flipping) I would like to remind members of the public and
people in the audience that you can view the
board agenda and handouts as well as minutes
from past meetings by visiting the district
website at www.gbaps.org. Click on our district at the top and then board of
education on the left menu and a new left menu will come up with a link to
agendas and minutes. This link will take you to a
website called agenda manager where all board agendas, minutes, and handouts from
board meetings are housed. Also, the board will
provide our community with two different opportunities
during tonight’s meeting to speak before the board. The first opportunity is
during our open forum, which comes up next and second opportunity
is during agenda items where indicated by public
comment on our agenda. All speakers must
fill out a form indicating their
desire to speak. If you wish to speak
during the open forum, you may do so with
respect to items that are posted on
tonight’s agenda or any other matter you wish
to share with the board. Please know that Wisconsin’s
open meeting laws prohibit the board from
conducting business on matters brought during this open forum. The board will also
permit public comment during agenda items as
noted on the board’s agenda during this public
participation time consistent with state
and federal laws, board members may engage in
dialogue with the speakers. In order that all
voices are heard the board will
suspend engagement until all speakers have
had a chance to speak. The process for speaking
during the agenda items is as follows: the board will first
hear the presentation and discuss the agenda
item before calling on those who desire to speak, (clears throat) if you want to speak during
a specific agenda item, please fill out a form and
indicate that on the form and give it to the board
secretary at any point during the meeting. If you desire to speak and
haven’t yet filled out a form, just indicate that to
the board secretary and you can fill a
form out afterwards. The board secretary
will provide the names of those wishing to
speak to the board member conducting that
part of the meeting and you will be
called upon to speak at the appropriate time. Please keep your
comments to five minutes. Prior to starting your
comments, please provide your name and address. So we have a few people
who would like to speak before, a couple
people, who would like to speak before the
board this evening. I’ll call them up in the
order they were received. Actually, hang on just a minute. (papers flipping) I’ll call them up in the
order they were received. Actually… Nevermind. Both of them have to do
with the agenda item. So we’ll hang on to those until
we get to that agenda item. Is there anyone else
who would like to speak during this open forum? Seeing none, we’ll then
continue with our agenda. First is our teaching
and learning discussion and that’ll be facilitated by… Katie? Okay. Oh, there it is, sorry. It’s at the top. Katie: Thank you, Brenda. We have two discussion items, the first one is student
fundraising activities policy. Melissa: Good evening. Tonight we are bringing forward the student fundraising
activities policy. I’m presenting but there have
been a number of individuals who have put forth a lot
of work into this policy, including all of the
executives directors, Mr. Tim Flood, who
oversees our activities and athletic
directors, as well as principle input
regarding this policy. This is a long time coming. We do not currently have
a fundraising policy in our numbered policy series. One still exists in our
old letter policy series but given the number of
stakeholders and input, we wanted to make sure
that we wrote a policy that reflected the work of
our students in our groups and also met the
needs of parents in our district and our schools. So that’s what we’re bringing
forward to you tonight. The policy reflects
really what our students and our student groups are
doing on the school level. It also reflects that
the policy as written in the letter series prohibits
door-to-door fundraising and we know that our students
are doing door-to-door fundraising and the
state law allows it and as noted here in the policy, the policy language is
consistent with the state legal requirements, if students
are going to do door-to-door fundraising, it needs
to be voluntary, at a certain age level, it needs to be
supervised by an adult and the requirements
with respect to that door-to-door fundraising. So if you have any questions? Katie: Brenda? Brenda: I’m wondering
under permissible activities, number four. A1C that says the
fundraising project may not create a
significant inequity and or competitive
advantage among schools, students, district programs,
employees or facilities. I’m wondering if you
could give me an example of when that might occur. -Sure. Melissa: Sure. This is the language that
needs to be in policies with respect to gifts or
donations or fundraising for Title IX purposes, that
we cannot have inequities between programs based on
Title IX considerations. So, for example, if the
girls’ basketball team was able to fundraise
a very large amount in order to buy an
extra coach or two and that was not reflective in the ratios that we
have set out for sports and the boys’ team was
not able to spend money to buy that coach, then we would need to
do a Title IX analysis to make sure that it
is not inequitable and it’s not just simply
numbers to numbers, three coaches versus
two, it’s is it meeting the needs of how many
girls have gone out? Is it meeting the demands
of what the sport requires? And go forward and
do that analysis to make sure that we’re
not being inequitable on those bases. Brenda: So wouldn’t, so it just is outlining the
fact that if something comes up, then it has to be evaluated
before it’s given the okay and it doesn’t mean
that if it comes forward and people are concerned about
it, that it can’t be done, it just might have to be
done a little differently. Melissa: Correct and
we’re already doing that with respect to our gifts policy and our booster club policy
because once it becomes the district’s money,
whether it’s fund raised from outside groups
or our own groups, we have to comply with the
legal requirements of Title IX. Brenda: Okay, thanks. Katie: Any other
questions or comments? Andrew? Okay. Andrew: So, what is the, what are the state rules about principal discretion to allow some fundraisers
that are food items outside of the school
lunch standards? Melissa: Each student group is
allowed to have two fundraisers during the course of
the year that are exempt from the wellness standards under the federal
school lunch program. So each group could have a
pizza sale or cookie sales during the school year
that do not need to follow the federal
nutrition guidelines. Andrew: Okay, so it’s
pretty wide open, you just can’t have a school do, the same group do
a food fundraiser over and over and over again. Melissa: You are limited
to two fundraisers during the course of the year. Andrew: Per group though. Okay. Brenda: That occurred
during the school day. Melissa: Yes, it’s for food
consumed during the school day, so frozen pizzas, for example, would not one of those
exempt fundraisers because you could probably
eat a frozen pizza during the school day but that’s
not intended to be consumed during the school day, it’s
intended to be brought home and cooked, same
with cookie dough, the cookie dough that
you need to cook, intended to be brought
home and cooked, so that would not fall under
your two exempt food items. (woman sneezes) I see Kristina is nodding so
I think I’m getting it right. (inaudible) Okay, yep, yep. Katie: Any other
questions or concerns? Comments? Hearing none, we’ll
move that forward. Thanks, Melissa. And our other discussion item is the bilingual education update. (coughing) (paper flipping) (coughing) Yes. Kristina: I don’t know if this
goes to you or you, Brenda, but I know we have some
people here that are here to talk during the agenda items, so can you just review
quickly how that process goes? Because some folks are new
and they had asked me about when they come forward. Katie: Brenda did explain
that at the beginning of the meeting, this evening. Kristina: Great, can
you just reiterate, just not the whole
thing, just again. So they’ll do the presentation– Brenda: They’ll do the– Katie: I can do that. Brenda: Yeah, go ahead Katie. Katie: We’ll be doing
the presentation, listen to the entire
presentation, board
will discuss it and then we will invite
the input from speakers. Right, and I have two so far. Okay? Everybody got it? All right, thank you. (pen clicking) So– (inaudible) (laughter) Gina: I apologize I’m just
learning how this works now. My name is Gina Cornu Zacharias,
I’m the associate director of bilingual
education programs for the Green Bay
Area School District. It’s a pleasure
to be here tonight and give you an
update on our programs and talk to you a
little bit about our advisory council with bilingual advisory council
with different stakeholders within our district as well
as outside of our district so I’m excited to share those
opportunities with you. Thank you for
giving me the time. So we’ll begin. So, okay. So I just go here. First of all, I just
want to review with you and I think it’s pretty
unique to our state actually that we are able to offer
bilingual education programs. That is something
that is wonderful for the children that
come to our district, and is endorsed by
the state that we are able under State Statute
provide that bilingual education to the children. However I do want to
mention that bilingual, bicultural education is
really centered around and the goal is to help
our bilingual learners, our English language learners. And in the case of our
district, it really centers the bilingual programs that
we offer are in Spanish, so we are looking at our Spanish
speaking, English learners. And the goals that
we need to set aside to bring them to
academic proficiency and being successful
within our community. Then the next thing will be, and I’m just gonna go back here. The other part of the Statute
that I think is critical for us to think about is
that, and this was created a while back to
protect our children and making sure that the
students walking away from our programs at
the end of the day, we do want them to
have that proficiency in the English language. What is nice about our program is that they are able to
maintain the Spanish language and they are able to
use the Spanish language to perform and to advance
their English proficiency. In our district, we are
very fortunate to have two different kinds
of bilingual programs. And I just want to
make sure we understand that difference because
it’s very unique to the realm of
bilingual programming. We have One-Way
Bilingual Programs and the difference between the
One-Way and the Two-Way is really the composition
of the students that we have in front of us. So the students in
the One-Way Program are your students that
are all Spanish-speaking or English learners. Right now, in our district, we are very luck to
have about 1156 students enrolled in the One-Way
Bilingual Program. Now we do have, in
addition to that, Two-Way Bilingual
Programs in our district. And again they are
very much the same, with the difference being the
composition of the children. So in Two-Way Bilingual
Programs we are seeking to have Spanish-speaking
ELs or English Learners as well as English-speaking
non-EL students. And right now our
involvement in our district is about 501 kids. About 72% of those students are English Learners,
Spanish-speaking
English Learners. And then we have about 28%
who are non-English Learners. John: And so I just want to
point out that the needs of both groups of
students are incredibly important to us. We want to make sure that all students
are well served. However though, the law and
what we have to focus on is first, the primary
driver needs to be the servicing of
the students who are English language learners. We have though, in conversations with
members of the community and people who have come
forward before the board, have had conversations
related to what are some ideas that
we could put forward that might be able to
continue to enhance English native speakers
who are wanting to continue with their Spanish. What are things we could do
given the change in percentage? And some of things we’ve
talked about were potentially some after-school support,
some differentiation within the classroom
but particularly another piece was thinking about a Spanish Immersion
academy that we could offer during the summer
that would be a fun, engaging, intensive opportunity
for Spanish language continuation of
that development. But we have to, by the
guidance of the State we have to place
primary emphasis on the learning of our
Spanish native students who are learning English. -Thank you. Gina: We also, we also wanted to
let you guys know the difference between the
Two-Way Bilingual Programs and Spanish Immersion Programs. Because there seems to
be confusion at times when you are learning
about the difference between the two different
kinds of programs. Just to let you know,
the difference again is within the composition
of the students as well as the goals
of the program. In the Two-Way Bilingual
Program the students are English learners as well
as non English learners like we reviewed. And students learn
both languages and the expectation is
high academic achievement. In the Spanish
immersion programs, we include only
English-speaking students. Native English speakers, and they are
immersed in Spanish, as they learn the
elementary curriculum. So it’s a different
type of setting. And we just wanted to make
sure you knew the difference. I wanted to point out to you, and this is something
that you saw in the past, where our bilingual schools, and in green will be the
two way bilingual schools, in purple the one way
bilingual schools, and we do have one
school Danz Elementary, where we have both programs. Now, we wanted to
review with you today, as to why we had to change
the counting allocation plan, and the emphasis
within the program. First and foremost, I
wanted to let you know, when we really look at, doing what is best for
the English learners, in our district, and when we make it successful, for our English
language learners, you are gonna make it successful for every single child
in that classroom. So we are looking at it
from that perspective. If we are giving
our English learners the best possible
opportunities for success, we know at the end of the day we’re gonna make it better for every child that
comes into our seats. So with that lens, the reason why we
changed the program, and we’re gonna go over
in a little bit is that we have user data that
indicated that our students were not achieving literacy
in either language. So that was a call
for us to say, hey, we need to do
something about this. We can do better, we
know we can do better. We also know, that literacy
skills and strategies, were not taught in
a scope and sequence in either English or Spanish. That needed to be
looked at, and make sure that we put a framework in
place within that program. With that literacy
framework that’s in place, our kids are able to
learn to read and write. Emphasis on Spanish
versus English allocation, that was something that
was in place in the past, we did have a 90 10 model, and if you review, the board update that Mrs.
Howard gave to all of you back in April, she was really questioning, why the 90/10
model, why isn’t it maybe it’s not timed right, and maybe we need to
look at that 90/10 model because the emphasis
on the Spanish versus the English language, did not give our students
the opportunities to become truly bi literate. And then we didn’t have a
paired literacy component in our classroom, so, those were some pieces that we really needed
to put in place. I’m gonna go over just
a couple of things. John: First, I just wanna
add one additional point. And that’s that, again some of the
information in the report are things that
we’ve shared before, but this, is additional
new information, and one thing that was
pointed out really clearly and I think it’s a very
valid point is that, the why of this is
not clearly permeated through, to the parents hasn’t really been
as clearly permeated through with the teachers,
and that’s something that we’re seeking to address. We did put together
a template letter, we put together a
PowerPoint presentation, that principals are,
were able to use at their site. There was a variety of
different amounts to which that was executed, and that’s
something that is on us to make sure that
it is clarified, but you can never over
communicate the why. And the why behind this, is really the points
that are listed there, and that’s something that the
parents and community members that I spoke with, they
shared that that was something that was a concern, and it is something
that we are addressing. But when we look at the,
percentage differences between the 90/10 aspect
and what we’re doing now, we actually give more than
what is suggested in the table, within the Escamilla book
for the six elementary years. So we give slightly less, 73 percent as opposed to 27 percent English
in kindergarten, but then we give slightly higher
in, first and second grade, but third grade
is slightly lower, and then the fourth
and fifth grade, we actually give a
slightly higher percentage than is recommended according to the guide
there on page 41, we can share that information, but it’s copyrighted material, so without having
permission for it, we wanna make sure
that we have permission before sharing that, but it is something that
we can give access to, but we wanted to make
sure that our work, is really based, deep
in current research, and, Nancy could tell
the story of actually, spending time with
Escamilla in Chicago, with Claudia or our former
Associate Director bilingual, and spent a couple of hours
with Escamilla discussing, what her thoughts were,
what we were thinking, over conversation at dinner
with a variety of people. Is there anything that you’d
add based on what I said? Nancy: The only thing
I’d like to add is that when we began to pursue
balancing the minutes, and adding additional
minutes of, English as well as
the balance of Spanish and what is best practice, one thing we learned at
the national convention in New Mexico , and that is where we
had our conversation with Doctor Escamilla, is that nobody has this, right, and they will openly, no matter what conference, pull outdoor section
you attended, they will all tell
you the same thing, but there are two things
that they were adamant about no matter who you spoke
to; they’d rather literacy, a strong literacy
foundation and you consider, your children and the
students that you’re serving. Are they new to the country? Are they second generation,
first generation, second generation,
third generation? You have to know your
population of students. And all of the
programming is based on a strong learning
of literacy model. And, John is absolutely correct, back there, Escamilla spent up, at least two to
three hours with us, together speaking about,
make up of our district, and what we were pursuing,
what we are questioning, what we are asking, for really
consultation from her. She actually agreed
to come to Green Bay. She no longer does this work
or should I say she’s retired, in this work but she
does do consultant work, and she was very much looking
forward to working exclusively with Green Bay if this is the
direction we’re wanting to go. One thing she did
let us know that she only works with
districts who are all in, in making this model work. There is a district in
Chicago, that was opening up, we were supposed to
go down there with Misses Howard, and
they were delayed in the start of
opening the school, so we’re going to first go in and take a look at the school,
and how it is operational, all the way through
middle school. So, John is correct in saying that we did spend a
lengthy period of time as well as time on
the phone making sure and running past our ideas
the population of students, what our data was showing, what was missing in
our literacy framework, and then we took the
advice of Doctor Escamilla as to what would be
our initial first steps in turning this and moving
this in the right direction in building a
literacy framework. Katie: Kristina. Kristina: Thank you Nancy. Question about that. So are you saying that the
Lucy Calkins literacy framework does not provide opportunity
for true dual bilingual program with the 50/50 split? Nancy: I’m not sure. I’m saying that a Lucy Calkins
resource has nothing to do with the fact that we need
to teach a literacy framework that has the components of
differentiated classrooms, with all eight of the
components that are necessary, regardless of whose
resources you purchase, or that you follow. It’s difficult to get that, teaching for students
and in a 50/50 split. There’s not enough minutes in
a literacy framework or block. And what I’d like
to share with that, and I would go slow
to go fast here, is that your English or
your foundational literacy, here let us say a 120 minutes, the important pieces that you’re then going to
do the paired literacy part, if I’m steering your
thunder please jump in here. The paired literacy part is
the strategies and skills that students need to be
lifelong learners of literacy. And, that is the
part that gets paired into Spanish, it’s not retyped, but it’s extended in
the Spanish language. So they’re not reteaching
the whole 120 minute block, rather they’re taking
the skills and strategies based on what the students need and they’re then
extending that in Spanish. With the key and important piece being that students read and
write in both languages daily at high volumes. And so, it’s not a 50/50
time, teaching literacy, it’s not necessarily if I
teach this much in English, I teach this much in Spanish, it depends on where
the students are at, but it would be unfair
for me to compare, a resource model as
to the foundations
of learning literacy. Kristina: So, there is
a literacy framework that allows for a
true 50/50 split, but the reason why
we can’t do this is because we don’t
have enough time? Is there a literacy framework, I would say that it depends, what you wanna
teach in literacy, where your students
are and their date and what parts of the literacy, what needs to be taught, the components of literacy
that need to be over taught, 50/50 is merely,
what we teaching in a
50/50 period of time, if we had 240 minutes,
we could have 50/50, we would not compromise
what we know works in teaching children English, that’s English
proficiency is the goal of all our literacy programming. We would not compromise
teaching 120 minutes, there’s not enough time
in a elementary schedule to teach 240
minutes of literacy. If we’re looking at equal
time between both of them. John: But, as you’re
maybe indicating, or I’m possibly wondering
with that question. If we did have an increased
length of the school day, there would be possibility
of including more Spanish within the
instructional framework within the confines of the day that we would have
at that point. And that is something
that I think in the medium to long run, would be very beneficial
for the district to be able to offer a similar student day to what the other surrounding
areas are offering. Sorry I have another question. Kristina: So, and I
apologize, this is not an
area of strength for me, and I’ve really
tried, I’m digging in so that I can ensure that
I know what’s going on to the best of my
abilities, so I apologize if trying to make sure I’m using the language
in the right way. If our two way program is
Spanish and English students, ELs and non-EL
students, correct? And then we are saying that, the way that we teach
grade level instruction for EL students is for them
to have as much in their language as possible, so
you have half and half, you have Spanish and
English speakers. Then we would, from what I’m seeing and the
research that I’m seeing, you would have to do 50/50, you would have to have
a more even spread to be able to reach their– To meet their instructional
needs, correct? Am I making sense? (inaudible) Gina: So you might be
referring to that. Ideally, we would wanna
maintain a 50/50 student ratio, meaning English instruction. -Instruction. Gina: Yeah but, in this model, what we did, is that we
wanted to put in place, the literacy framework, like Miss Shelton was saying, a literacy framework in
place in one language, and then pairing that to
the opposite language, so that our students have
the opportunities to transfer the literacy skills that
they are presented with. Kristina: I understand what
you’re saying though. But what I’m seeing here, with some of the research that I’ve done with Thomas
and Collier saying that, those students it says, English language
learners are successful when teachers teach with
grade level instruction in students’ first language
for as much as possible, usually through a
fifth or sixth grade, and the second language
for a portion of the day. So if you’re
teaching more English and you’re using the
extensions in Spanish, then aren’t the Spanish
speaking students losing out? Gina: In kinder
through second grade, they are learning in Spanish, our students are learning in
Spanish 70 percent of the day. So, they are learning literacy
first in that language. And then they do the transfer, and they do the English
language development time in that 30 percent of the
day in kinder through second. Now, as far as grade
three, four and five, we are giving them that
30 percent of the day, because of the different time
constraints that we have, but again we have to
recognize that our students, are able to transfer
those literacy skills, they are capable of
continuing to maintain and extend their
knowledge into that. They have that strong
foundation in Spanish, and they have had instruction
in Spanish since kindergarten, so by the time they get into
third, fourth and fifth grade, we’re gonna be able to, the students are
able to do the pair, they can go in depth, they can maintain, they can pair the
literacy at deeper levels. So I don’t think our students
are losing their language, if we really, what we’re
concentrating on is, the instructional practices, in that we are giving them, the literacy that they need. So that’s really where,
our priority has been. Kristina: I appreciate your– Katie: Hang on, someone else
would like to make a comment. Andrew: Thank you. I’m concerned about the, I think there’s a philosophical
discussion to be had about, it seems to me that
what we are doing is, moving from two way bilingual to a late exit transitional, is that about, that’s
if it’s not that, then it’s retaining just enough
Spanish at the higher level that is technically not an exit, but for all intents and
purposes, this ain’t right, cause you’re down,
by sixth grade, you’re down to
what, nine percent? So K two, they get
70 percent Spanish, and then three through five,
its 30 percent Spanish, and then what about sixth grade? Gina: So, this year, we are in sixth grade, we asked our sixth
grade teams to try out, about a ten percent Spanish. Now we do, we’re looking, and that’s part of the
presentation today, that I wanted to let you know, that we are looking
at advisory council, to look at giving us
their recommendations as to what we can do. In some of the secondaries and
some of the middle schools, they might offer some
science in Spanish I believe that is being
offered at Edison, as well as at Franklin, but obviously we
do need to review, with their input and as well
as the advisory council, what is that program
gonna look like? Andrew: I’m more worried
about third grade than sixth. So we have, we’re going from 70 to 30 and completely flipping
it in third grade, and that just seems extremely, that seems extremely
drastic to me. We had, or I guess if more, if the overall progression, if best practice is to
raise the English number, I’d almost rather see it be, a little bit more, move where the wine is, instead of just have that, that cliff edge, and I am especially wondering what does that do if a kid
is moving between schools if a kid is New to our district, it just
seems to be very drastic, and I’m wondering why we’re not having something a
little bit more gradual. Gina: So that you know, we are, bilingual programs
are extremely complex, and they have to
be individualized to the needs of the students. So, some of the things that
we need to do is, for example, if you have newcomers coming
into third, fourth, and fifth or kids that are brand
new to the country, we have our content allocation
plan that says 70-30, 70 English, 30% Spanish, but at the end of the day when
we look at those children, if we need to give them
more of the Spanish based on their needs, I know that conversations are
happening in grade-level teams with building principals. They consult with us to give
the students what they need, so if some of the kids
need more Spanish, then we need to be
responsive to those needs. So, some of that might
happen in small group, some of that might happen
if the teacher is seeing, especially in third grade, that the students need
a little bit more time in the Spanish, they might have to give
them that time in Spanish to support the
needs of the kids. Andrew: So, what concerns me, and this has a lot
to do with the fact that we are a big district, as soon as we shift and we
do this in different areas, I’m not saying that
we don’t sometimes have less formal
solutions that work because we do, and I like
building flexibility, and I like instructor
flexibility, but it was a big deal that
the district ruled this out that we were changing
from 70-30 to 30-70, and I don’t know that a
teacher following and wanting, you know, teachers want to
do the right thing for kids, and they wanna stay
within district policy. This just seems a little
like we’re throwing a lot on the teacher’s plate
to have them look at their group of kids. I’m teaching third
grade, say I have, let’s throw in that maybe
I’m a new teacher as well and I don’t know the workings
of a large district very well. So, I’m in my classroom, and I think my kids need a
lot more Spanish than English because I have a
lot of newcomers. Like, how does that really work? I think that puts the teacher
in an uncomfortable situation where they’re trying
to juggle these things, and as a district,
are we doing 70-30, or are we doing
teacher discretion but the suggestion is 30-70? And we can’t, unless all of our, not all of our
teachers are bilingual, so if we have a teacher who
thinks it should be 70-30, should be more Spanish, if we don’t have the right
staff to be able to offer that, then we can’t. And I’m assuming staffing
has something to do with how we set up these allocations. So, to say that yep
it’s a drop off, it’s a complete switch
from 70-30 to 30-70, but really if more is
needed in a classroom, it’ll just happen or
principals will make it happen or teachers will make it happen or teacher teams
will make it happen, I’m not convinced that
the structures exist to empower them to do that. Gina: And I will let others
chime in as they see it fit, but I can let you know even
when I was about seven, eight years ago as a principal, it was incredible to see CLT’s and incredible to see that
collaboration that happens with their coaches, with
their grade-level teams. They look at student data, they’ll be looking at their
students and their data and who they are, and they
will bring it to their CLT’s, they will bring it to, they
collaborate with one another. We have a lot of
systems in place to provide that
support to teachers. The work is hard,
I’m not gonna lie, and that is part of why
we wanna give them as much of our support and as
much guidance as we can. Many of them come and
ask their principals or they come and ask me,
“How would we make it work, “what do you think we can do?” Yes, we have our guidelines,
but at the end of the day, we also need to be responsive
to students’ needs, and we need to trust the
professionalism of our teachers who are incredible and
are giving it their best, and they are working
hard for the kids that we have in front of us. We also need to understand that our students change
very rapidly in terms of the language acquisition. They might come in as newcomers, and it’s incredible to see
how their needs transform in six month to a
year for some of them, some of them may need more time, and it’s all part of
understanding who your kids are and giving the kids
what they need. And some of it, yes,
we have new teachers, but we also have a
system in place here to help address some
of those concerns, and even within the
CLT’s or even in LSD’s, if they have more questions, they know they can
always reach out too. We’re very fortunate to
have so many resources here to help support our
teachers in their decisions. So, I don’t wanna
lose sight of that. I do want us to really
think about what is it that we want for our students? At the end of the day, we
want them to be literate. I don’t know anybody
in this room, I don’t know any teacher
that wouldn’t want that for their kids. So, really, we can show you
more on the Escamilla work and how that really transforms
the literacy of our students. At the end of the day, I think we owe it to them to
be able to read and write, and that was the
reason for the change. And the way that we do
it, we have to trust that there is enough
research here to do it to support the
needs of our kids, and with the collaboration
with our teachers, I think we can make it work. Andrew: I’m not sure if my
question– Katie: No, Brenda? Brenda: I’d like to suggest that we let them
finish the presentation ’cause I think sometimes
questions are answered in the presentation that
people might be asking ahead of time, and then ask questions at the end. (clearing throat) -I didn’t have a question,
I had a comment. John: And I would just point
out that part of the reason for the significant shift
between second and third grade is the Escamilla
research shows that, recommends a 70-30
split, or I’m sorry, recommends a 60-40 split, but
we’re doing a 70-30 split, so we’re investing little
more in our Spanish in second grade than is
recommended, because of that, there’s a little bit more
of a shift going from 70-30 to 30-70, as opposed
to 60-40 to 40-60. And so, we are investing a
little bit more in second grade, kindergarten through
second grade, because we know that
there’s that shift coming in third grade, and again,
those are our guidelines, but I think, as you mentioned, there are several other slides that I believe will illustrate
a little bit more of the why. Gina: And I wanted
to bring up to you, and I’m gonna bring up
to you some information that I think is gonna
explain to you the why. On the left of the slide, you’re gonna see data that was
shared with you back in April by Mrs. Orr on the EDL2. The EDL2 is a Spanish reading
proficiency assessment that is given to all the
students in a dual language or bilingual programs. And then, I also wanted
to let you know about, Mrs. Orr shared with you
the forward proficiency in reading for the
2017-2018 year. The reason why we talked about
forward proficiency here, I know we have many other
assessments that we use in our bilingual programs, but the reason why we wanted to talk about forward
assessments in here or results is because forward
assessment is really linked to if you’re proficient
in the forward, it’s very likely that you
are grade-level proficient in reading, so that corelation
of grade-level proficiency of reading and how well you
are doing in the forward is linked, they are linked. So, you will see
that in third grade, the proficiency was
11%, fourth grade 30%, and fifth grade 19%. Then, I do wanna share with you
the EDL2 reading proficiency for June, I don’t
know if I can, okay. Thank you. So, in kindergarten, that proficiency is
31.4% in Spanish reading, first grade, 15.2%,
second grade, 41.6%, third grade is 29.5%,
fourth grade is 46.3%, and fifth grade is 58.6%. The overall proficiency in
Spanish reading in K-5 programs, bilingual programs, is 37.4%,
and that was as of June 2019. Obviously, that tell us that
we do have work to do there. I also wanted to let you know that when we receive our
forward data, and again, knowing that students who
are grade-level proficient in reading will be
proficient or advanced in the forward exam, I wanted to look
at the difference. How are well are
students in the one-way and the two-way
programs are doing? So, in the one-way program, what I found out was 11.9% of
our students are proficient and advanced, and
those are the students who are English learners. The bulk of the students
are English learners. In the two-way
bilingual programs, I look at proficiency
based on that program, and that proficiency
went to 23.4% of students who are proficient and advanced. I do need some reading glasses so I can look at the
proficient and the advanced, so I apologize for that. Hey, it’s my age. You know, I’m just trying
to, it’s right there. So, you can see, and I’m just
gonna jump to the next part, you can see that, I don’t know if you can
go in the previous one. In the previous one,
proficient students in the two-way program,
that percentage was 19.2 and advanced was
4.2% of the students. Then, I did wanna, you know, I wanna separate those students because in the two-way
bilingual program, we do have native
English speakers, and then we have
our Spanish-speaking
English learners, so I wanted to look at that
composition of students and how well they do
in the forward exam. So, when I split that, I found out that if you’re an
English proficient student, 45.5% of the students will
be proficient and advanced, if you’re an English
proficient student. However, our students
who are English learners, Spanish-speaking
English learners, only 4.4% of the students in the two-way bilingual
programs are proficient. John: So, I think it’s important
to take a look at that slide and look at the drastic
difference there and reflect on it
for just a minute because we believe in
the great potential of all of our learners, we believe that our bilingual
learners can emerge as lifters of our community and individuals who are going to
serve us very well and in lifting the economy, lifting the work of
our neighborhoods, making sure that we have
empowered all students, and if we have 95% of the
students not proficient, that is closing those students
off from their potential, it’s limiting the zenith
of their potential, and our concern about that
was pretty significant. I know some of the individuals who had shared with me
part of the problem was that they have had a number of different literacy
frameworks and methodologies that they’ve worked through
over the past few years and part of this is a
product of multiple changes, and there is some
validity to that point, but we have to make sure
that our primary focus, our focus on making sure our
English language learners that are part of that
bilingual community, our maximizing their
potential is significant, and for me, 4.4% proficient
is not approaching that zenith of potential
for those learners. -Question. Kristina: Thanks, John, I think
we all agree on that absolutely, so I’m still confused because if our ELL students
over there are at 4.4%, what grade is this, or is
this combined, do you know? Combined for elementary? So, again, to go back to the
research that I’m looking at, it says that those students
should be learning the most in Spanish because
what I’m seeing is, is that if they are learning
in their first language, it takes less time
for them to catch up and reach proficiency than if they’re being
taught in English, and the other thing I
wanted to ask too is, and I’m trying to
understand this, this is why I’m poking
the bear a little bit here because we’re all on the,
to go back to your point, we’re all on the same team, we’re here because we
gotta figure it out and make sure we’re doing
the best for our kids, so thank you for
saying that earlier. But, to go back to
this, I guess I just, it just doesn’t match for me. Like, what I’m seeing
in the research and what I’m seeing up here because we’re seeing
the same thing, but how to get get there,
from what I’m looking at, is different than what you’re
telling me we’re doing. -Michelle? Michelle: What model were
the students engaged in to get to this data? Gina: They were engaged
in a 90-10 model, 90% Spanish, 10% English, and this is the data
from the students in the two-way
bilingual programs, I shared with you
earlier the students in the one-way program. So, if you look at that, we
created this program to support, enhance the needs of
our English learners. Something, and you’re correct,
there is a disconnect. Why is it that only 4% of
the students are proficient and advanced when we know
that it has to be linked to their literacy skills in that they transfer
all those skills? So, that really told us a story and the story is we just need to look at revamping
the literacy framework and making sure that we
have a literacy framework in place that is gonna
support their needs. -I’m sorry I have
one more question, and this is really important. Katie: Feel free to
let us know that if when we’re asking a question, you’re gonna get to the
answer in a couple of slides. Let us know that, please. Thank you. Kristina: Sorry, so if it takes
four to seven years for students to become proficient, why are we looking at
snapshots in the forward exam? Because what we know, from
what I understand, is we should be looking at growth
here, not proficiency, so why are we not looking
at middle school data that would actually show
our change over time? Nancy? Nancy: We have looked
at middle school data and that’s why we’re here. We actually, it’s not
in this presentation but we certainly can bring
you that information. Totally agree with
you, research will back that it takes 4-7 years, but
one piece that we’ve found in our work, over the
past year and a half, is that there doesn’t have
to be such an overteach that they’re very
proficient in Spanish and then the English is
always lagging behind. What we’ve found in a
very short period of time in actually implementing
this in our district, right away we started to
see, yes, English lagged, but they came
together like this. They didn’t come
together like this, where we create such a gap and then we try to overteach. You have to teach the
languages together and that’s the paired part, there’s generative
practices you need regardless of what
language you speak that you have to help
support the student. The Spanish is like
their anchor leg that they can make
a connection to. We do have compelling
data to talk about in our secondary and that’s
gonna be the majority and Gina we’ll get to
this in just a moment, the majority of our work and
with our advisory council, but I want to note that
my first year in Green Bay is we were having AVMR, we were at Lombardy
AVMR training and our middles school
teachers were there. They looked at me and said,
“You’re not getting it, Nancy.” I said, “What am I not getting?” We have students coming
from elementary schools that have never been taught
mathematics and English or have seen any mathematics
instruction in English in coming to our middle
school classrooms. So it’s a broader piece,
that we have to take a piece, a little piece at a
time to dissect it, getting our literacy foundation
in place first is critical. Having our schools work as truly collaborative learning
teams, to the point, if you do have a student
that needs more Spanish, that Spanish language
acquisition teacher will push into that class
room, or the greatest piece you can have is
having a bilingual teacher teaching all day
long in a classroom if we could only have
the luxury of having too many bilingual teachers,
that’s not the case, we have a shortage of them. But we do adapt, we
do have guardrails but we do not teach
content, we follow students, and we provide
students what they need to learn their language. Our goal, English proficiency. The other piece that I
just wanna make very clear, is that this is
a choice program. Children do not have to belong,
or join, or be a member, parents sign up children
into a dual language or a one way bilingual program. That’s a choice for a parent,
that’s an option for them. They can also opt out. And so that’s one thing that
I’m gonna make very clear, this is not, we were required
to provide programming but parents have a right
to opt their students out. So we have to be very
conscientious of the parent who would wanna opt out their
child from learning Spanish and have them totally
immersed into English. Those children will be
going through our system with little or no support. And I’m gonna drop off their
and I kind of primed the pump, because of all the work
that lies ahead of us with our secondary work,
that is we’re going to need a village to really
work together. I’m moving this forward,
but to Andrew’s point, we are not looking at decreasing our Spanish allocation to 10%, we’re looking at truly
creating a dual language pathway through high
school in our district. We are not there, and I’ll
let Gina take over here because it is really much the, she’ll speak to the make
up of our advisory council and the advisory
council that we have is made up with the members
of that with intentionality because of the work
that lies ahead of us. Gina: So I do wanna mention that the reason why we had to switch, it was the top
priority is literacy. Our students needed to be
taught the skills needed to be successful in middle
school, and in high school, but we also need to
understand that our students are able to transfer
those skills between
the two languages. Our kids are pretty
gifted in that regard, we just need to be
clear and explicit and have time to teach literacy. What I have here is in
Kinder- through second grade our literacy skills
and strategies are
taught in Spanish, and transferred and extended
during the literacy-based English language
development time, but again the focus,
the priority is literacy and we went from
teaching through content to now teaching the kids the
literacy that they deserve. And this requires that
high level of collaboration in a two-teacher model and a high level
of collaboration with our grade level teams. I do wanna talk to
you a little bit about the Bilingual
Advisory Council. We are very fortunate to have
this council in our district. We met in October a
couple of weeks ago and the purpose of
that advisory council when we talked to them, was
we really wanna see their, we want them to be involved. We want them to come and
learn alongside with us. They are not a
decision-making body but they are able to
provide recommendations as to what will
be the next steps particularly when it comes
to that secondary piece. The advisory council membership, we wanted to really look
at multiple stakeholders so we had one elementary,
one-way bilingual teacher, another two-way elementary
bilingual teacher, two middle school
bilingual teachers, we have three
English-speaking parents. We invited four to five
Spanish speaking parents to also come to this. We have three
Community-at-large members, including university professors, two university professors. Sister Melanie has
been invited as well to be part os this task. She couldn’t make it in October but she hopes to be
part of it in November. We also had elementary principal as well as a middle
school principal as part of the membership. We-
(inaudible) We invited them obviously
for the teachers, we share out an email to
teachers and the first ones that responded, they were
the ones that got in, but I put the rest of them on,
if they expressed interest, they were put on waiting list, so then if at some
point somebody is unable to continue to commit
to that council, then we can look at
that waiting list to see they will
wanna be part of that, and that was the same even with our
English-speaking families that express an interest. As far as the families, I reach
out to building principles, I also knew that if
they had concerns, if they had expressed
concerns in the past, I invited them to be
part of that council, and if they came by the teachers or the principals of the schools they
have recommended parents to be part
of that council. So that was that,
and then we did have, like I said we met in October, we talk about our
responsibilities as members how we wanted to take
this job very seriously, to learn together, to
provide recommendation as we make decisions
to improve and enhance what we have within our program. We did examine the
characteristics of being bilingual
versus biliterate. It was beautiful to
hear our families talking about the difference,
how many of her students might be bilingual, but
they may not be biliterate because they have had
access to the opportunity to have those literacy skills, but everybody in the
council agree that ideally, we will want all of our students to graduate with the literacy that they need to be successful. We also talked a
little bit about our simultaneous bilingual
learners versus our sequential. I am a sequential
bilingual learner. I grew up in another country, I came here when I was in
college, I’m a sequential, meaning I started all in Spanish and then when I came I
learned all of my English. Most of our students today are simultaneous
bilingual learners. They are learning
those two languages from birth, or even before. They have the
ability to code and switch back and
forth between languages because they are actually exposed to both
languages since birth. And Escamilla’s work will say because our students
are different, many of them are simultaneous. We do wanna give
them the opportunity to have biliteracy
from the start, to have literacy from the
beginning, from kindergarten. We did talked about
who our students, who are our students and
what are their needs? And they brainstormed
some of their needs, they need to have flexibility, they need to have a
strong instruction, and briefly review some
bilingual reading data for Spanish as well as some
initial forward exam data, but we will continue to look
at the data and what the means and where would this help
us guide our next steps? John: We also feel that
it would be important to have some members of the
advisory committee potentially take part in assisting
with future updates and presentations, however
just the fact that we started our group only a
couple of weeks ago, we wanted to give them
some time for grounding and to make sure that we
had those elements included. We also had another
committee member join on recommendation
of Dr. Langenfeld, it was somebody who had
presented some concerns here and wanted to have further voice and we wanted to make sure
that voice was included in the conversation
and so we added somebody to that group. If we had other people that
we would want to add though, I would want to make
sure that we were careful thinking about the
wait list of people that we have as well, so
that we have a balance of making sure that
we have new members included with people
who are waiting to be on the committee already. I know that’s it’s preliminary, but was there feedback
from the parents related to what
their thoughts were related to the model
moving forward? Gina: Obviously we didn’t
get so much into the model being that first time,
we really wanted to look at who our students are, and
understand that our programs have to really fit the
needs our students. I know anecdotally, I have had Spanish-speaking
families saying that they do want their
children to continue to learn their English literacy skills that they deserve
to be successful. And that was one thing that
one of the parents mentioned, but again we haven’t
really dived deeper into some of the pieces as
to why the change was made. More importantly, we
do wanna make sure that they give us
some recommendations to that secondary dual language or the bilingual program
at the middle school. Like Mrs. Chartier was saying, we really wanted to give
them access to at least one content area in Spanish, we also wanted to
give them access to the language charts
in both languages. So those are ideals
that we have, we wanna bring them
to this council so they can make
additional recommendations and provide insight as to
what are those pathways that we can have in
place for the kids, especially as we look at them
going into the high school in do we wanna give them
the best opportunities to continue in high
school and develop that skill set that they
have, if that’s something that the kids as well
as the parents wish for their kids to continue. John: I also wanna say,
moving forward, that in conversation with
our bilingual teachers, our bilingual teachers
are extremely dedicated, they want to be change
agents, they wanna make sure that we are lifting the
learning of all of our learners and like us, who were
bilingual teachers before and who had done
work in that area, it’s something that is
a passion and a calling. It’s something that we
want to, again, make sure that this is not seen
from a deficit model because I think unfortunately
sometimes people look at bilingual education as, or English language
learners from a perspective of a lessor-than
group of students, but really we look at this
as a magnificent opportunity for us to provide
access, and allow again, the greatest zenith of potential for all of our students
moving forward. And I would say that the work, even though the current
results that we’re seeing in our proficiency ratings
are not what we want to see and we need to have
a change of practice. It’s not for lack of
effort, it’s not for lack of dedication, it’s not
for lack of hard work on the part of our
bilingual teachers. We find the need to focus
and go a little bit deeper with what we see as
the next best steps related to our English
language learners who are in a bilingual program. It does require change
and change is not always the most comfortable
thing, but it is something that we will be very
supportive in leading through, again making sure that
we’re refocusing on the why, making sure that
we’re refocusing on the professional learning
so that if a teacher is questioning, “How
can I best determine”, as Andrew pointed out, “What is the best allocation
percentage-wise?”, making sure that our
principals are aware and supportive of
that conversation. Those are all factors that
are gonna be really important. But moving forward, it’s
important for us too, to think about equity
from the perspective of what voices are not
yet fully at the table and making sure that
those are communicated. I never would’ve thought that
I would be in a presentation on bilingual talking
about changing from more Spanish to
less, to greater English. I’ve been a strong
proponent of bilingual education my whole life. I am convinced that there’s
research-based best practice in the move that we’re making, with the intention of
serving all learners and I believe that if
we continue this work, we will continue to
bear positive fruit and we will lead people and support people
through this change. Nancy: To that point, John, we
may be sitting in front of you in a year and saying we
have to increase Spanish because of the
population of students that have moved
into our district. So it’s critically
important to know that we follow our students
and our students’ needs. So if we have an influx
of new-to-the-country Spanish students, you will note
that we have to be flexible in the amount of time
we allocate to students based on how long they’ve
lived in our country, and what their incoming data
is, does that make sense? Because I don’t wanna
have to come back here and say, “Well you just
(laughs) were here saying “that we’re going
with this model.” Like we had mentioned
when we started, we’ve chosen this program
with Dr. Escamilla’s guidance in noting that the population
of students that are currently in the Green Bay Area
Public School District, and what their needs are. And if we were to have new
students move into our district, new to the country, that
would have a different demand than working with third
generation learners. Kristina: I’m sorry, I’m
totally confused by that. So you’re telling me, that if
we had more Spanish-speaking students come in so that
just the number of students would require us to
increase Spanish, that doesn’t make
any sense to me. Nancy: I’m sorry, that’s the
last thing we need to do is me confuse you
at ten after seven at the end of our
presentation, so I apologize. What I’m saying is that
we never lose sight of who our learners are. So if we have an
abundancy of students, let’s say we had a thousand
new students come to us, and we have had an
abundancy of students from other countries come
first new to the country, where we’ve had to
establish new programming and make adaptations to our
programs to meet their needs. I want you to know that
we have to be flexible, and that we will always follow
the needs of our learners. That’s what I’m saying to you. And that may be that we
look at a different track, a different model, a
different configuration to meet the needs of
each group of students and their individual needs. This is not a one size fits all. This is a framework in
which we are focused on teaching literacy and
ensuring all of our children have access to literacy
in abundancy and volume of both reading and writing,
but in both languages. They could not
emphasize that enough. But we made our decisions
on our time allocation based on, as Gina was
saying, who are our learners? Who are our kids right now? Who are our students in the Green Bay Area Public
School District right now? And as we know, because
of our diverse population, that can change at any time. And I’m just being
very open, transparent, that when that changes,
we will be back. But we will have a
solid advisory committee behind us that is going
to be taking all of this into consideration as we
build our program out forward. Katie: That being said,
Nancy, what you’re saying is that we would
make some changes to
accommodate newcomers, but we wouldn’t make
changes across the board. Because if you’re saying
that the 70/30 Program is what’s best for the
students we have now, we’re not gonna push everybody back to the 50/50,
you’re gonna adapt. There should be some
fluidity to this program. Nancy: That’s exactly
what I’m saying. This very much falls in line with our individualized
personal education plan, but the district has a
framework of programming that has that flexibility,
but within it. KAtie: Eric. Eric: Thank you. I’m going to ask some
questions to help clarify. If I’m a student,
second or third grade, regardless of what level of
English proficiency I have, let’s say I don’t
speak any English, how soon would I
take a forward exam or a test in English that
measures my English proficiency? Nancy: It depends on how long
you’ve been in the country. Eric: Sorry I bumped you. Nancy: You can answer. Gina: Depending on whether or not they’ve been
in the country for a year, they are exempt from taking the forward exam or
a state assessment for that first year and after
that, in the area of reading. And then after that, they are
required to take the test. Eric: So if I’ve been in
the country for a year and still have very low
English proficiency, I would take an English test? Okay, and I would imagine I wouldn’t do very
well on that test so I wouldn’t expect my
proficiency to be very high. According to the numbers
that you showed us, it showed that the
two-way programs, two-way bilingual
programs, tend to have better proficieny
data, is that correct? Gina: Correct. If you look at the first line, it shows that the two-way
bilingual programs have higher
proficiency at first. Then when you go deeper
as to who is proficient within the group of
children taking that test, that’s when you see
the discrepancy. About 45% of the students
that are proficient are your native English
speakers at this point. And then your EL’s, when you look at your EL’s, only 4% of those students
are proficient at this point. Again, we’re here
to change that. We know we can do
better than that. Eric: Sure, I just
wanted to make sure that I’m not comparing
the two programs. One-way programs aren’t as
good as two-way programs. They both serve different needs and I understand
and appreciate that. You mentioned that
there’s no right answer. It’s all across the country. We want to look at having
strong literacy foundation across the district,
that makes sense to me. I wanna make sure we
take into the needs and considerations of
all of our students. That makes sense to me. But nowhere across the country has somebody figured this out. So would you say
that it’s accurate that there’s varying research
that I could find a book from somebody that says, “This
is the best way to do it.” And I could find a book
from somebody that, “This is the best way to do it.” And everyone sort
of, is that correct? Nancy: Not only is that correct, but there’s limited
research out there. So you’ll often hear the same
names of researchers used in discussion
regarding bilingual
biliterate programming. Very limited amount of
research is even available. Eric: So if you had
to summarize for me, great presentation, again,
thank you for all of this. But if you had to
summarize to somebody who just walked in the
room in one sentence, what exactly are we
proposing to change? What is the, what are we changing? As short a sentence
as you can give me. Gina: We are teaching
our students literacy and that is the
number one change that we are putting a
literacy framework in place. And they change in the
amount of time of instruction in one language
versus the other, had to be looked at to make
sure the literacy framework, in it’s entire framework, was able to fit into
the schedule of the
day for the kids. Eric: And we’re doing
that in all grade levels or just three five? Gina: Excellent question. We’re doing this in
every single grade level. Because we want our
students from kindergarten to have access to
all the components of their literacy
framework in one language, and then have the
opportunity to pair, transfer extent into
the second language. Our simultaneous bilingual
learners are able to do that. We just need to give
them a lot of support and explicit
teaching of literacy. And then that changed
in third grade. Eric: Just want to try to frame
the problem again in my head. We’re gonna hear from people
who disagree with this change and there’s two sides. Would you, we can ask them in a minute, I can see many of
them want to speak. But is the disconnect
here simply, we’re going with one
brand of research or one person’s research
and they believe in another person’s research and we’re trying
to make a change? If you had to play
devil’s advocate, is that where the disconnect is? Gina: Obviously, I’m gonna
hear what they have to say, but I’m assuming so. I’m assuming that they are
looking at Colier’s research, which was the program
that we used to have. As you could see from
the results that we have, because we implemented that
that content allocation plan, it’s showing us
that it didn’t work. And we needed to do
something different. We needed to make sure that we the literacy skills
in place for the kids, that they need it. Eric: Sorry, I know that was
two and this is three. Would you (laughing) say that, you said that the middle school and high school research
shows the same story. I know you don’t have
it here for us today, but it shows that our
kids aren’t proficient in either language in middle
school and high school. Gina: Correct. Kristina: Thanks Gina. So, to go back to your
question about the data, we’re talking about local
data of in our district. So is it possible that the data that we’re seeing
coming from our district that we’re using
to justify a change could be more about
implementation, support, professional
development, and philosophy, than it is about a
philosophical change in the percentage of
Spanish and English? Nancy: I think that’s a
very fair question. In fact, I think you’ve hit it out of the park
with that question. I will go back to the number
one change we’ve made, is we are teaching the
foundations of literacy. And that might be a, we believe that we had
in the past when you compare the programs, and
they’ve been looked at by people outside of
our district to examine, we know we were not teaching
in a scoping sequence. We know that because they moved
their content units around. You can’t move your units around if your literacy’s
connected in there because there’s a
scoping sequence in teaching literacy
foundations. So I think you’re exactly
correct when you say that, the minutes are the minutes. And you’re gonna use, and I’ve
observed multiple classrooms, teachers and students coding
back and forth like lightning. They read in English
during English time and they’re writing what about
their reading in Spanish. It’s amazing, really,
to watch them code. The piece that we wanna
make sure that we have right is that every single
one of our students have access to a strong
literacy foundation. That is the key piece. We use that across
everything we learn. And for when we get
into the technical part in bilingual education, is
that their first language is Spanish for most of them
and that’s, like any of us, we learn English first and
then we add on another language like Gina so eloquently
explained to us the difference in our
types of learners. The philosophy I believe
is the exact same. We want children to have access to both languages
in their learning. In all reality, if we had
a Spanish bi-ed teacher, we could even the minutes up
at teaching bi-ed in Spanish because they’d be using Spanish as part of their physical
education or their art, but not necessarily to learn
just their literacy foundation. So when you’re looking
at the configuration of what students are
learning in what language, it could be science, it could be social studies that
they’re learning additional minutes in
a particular subject. When we figure out
the bilingual minutes in elementary with our
bilingual students, we have less than 30 minutes
by the time your get your art, your music, your
phy-ed, your library, all of the pieces that
have to be in place in the minutes that
are required by the Department of
Public Construction, we have less than 30 minutes in an elementary teacher’s
bilingual classroom. We’re flexibility to do
something different with. That’s not a lot of time when
you’re following students. The boots in the winter take more than 15 minutes of
that 30 extra minutes. So you’re in a very,
very tight time schedule. But the commitment
of the district is to ensure that our
children are literate and then you’re exactly, if
we get down to the minutes, we can teach Spanish
in any subject area. But we have to make sure that we have our literacy
foundations in place first. John: And two related
points to that. One is that we have to
become much more creative and inventive of what
our teacher preparation and teacher pipelines look like
for our bilingual teachers. I think that is something
that we’ve talked about, something that we’re
engaging in conversation with local university partners, thinking about what can
we do to take students who are bilingual and
emerging from our programming here in Green Bay,
and training them up and offer opportunities for
dual credit options in pedagogy. And offer programming
and potentially, financial incentive to make sure that they have the ability
to train as teachers here. Because what we find is the
teachers that we home grow, the teachers who
have grown up here and have greater connections, tend to do really
well and stay here, as opposed to if we end
up recruiting people from further away, thinking
about the border states or even Chicago, or even
sometimes Milwaukee. Sometimes teachers
have come here and because they
don’t necessarily have that support system and
that home base of people, they haven’t tended
to stay as long. And so, thinking
about what can we do to make sure that every
one of our students that is emerging
from our programming has that offering is important. And then, I think
the other point that, doubling down on what
Nancy was saying and Gina, that it’s really about
the literacy framework and the scope and the sequence. So when we say something
might change moving forward if the population
changes, that’s the same as a classroom teacher looking at their class from day to day. If they have new
learners coming in or if learner’s needs are
emerging in a different way, we want to be responsive. But those critical elements
of literacy foundation and scope and
sequence are things that we wouldn’t be
advocating for changing. Those are the pillars
of what we need to do within the programming
and making sure that we have those supports. We might change
things slightly based on the needs of students,
just like we would expect our third grade teacher or
our fourth grade teacher to change based on the
makeup of their classroom. And again, being
careful about the why, being careful about making
sure that this is not a strict, 70%, start your timer now, that it’s really
about doing what we need to be responsive
to our learners. Andrew: So, getting back
to my question about what seems to be this
cliff edge between second and third grade, going from
70/30 all the way to 30/70. It does go from 70/30 to
30/70, but then it sounds like there’s some room for
teacher flexibility. I didn’t hear that when
this was first presented, that there was
significant teacher and principal flexibility
around individual needs, that might cause
it to not be 70/30. So is that something
that we’re saying is a commitment now? That there is teacher
and administrator, teacher and building
flexibility to do something that could look much different
than those percentages? Gina: We can let you know that
when those decisions are made, the principals consult with
Nancy and myself and the teacher to really look at why are
we making those changes and how is that gonna be in the best interest
of the students? And anecdotally, I can
tell you, for example, if in kindergarten, the
first month of school, the teacher says, “I do
need to teach,” for example, “number corner in Spanish,
to start teaching the “routines in Spanish because
most of our kids need that.” So then we’re like, “Okay, let’s try it
out for a month or so “and then we’ll slowly
switch into English.” That’s just an example
of how that happens. So it is a pact. Andrew: So are there
places then that since this is what we’re
doing as of this year, are there classrooms now where that teaching percentage
is significantly different than the 70/30
switching to 30/70? Nancy: I would say that
the emphasis right now is learning to teach
the literacy framework and the greater emphasis
is really looking at those generative practice
strategies and skills that need to be, then, transitioned into, or
paired with in Spanish. So, in all honesty Andrew, I really don’t believe that
they’re looking at the time. They’re looking at how
do I teach this framework and how do I do the
paired part in Spanish so that generative
literacy practices that they need for
lifelong learning are transferring between
both Spanish and English? The schools that we’ve
worked with for the past year and a half, I don’t know
if it’s significant. I don’t get into that
part of the weeds, but I can tell you
that on Fridays, we as a collaborative group
have, with the schools, they bring the data forward and we’re thinking
partners together. What would be the next best
step for these students? And it’s always to be responsive
to the student learning. Use your data, follow your data. The answer is in the data. And then, the goal has
to be, for our district, has to be that we
teach literacy. That is our utmost
importance right now. Andrew: You mean
English literacy? Nancy: I’m saying the foundation I’m saying
for bilingual, both because it’s the paired
part, the genitive practices and strategies and
skills of any language that you’re pairing
to your English. Now, if you’re an
English speaker what they’re really
pairing is Spanish for you, so if your first
language is English and you’re in a dual
language program, the pairing comes when
they pair the Spanish for your English
generative practices, so it depends on what your
first language would be. Andrew: It’s up there and I’ll
may have more questions as a result to what we hear
from some of the other speakers, but again, I need to at some
point, at the end of the next, I really need to know at
the next board meeting, I don’t think, either
there’s an option to deviate substantially from
30/70 or there isn’t, in third grade, and I
think that’s a real, I don’t wanna leave
teachers wondering, can I do a lot more, can I do a lot more Spanish
with my third graders or am I gonna be running a
follow of District policy or is it so much,
is it so complicated to present a change that
with my limited time it’s, my time might be better
spent not doing that and you know, ’cause it
was a really big deal that we passed these percentages
with these new models. We had a substantial
board discussion and a vote on the percentages and that switched from 70 to 30. So it does mean something
and I think it’s a lot easier if the board were to say,
no we wanna transition more gradually and it should
be 50/50 in third grade, that would do something
very specific. I’m not saying it’s
right or wrong, but if it is left ambiguous, then it just seems
very confusing. I’ll hold off until I hear
what some of the other speakers have to say at this point.
Katie: Brenda. Brenda: So just so I’m clear, the biggest switch you’ve made
is the literacy component. So describe for me what we used to do with
regard to literacy, not the percentages,
but just the shift you’re making with literacy,
what did it look like before? Gina: So we previously,
we used to teach based on biliteracy framework from Karen Beeman, in which we will
teach through content. That’s what I thought
you said, okay. And Bridgette, but it was teached through
content with sprinkle literacy skills. So the emphasis was on
teaching content skills and then the literacy
pieces came after. So, content as in? Social Studies and Science. -Okay. Nancy: It’s not a
wrong model, but even Karen Beeman will tell you
in conversation with her, you have to build that on a
strong literacy foundation. And if you have a strong
literacy foundation, as we all know, you use your
literacy practices and skills to expand your learning
in different content. We didn’t have a strong
literacy foundation in place or a foundation of
teaching literacy in place. And to Andrew’s point, I would
hope the board would consider whether or not you want a
literacy framework taught in our bilingual
biliterate program. It’s more important than the
minutes, and as we get better and our students have
one year after another, that time will shorten up, shorten up for our
English speaking students from the English side too,
the more refined we get in our literacy practices. -Thanks. Katie: Michelle. Michelle: I would assume,
and correct me if I’m wrong, that the decisions the
teachers are making are based on the
results they’re getting within the framework, as
they were moving forward. So, I think it would be
really helpful to understand, I’m just gonna piggy back
on where Andrew was going. I would assume that
as a classroom teacher you would know how much
and where to go next, based on that collaborative
teaming and work. So, I think it can vary
from classroom to classroom. I’m sure it does, just
like everything else and it should and does
based on the needs of kids, so I’ll be curious to
hear from the speakers how that’s working
for them as well. Nancy: Keep in mind we have
only implemented this beginning this
year, so this is all new learning for everyone. So to bring back any, at least
January would be a nice point to give our teachers
the courtesy of taking on this new learning. It’s strenuous and
difficult enough. It will take, as it
does all of our teachers to learn to teach literacy. It’s three and four
years to get this down and get it down to where
you’re actually using the teachers’ decision making
and scaffolding decisions based on what the
student needs next and not just following
what’s in the content that you’re covering. So please have grace
and allow them to, the opportunity to
learn, enjoy the journey that they’re on in helping
our children become literate and thank you for your time. Katie: Thank you very much. And I would now invite members
of the viewing audience to come and voice their opinions just the order in which
they were received. I’ll start with Kelly
Stalick and please approach, state your name and address. Kelly: Hi, Kelly Stalick,
2677 Van Beek in Green Bay. I’m gonna try to keep it short because there’s been a
lot of talking tonight and I think we’re probably
already overwhelmed by some of these concepts,
I know that I am. I’m continuing to
learn more about all of these bilingual topics,
so that’s a good thing. This is now gonna be my seventh, more formal attempt
to get what I think is a basic question answered. I can go through the other six
attempts if you want me to, otherwise I can email it
to you too if you want. I’ve tried various avenues
to get this question answered and it’s not been answered yet. In terms of this new
ratio with the program, especially the big dip
beginning in the third grade with 70% English 30% Spanish. Is this new ratio aligned
with any scientific or evidence-based research to support the effect of
the new bilingual model? Do we have any
scientific evidence done on kids in
bilingual programs from Spanish speaking and
English speaking homes that the long-term outcomes
will be positive for kids from both, the
Spanish speaking homes and the English speaking homes? To me if that exists, that should be easily delivered
to me or anyone who asks. There’s been times where
it’s be alluded to. I know that John had mentioned
there’s some copyright issues around being able to share
some of this information, so maybe it’s not easily
copied and given to people, but there’s gotta be a way
to get it to someone like me. It’s not that hard. Katie: Sorry, I don’t
mean to cut you off, but I would like to know, who’s in a position to
answer Kelly’s question? Gina: The research
that we’re using is from Dr. Kathy Escamilla
from Bilitracy from the Start. I believe I gave you a
copy of that resource, I’ll be happy to point out
to you the different pages as to where that research is. -Thank you. Kelly: I do appreciate
Gina did send me the book, I haven’t had a chance
to read the whole book, it’s gonna take me some time because I don’t have the
extensive bilingual background, so it’s gonna take
me longer to read it, to understand it and really
be able to digest it. So in the meantime if someone
would be able to point out certain pages that
show that this, there’s something standing
behind these changes, other than our district’s
data with forward test exams and EDL, et cetera. I can get on board
with it better. Katie: And Gina is not a
net, she can do that. -Would you like us to call
a meeting or have a meeting where we can just, after
schools, sit down and go through and discuss if anyone is
interested in the changes from the research and
literary part of this. I would love a reference
list, it’d be great. Katie: Kelly, would that
be something you would
be interested in? Okay, okay. Okay wait. Kristina: Can I just ask
you a quick question, Kelly? I don’t know if this is
to you or to the audience, but what I worry about
with having that some type, that meeting is that
it’s another presentation by the district where we
go through the same things we’ve already heard, so
my only consideration, I’m just saying this to
everyone in the group, and feel free to chime
in if that happens, I’d like it to be
a working meeting rather than a presentation,
so that we can get into some of the need of that, so. And that’s just coming
from some of the feedback that I’ve heard from community
members and staff about that. So Kelly, I don’t know if you
have any feelings about that, I just wanted to
out that out there. Kelly: You know I agree
exactly with what you said, it can’t be just a presentation
at me, for an hour long, the meaning gets lost
in all the words. Nancy: That is the purpose
of the Advisory Committee, and I realize that we
followed best practice in holding the number of
members of an Advisory Council. They, like research, tells you
to keep it around 10 or 12, that’s why it was
divided the way it was, I guess other than an
opportunity to better clarify, to share would
be more transparent, I would appreciate that we use
the Advisory Council process, that’s why the District
has adopted that format, and then the members, that’s
why it’s a diverse membership, will then go out and they have,
well I don’t wanna say work, but they’ll have
responsibilities to go out to the populations
and stakeholders
that they represent, such as our university
personnel, administrators, elementary principals,
teachers, parents, they would be then,
be the voice, two-way, from you know in
back and forth voice from the Advisory Council,
because they are going to have to solicit
additional information. The Advisory Council will not
be the only one advising us, their responsibility
will be to reach out to the stakeholders they’re,
shall I say, representing. Just a thought to stay within
the model and the framework the District has proposed
to getting our work. Katie: Kelly, are you a member
of the Advisory Committee? Kelly: Yes, I learned
about the Committee
after I raised concerns so I don’t know if I
would have been on it or even been aware
that it existed, had I not come to
the board meeting and also emailed the Whiler
Principal and Gina so. Katie: You are on the
Advisory, okay good. Kelly: The one other thing that
really struck a cord to me tonight when
listening with things, I mean I’ve written
down a lot of questions and I could go on and on, but it’s just too much, so. Nancy had said, basically,
this is a program that people choice into, and if
you’re not interested in being in it any longer,
you can get out of it, but our district’s not
gonna support those kids if they change programs, do you know what
I’m referring to? Katie: Is your child an English
speaking participant in the bilingual program, okay. Brenda: It’s also
a choice for the Spanish
speaking students too, I think that’s who
you were referring to when you talked
about the choice, not all of our Spanish
speaking childrens’ parents choose to put them in
a bilingual program. -That’s true. Brenda: So that’s who
they were talking about when they said we
can’t support children in their Spanish learning,
if the parents have chosen to put them in an all
English classroom. I think that was the reference. Kelly: I don’t know,
I need some time to get my thoughts around
this ’cause a lot of, some of what was said to
night was very upsetting and it’s struck an emotional,
personal cord with me I chose to put my kids in
Green Bay Area Public Schools, even though I work here and I know that there’s
pitfalls in the district and I know that
there’s pros and cons. My gut in the beginning told
me, maybe I shouldn’t do it, I was happy with how
things went last year, when the kids were
in kindergarten. Now with this change
and now going through all of these discussions, I
feel like it’s coming back to bite me and maybe my
initial gut was accurate that I needed to go
outside the district and go somewhere else, take
my kids somewhere else, which would sill be a choice
so, that’s where I’m left now. I think my kids will be
fine because they’re my kids and they have that white
privilege behind them ’cause they are in an educated
household with two parents, but I wanted something great
for them, not just okay. I think they’ll be okay, they’ll be able to
read in English, possibly be able to read
a little bit in Spanish, but I don’t have full faith that it is what’s
it’s going to be, from what I had understood
when I signed them up for it last fall, ’cause
it’s now changed. I acted into one thing, but it’s now become something
different, so that’s it. Katie: Thank you, Kelly. Melissa. Melissa: We had feedback from
CESA who does our videos after the board
meetings from last week that when people were
not at the microphone, that we were unable to
transcribe that information, so if we can just make sure
everyone’s at the microphone and speaking into
the microphone, so that we can comply
with the ADA requirements, that would be helpful for CESA, I know Laurie had to
step out a minute, but I just wanted,
now that we’re moving into public comment
period, just to raise that. Thank you. Katie: Thank you. The next speaker,
Susan Budsmann. Katie: The red light will go on
when you hit the red button. Nope. It looks like a face talking. Okay, perfect. (inaudible) We’ll have to speak
into my (inaudible). Susan: All right,
I’m gonna start with the idea of choice, just because oh sorry,
I’m Susan Busband living at 1563 Oriel Street,
Green Bay, Wisconsin 54311. I’m gonna start with
the idea of choice. I am a mother of
two way students, but I am also a
district employee. And part of my role up until
the last couple of years has been sitting down
with the Spanish families as we were done assessing them, doing home language
questionnaires and having conversations
with the families about what program we
recommended for their child. And again, that’s where
that choice comes in. We’re recommending this
and then they get to pick. But with that recommendation, I always had that strong
longitudinal research of Thomas and Collier. I explained that
we have one way is, we have two ways depending
on which school it was at. That research shows this
is what’s best for kids. It’s learning to read it and
write in their home language or their first language first, and then translate in into
their second language over time. I sat and shared the percentages and that’s actually one of
the reasons I’m struggling with this change this year and
even falling asleep at night, because I promised
something to families and we’re not fulfilling
that for them. We’re not giving them that. And I’m not giving the
answers about what research is supporting and where we’re
shifting to and changing to that I can say that same
stuff to those families. And like I said, that’s
not my role anymore. I still get a permission
to serve sign, but the bilingual
department explains that. So at least I don’t have that, but I also have that history
of hundreds and hundreds of families where I sat and
I told them what to expect. And then this change
happened without a letter. Until I went to my principal
and asked for that, which caused that
letter to come home, and then it bothers me too that
that letter is so positive. We’re switching to a true
duel language program. What does that mean? I feel like my definition
of what a true one is, this is a step backwards, not
forwards for our district. And the fact that
families are being told it’s a better program when I
haven’t been shown any research that proves that it really
is a better program, it’s just hard for me as
an employee and a parent. Going off of that too,
I have a question. So my first question is how is it considered
an advisory counsel if the district had
already made its decision before they put the
counsel together? Katie: The advisory counsel
is an ongoing counsel for the program. It’s not like the taskforce
that they had a short term goal. This is an ongoing
advisory counsel. Susan: I kinda feel like
it was an afterthought to check a box, to say oh, we put
this group together. We brought them
together once a month. We did some activities
with them, we listened, and they all agreed. ‘Cause even as I listen
to them share out, they talked about one parent
saying they want English. But then I feel
like as a district, that we need to
have the vocabulary if they’re misunderstanding
that English is the pathway and what’s best for their child, that we should be able to say, well, there’s research. There’s this Thomas and Collier. It was done longterm. And it shows that it’s best
to start foundationally in their first home
language and then transition into the second language. Like you just need to
have the vocabulary and the understanding
to explain it, but when I keep asking
for clarifying questions about what why and they
can’t give that research, they can’t give that why, it’s because it doesn’t exist. I think what they’re
talking about with those copies
they wanted to share, I know what they’re
talking about. They’re talking about the
literacy minute breakouts, but Eskamia, I’m going
back to what I shared at that last meeting. She quote says, “It
is important to note “that duel language
programs had the advantage “of being able to maintain
a 50 50 time allocations “in grades three through five. “This is a luxury that we
wish were available also “to more transitional
bilingual models,” end quote. So Eskamia is not saying 70, 30. I can’t find research
on the 70, 30, where 70% is in English. I feel like my question
is, my next one, would be what is the difference between a one way
bilingual program and a late exit
transitional program? That’s my next question. Katie: And can we get
an indication as to, I’m not in a position
to answer that question and I’ll put that out there. But who will be following up? Brenda: Can we keep
a list of questions and ask Nancy and– Katie: Do you have that in a
format that you’re willing to submit to us? Brenda: I mean can we
just write it down and have Nancy and Gina
come up at the very end and answer everybody’s
questions all at once? So somebody just needs to, Nancy, can you just
keep track, or Gina? Nancy: Yeah. Brenda: Questions. John: I guess I’m not
sure what protocol is to some extent. We’d be glad to come
up and share afterwards with some neutral answers, but then I think some of
the questions might require. Brenda: Sure.
Katie: And that’s fine. Brenda and Katie: That’s fine. John: I think I
might (inaudible). Katie: Commiserate,
okay, go ahead. Kristina. Kristina: Can you
just repeat that? I want to write your
question down as well. So can you just repeat that
again for my own records? Susan: I want to know what– Brenda: Can you put your, sorry. Susan: Yeah, sorry. I want to know what
is the difference between a one way
bilingual program and a late exit
transitional program, because I know our district
is saying we have one ways and I’m questioning
whether that’s really what we’re giving kids. -Late transitionals.
Brenda: Transitional. Susan: My next question is about the slide
that referred to, it talked about the two
way bilingual programs and the Spanish
immersion programs. And I personally do understand
the difference between that. But I just wanted to point
out something that I noticed with that was if you go
to the district website, and you go into
English learners, and under English learners
the link you actually click on to go into the dual
language immersion programs, it actually says quote,
“Spanish Immersion Programs.” That’s the link you click. So there’s that big
difference that is visible and blaring that they expect
us parents and community to understand, I don’t know why
that’s the name of the link. And then also, just
to reemphasize, when
you go in there, I went in there today again, it’s still showing an 8020 model as our districts
advertised offering. My next question
would be on the slide where they talked about
which schools offer one ways, which schools offer two ways, and which schools offer both, I am curious would
Eisenhower, Nicolet and Tank still be considered one ways, and if so how? -Say that one more time. Eisenhower, Nicolet and Tank? Susan: Uh huh, Eisenhower, Nicolet and Tank, if they’d
still be considered one ways, ’cause there’s a huge difference in what the bilingual
program looks like in those three schools, compared to the other
bilingual schools. On the slide they
talked about the why, and they referred to the data and not achieving literacy
in either language. I’m curious if they
took into consideration the research that shows
the four to seven years. If they also took into
consideration the idea that Spanish interventionists
are far and few. There are way more
English interventionists so there’s way more support
for struggling learners in English literacy programs
than in bilingual programs. And then also, at each
individual building, if they compared it to their
monolingual counterparts, because poverty does
play a role in data. It’s not just all
about percentages. Where they talked about
the bullet about emphasis on Spanish versus English
language allocation, I’ve been curious
did we have research that supported our previous
Spanish and English allocation, which I already know the
answer to that is yes ’cause I’ve shared it with
community members and parents, but that’s where I’m
confused if they’re saying that there was an emphasis. I personally didn’t
see an emphasis on
Spanish over English. It was truly the end
goal was biliteracy through research based
method that led to that. Speaking to the
strong literacy focus on the idea of what are we doing for our new to the country kids, because I’ve had more
than one bilingual teacher come to me not sure what
to do and how to support with 70% in the third
through fifth grade being in English and them
not understanding it. There was just so much,
sorry, I apologize. I should be more organized. When it came to the
data sharing for EDL2 and forward exam, my question
is have we compared this to national data? Have we compared it to districts with similar programs to us? Again, that whole idea
of four to seven years comes into play. We shouldn’t expect to see
them performing equally in English to a monolingual
peer in third, fourth and fifth grade. It just shouldn’t
be happening yet. And if it is, that’s great
and there are student that has excellent growth
going on, which is great, but it shouldn’t be
expected in English yet. The power of yet. Looking at the two
way program data, I feel like that makes sense. That chart they showed where it had the
English-proficient students, and then the EL learners
in the two way program. Of course on the forward exam you would expect the families that have their birth to
age five language at home in English, they’re going to outperform
the Spanish speaking students who’s birth to age five
language was Spanish. Eventually that’s why
Thomas and Collier says you gotta look
longitudinally. They will catch up
and in the long run, it’s the best program for them to learn their foundational
skills in Spanish. So I feel like that chart speaks to the expected
four to seven years. Katie: Susan, I’m
wondering as you’re going through slide by slide, if you would be willing
to maybe let one of the other speakers come up, and make their statement and then I’d bring you back up if you could have your
questions lined up. Susan: I have one last
one and then I’m done. Katie: All right, all right. Susan: The last slide
about secondary– Brenda: Sorry, can
you press your… Katie: You have to push.
Susan: I apologize. This isn’t my thing. So the last slide was about the secondary
dual language program. I don’t understand how students will be able to handle that
heavy academic expectation in secondary programs, when in third, fourth
and fifth grade we pull away all that Spanish. Their ability to
understand and read and produce reading and writing on philosophy
topics and chemistry and physics at the
secondary level isn’t going to be
there in Spanish if we don’t give
them that foundation in the elementary
school in both. They need it in English, but
they also need it in Spanish if you truly want a strong
growing secondary program. So how will we support
those secondary programs when their Spanish
literacy skills won’t be strong enough for that? Katie: Kristina. (inaudible) Kristina: Okay, I have
two quick things. Going back to you’re, you’re on the advisory
committee, correct? Susan: Yes. Kristina: Okay, that’s okay. So you have a lot that
you’re considering because of your
expertise, your kids and your own children
and your students. So how do you see the
advisory committee, the purpose of that committee
sort of helping you, as a group, to
consider these pieces that you just so
eloquently went through? And then how do you see
that advisory committee working together as a body
to not only inform admin, but also directly to the board? Do you have any
feelings about that? Susan: Like they’ve said, we’ve only had one
meeting so far. But it was definitely
a set agenda with tasks to be taken care of and it
really didn’t open itself up at any point. The last two minutes was
when they flashed at the data on handwritten Post-It notes. It didn’t lend
itself at any point to really get into the
idea of talking about how it should look or what
research supports the changes. So I would look for
it to become something where we are actually
looking at the data and being shown research for
the decision making process that’s currently happening. And then that could
be something where, after we look at that
and talk about it, that could come back to here. That could be a
fluent sharing thing and hopefully with that sharing, that honest open
communication about that, it could lead to
positive changes for the Spanish speaking and
the English speaking students in the program. That truly would be
the end goal for me. -Thank you. Katie: Sarah Pamprin. Sarah: Hello everyone. I’m Sarah Pamprin, I live
at 2397 Yolanda Circle in Green Bay. Before I begin, I just
want to personally thank, especially Andrew,
Christina and Katie for reaching out to me
in regards to things related to bilingual education. And actually coming
to me instead of me having to find people to
talk to about concerns. As you all know,
when I started here I wasn’t even contracted yet. When I returned in 2018
and I came before the board to express my frustration that we didn’t have an
advisory counsel implemented within the district
when I learned about it through the Wisconsin
State Statute. Now however I feel
like that has come back to bite me in the foot
because as I read it, I’ve read it over and
over and over again, and I’m just very confused
as to what we have right now and why that matches
the state statute. I will read the state
statue for you again. It’s 115.98, the bilingual
bicultural advisory committee. In each school district, which establishes a bilingual,
bilingual education program under the subchapter, the school board may appoint a bilingual
bi-cultural advisory committee to afford parents and educators of limited English
proficient pupils the opportunity to
advise the school board of their views and to
ensure that a program is planned, operated
and evaluated with their involvement
and consultation. So just interjecting
here to say I’m confused as to
why district employees were the ones that were
organizing the committee when it says clearly here, that the school board
may appoint that. It then says, “the committee
shall assist the school board “in informing educators,
parents, and legal custodians “of limited English
proficient pupils “that a program exists.” So again, I’m not
really sure why it’s run by district administration
when it says clearly here that the committee shall
assist the school board. There’s also, I’m also
part of this council, and there was not a school
board member in attendance at the October meeting, so I
guess I’m just a bit confused. It then goes on to say, “The
committee shall be composed “of parents of limited
English proficient pupils “enrolled in the Bilingual
Bi-cultural Education Program, “bilingual and other teachers, “bilingual teacher’s aids,
bilingual and other counselors, “and bilingual counselor’s
aids in the district, “at least one representative
from the community, “and a representative of the school district administration.” So to me, when I read this,
and it might be interpretation, but the very last
listed member on that is someone from the
district administration, it doesn’t say that it should be led by district administration. So, I guess I’m just
confused as to how this is going to be meaningful and
fruitful if it is, again, something that is led by
district administration when we’re really trying
to elevate the voices of the families, and students, and teachers that
are in the program. So that is one thing. I also, Gina, when she
began her presentation, her presentation had stated
that Wisconsin is unique with its state statutes
about bilingual education, I did some research, actually
there are eight states that have statutes about
bilingual education. That’s not very many, but
that’s not also only one. There are actually
also 34 states that, although they don’t have
statutes about them, there are 34 states in
our country in 2012-13 that had a Spanish
bilingual program, at least one within the state. So this isn’t unique,
this isn’t something that we are trying out, and
like, forging new ground. This is something that
has been in existence for quite some time. The presenters talked
about having some sort of Spanish immersion
summer program. Guess what? Guess who tried
to run that last summer? That would be me. I called it Latinos
en Los Estados Unidos, Latinos in the United States. I listed a bunch of
community partners as I had to for all
secondary programming. I put together a huge proposal, and of course it didn’t
run because we are required to apparently
advertise our own summer school classes, and
I didn’t get the attendants for that class. So, I’m not really sure. Also, with all of the issues
with transportation last summer I’m not really sure
how we’re going to get students in attendance if we’re not providing them
transportation. Another issue I have here,
although Dr. Lindsey Moses I’m sure is very qualified,
I was mystified as to why she was leading
a professional
development this summer about bilingual education. I looked at her CD,
there is absolutely– not once on her CD is there any mention of
bilingual learners. There is mention of
linguistically diverse students, but nothing specific to
working in bilingual programs. And so that was confusing to me. There’s also in this slide,
talking about how Danz has a two-way bilingual program. it wasn’t addressed that that’s
actually being phased out, so just wanted to make
sure that that was clear. There was a slide on
there that actually got my blood boiling
a bit that said, it was slide number 7,
and it mentioned things that teachers weren’t doing. I can tell you with
complete confidence that teachers are doing
a lot of the things that people are
saying we are not. I’m very confused as to how
that data is being collected, I’m not sure if there
are cameras in the rooms that are watching us,
because I have once had a district administrator in
my classroom to observe me, and it was for 30 seconds,
and it was to actually check that I had the correct ANCHOR
charts up in my classroom. And so, I guess I’m
just confused as to where we’re getting
this data from that’s talking
about what teachers are or aren’t doing
in their classrooms. I also looked into Dr. Escamilla because as far as I knew, she
is still currently working, I found her, it
says on her website that she is still
the leaders of the BUENO Center for Multicultural
Education in Colorado. She has a colorado.edu
email address, so I reached out to her to
see if she was interested in exclusively working
with Green Bay schools, because if she is I’m
not sure why we’re not taking advantage of
that opportunity, and why we haven’t been
for quite some time. There was mention of how we know that students are not
losing their Spanish during the presentation,
and I’m curious as to where the research is that they
are not losing their Spanish, or that they are
losing their Spanish. We don’t really have measures
that follow students. I’m a sixth grade
teacher, I don’t– I’m not really sure what
I’m supposed to be doing in terms of keeping track of how they’re doing in Spanish. A lot of people have
notes in here about the advisory committee. I did want to clarify that there is no Spanish
Science offered at Edison. We have one section of
bilingual Social Studies that I basically begged and
bartered for for months, and within the last
week before school began was told that I was
granted the opportunity to teach one section. When we talk about
collaborative learning teams, especially with
bilingual teachers, we have three at
Edison in sixth grade, each one of us– two of the
teachers teach one period a day in Spanish, and I teach two
periods a day in Spanish. I’m not really sure when we
quote the fact that we’re– we don’t have the staff
to fill positions. We have plenty of
teachers at Edison that are begging to teach
in bilingual classrooms, and we’re not granted
that opportunity. I think all of the
training that I’ve done, and the investment that this
district has taken in me, and encouraging me to
get my Bilingual license, I don’t feel like I’m
using all of the skills that I’m meant to be using. In terms of collaborative
learning time, I have 20 minutes twice a week with my fellow
bilingual teachers, because we have assignable time that is apparently not flexible, and so I am unable
to actually meet with my collaborative
learning team. After, again, a lot of
begging and pleading, was granted a day
to do some planning, which I am very
grateful for, however, it was only– we were only
able to get through one unit for the entire year,
and we’re approaching the end of that unit,
and I’m not really sure now what happens,
and how we’re able to plan and collaborate together again. I, let’s see. I also just wanted
to reiterate – a few times in the
presentation it was mentioned that the presenters
had talked to, and had anecdotal evidence, and had collaborated
with teachers. I have to be honest, and
I’ve said this before, and I’ve shared this
many times with Michelle that the only time that
I feel like I have had a conversation with someone
at DOB or on the board, except for the exception
of these three folks here, that I pointed out, I have
been the one to reach out. And that to me is incredibly– it’s impossible for
me to understand how that is our
current situation, that I’m the one that
has to basically beg to have a conversation,
and to ask questions, and to be seen as
a rabble rouser just for asking questions,
and trying to understand what research backs up the
decisions we’re making. I was actually a part of
the committee years ago that wrote the booths, the content-centered curriculum. I have almost got my PhD in
Social Studies Education, and I can tell you that
Social Studies Education is a really great way for
students to learn literacy, cause it helps with engagement, it helps students find what
they’re passionate about, and it’s unfortunate as
a sixth grade teacher that I’m having to
teach some students for the very first time
anything about Social Studies, because there is not
time in elementary school because there’s so much
push for literacy and math. There was also conversation
about room for flexibility, and I know Andrew was
asking a lot of questions to understand more about where that flexibility
comes into play. I’m curious as to how that
flexibility comes into play in a middle school setting
where kids are with us 54 minutes a day,
and then they leave. I’m not really sure how
I’m supposed to push more or less Spanish
with kids that I only see for one to two periods a day. I also would just
like to recommend, I know that we’re writing down a lot of questions
that people have today. What I would ask is
that instead of having the presenters come
up here at the end and address a lot
of the questions, what I would ask is that
we all take some time to mull over those
questions, and the answers, and that those are shared
in a listening session with all people who are
impacted by bilingual education in this district, because the
transparency is not there, and we all continue
to hear mixed messages from all over the place, and
so I think that it would be cool of us to, like
I did when I first came into this district in 2012, actually get bilingual
educators in the same space, at the same time,
which I haven’t done since I came back to
this district last year. My last question, someone
alluded to this previously, that we’re missing a lot of
interventionists and coaches. There did– There was an
opening for a bilingual coach last year at Eisenhower that I was highly interested
in applying for. It’s interesting to me that
I have multiple years Post- Post-Bachelor of Education,
and yet I’m not qualified to be a bilingual coach,
because I don’t have the 316. And in speaking with
others that have the 316, which is an expensive
license to receive, and it’s time-intensive,
I’m just wondering where there’s a program where
I can get my 316 license, based on bilingual learners,
because the anecdotal evidence that I have from folks
that have the 316 is that there isn’t an
emphasis on bilingual learners, so I’m confused as to
why a bilingual coach would need that license. And that’s all. Katie: And this actually
helps to explain why the advisory
committee is a good idea, because you’re on that
as well, aren’t you? Yeah, I think we– all
the first three speakers are on the advisory council, and I think we need
that communication. We need to listen
to one another, we need to have teachers
talking to administrators. We can’t– you know we have
administrators presenting, and people throwing
up their hands, and shaking their heads, and
clearly you have some concerns, and I think we need to
have that communication. So I think the advisory
council is a good idea. Sarah: I appreciate that, and I also believe in what
the state statute says that it should be– (inaudible) That’s okay (laughs). I’m just not sure
if it is meeting its potential at this current point. I know that we’ve
only had one meeting, but again walking
into a room where we’re having an advisory
council meeting, and there are tables
with four chairs setup, and the parents
who speak Spanish are sitting at one
table off to the side, and then all other
of us come into– it almost felt like
a classroom setting instead of a listening
session setting. Katie: Yeah, and
that can be changed, I mean you can
even, these tables, you can have an oval one,
you can have, you know– they’re growing pains,
this is, you’ve met once. So I would encourage all
of you to give it a chance. Michelle. Michelle: Thank you Sarah. As I was listening carefully and thinking through
all of this, I do. And I saw when you
started speaking about bringing everybody together
to really have a conversation, that’s really what you’re
asking for, and I think that’s– I’m seeing nods. I really think that’s
what has to happen. What I hear from everybody
who spoke tonight, regardless of where people are lining up behind the research, is that people care deeply, people want the
best for children, and their bilingual programming. I don’t know. What I appreciated
was Susan said… Susan, or Sue? I’m sorry. Susan said at the end, which
really was hopeful for me, was the fact that I
don’t know there’s a perfect answer, but
I’m confident that the answers in the
room, basically. That the people who are
delivering the programming, and the people who are working
on point for the district, and the people who are
actually receiving, you know, the
students and families. Because I’ve had mixed
conversations with community about what the right answer is. And so I think it’s
really important to just almost have a summit
around these issues, and really understand
the research, and come away with where
people can believe they can put their work into, because
the passion is there, and that I applaud everyone for. You know, it’s late at night, and people have grave concerns, and that’s really speaks volumes to the professionalism, but also the work that you wanna do, so. And I see that from our
essential office staff, I see it from all
of our teachers, and I see it from our
families and parents that want the best, so. Working collectively,
I think with the summit kind of
mindset, where everybody, instead of talking
at each other, start talking with each
other what they know on how to make that. And solution finding,
rather than lining up behind one side or the
other, it just, yeah. We’re going in the
right direction, I like the recommendation– Sarah: Oh! Sorry, I cut you– (laughing) I got you back. Katie: Well that was rude! (laughing) Sarah: I just
wanted to thank you for humanizing people,
cause I think a lot of the time tonight we’ve been
talking data data data, but what we have to recognize is that these are actual
children, and actual families who are impacted gravely
by these decisions, and depending on how we share
what we’re doing with families and with the community,
it can definitely give us some of those
different perceptions, and I know that there are
a lot of families out there that are latinx, and they would
really like for their kids to be in a bilingual
program, but they’re scared that they’re not going
to learn English, and I think that we have
a huge assimilation issue in this city, and
in this country. This isn’t something
I’m asking all of you to answer right now, but when we emphasize
English so heavily it puts a lot of
pressure on families who perhaps maybe want to
value bilingualism, and biculturalism,
and biliteracy, and makes them feel
like the only way is to assimilate and
to only learn English. Katie: (sighing) What? Kristina: I’m
allowed to ask questions. (laughing) Don’t get snippy with me. Sarah, you shared some
really great stuff, but I wanted to just ask once a targeted question around
your bilingual educators. I heard you talk
about the need for that team to get
together more regularly. Moving forward, do you
have any recommendations on how that would look,
because that would exist outside of the advisory
committee, right? That would be
across the district. So any thoughts about that? Sarah: I’m not sure any
more what things look like at the elementary level,
I mean, I know in general from teaching there that
there is zero time for much. But I know that there is
the time in middle schools. I know that the
bilingual teachers and I all have one period free
a day at the same time. But what it– What
is getting in the way is our assignable
time, our duty. Kristina: Thank you. Katie: Mary Ellen Merk. -The one with the
face (inaudible) there we go. Mary Ellen: Hello, my
name is Mary Ellen Merk. I reside at 461 Roselawn
Boulevard, 54301. I have been a bilingual educator
in the district since 1998. I started in the district in a transitional bilingual program, and was part at
Eisenhower at the time that moved to a one-way model. We designed that model
together as a crew, and actually Delia and I taught in a classroom
with kids together, and I was published
in the WSRA about that bilingual literacy
model that we did. At the time, we were
trying to move the district from a transitional
program into a one-way– Actually into a dual-language
model, which we then called the one-way model,
and people were like, “What is a one-way model?
That’s not in the research.” That’s because it is, but
it is one language group, it is not two language groups. But, we were very very concerned about our students’ ability
to learn both languages, because they were
being pulled out of regular education
classrooms for literacy for that time period,
and they were not getting enough literacy, and they were
not increasing their skills. And they were not increasing
in either language. So we chose to go
with a one-way model. We had an advisory group
then meet, and talk about it and come up with the
best way to do that. So that’s what happened. So I have been doing this
for a very very long time. In the mean time, I did get my
316 as a bilingual educator. I actually came into the
district as a bilingual educator from New York City. So I taught in a
bilingual program, I subbed in bilingual
programs in New York City, and so I’ve seen
bilingual education for a very very long time. I also, in 2014, did
go to Puebla for a week with Escamilla to learn about the Biliteracy Squared model. I went as a adjunct
professor for UW-Oshkosh because I was
teaching biliteracy at UW-Oshkosh as
adjunct faculty. And I did that for
many many years. I taught the Beaman
book and the Uro book for about three or four years. What I can tell you
about Escamilla is Escamilla is a
proponent of Spanish. She is a proponent of
bilingual, biliterate, bicultural kids. We were completely
taught in Spanish, we went to schools, we were
taught how to do biliteracy, we were given all
the information, and one of the things you have
to remember about her book is it’s biliteracy. It is not math, it is not
content, it is not Phy. Ed. it is not music. So she is a proponent of
increasing their literacy in Fourth and Fifth Grade by
percentages, which makes sense. Because, as Sarah talked about, you can do Spanish in content. You can give them
literacy skills that they can
transfer in content. You can give them
Spanish science and they can read
Spanish science. So, instead of only
having 20% of Spanish, they have 20% of
Spanish in literacy, but they have their entire
reading, in science, is in Spanish, because
they’re transferring those skills back and forth. I have been doing
paired literacy. Taking what they
know in Spanish, and increasing their English, for over 20 years
I’ve been doing it. I am presently one
of the only full-time Bilingual Interventionists,
I have been for the last 10 years at Sullivan Elementary. I am a Bilingual
Reading Interventionist who is now Reading Recovery
trained, and DLL trained. I’ve been doing it at
Sullivan for 10 years. When I looked at the
data at Sullivan, it is interesting to see
that our bilingual kids in reading in Spanish, their
EDL2 scores in proficiency were the same or equal
to or greater than their native English
counterparts. So, they’re reading in
their native language the same or equal to their
English counterparts. So I don’t understand why
the program doesn’t work. It’s doing the same thing. Are 90% of them
reading on grade level? No they’re not, we have a
literacy issue in our district. We don’t have a bilingual issue. The bilingual program
that they are proposing, that they want to put in place, when you hit a threshold
of 50% English or lower, it is no longer a
dual language program. It is a transitional program. Late exit. It is not a dual
language program. Any bit of research out
there will tell you, as soon as you drop below the
50% threshold for English, you are no longer a
dual language program. So all of the paper work that
you are putting out to parents that says that they are in
a dual language program, that they are in
a two-way program, that they are in a one-way,
dual language program to become biliterate,
bilingual, bicultural, is wrong. It is not research supported. As soon as you drop below that
50% threshold, you’re done. It’s not dual language anymore. I was very concerned in April, I had no idea this
was happening. I’ve been in the
district 20 years, I’m in a bilingual school. I had no idea this
was even happening. I heard rumors that there
was something going on in Eisenhower, I knew nothing. In April, I went to the board. I didn’t know anything about it. In May, I started
to hear these rumors that something was changing, but it was all hush-hush. What’s that all about? So I went and I watched
the board meeting. And I’m looking for the data,
and I don’t see any data. The only data I saw
was behavior data. I was like, “This
is interesting. “What data are they looking at?” So I emailed
Claudia Orr in June. And I said, “Can you
give me some data “that you guys looked at? I’m really confused.” She copied her response to
Nancy Chartier and my principal, and said, “Your
principal has that data.” That was the response I got. I had no idea what was going on. I had no idea about the change, no idea about the data, nothing. So in the other
piece of my puzzle, that I kept getting
very upset about is every time that
it was brought up that classroom teachers,
or teachers in our district did not have a
literacy framework and were not following the
scope and sequences incorrect. I have been, for 20 years. We have followed the Fountas
and Pinnell continuum. We have followed whatever
literacy framework was given to the district. Right now, all we
have is Lucy Calkins, that’s what the classroom
teachers are using, and the continuum, if that’s the framework
they’re talking about. I have done Reading Workshop,
Writing Workshop language since 2000? 2005? I’ve been doing mini-lessons
and Reading Workshop and Writing Workshop
for over 10 years, if not 12 years. So it’s not new to me,
and I don’t understand why it’s sounding like it’s new. And paired literacy has
been done for 20 years. We have always looked at, “What are their
strengths in Spanish?”, “What do they need in English?”, and moving it forward. There’s a graph by
Thonis, Eleanor Thonis, that was done 30 years ago. And it lists out
all of the things that when you learn a literacy, that you can transfer
to another language. Basically, everything transfers. The only thing that
does not transfer, is whatever is specific
for that language. For instance, directionality. In, I think it’s Hebrew,
you read right to left. Well that directionality’s
not gonna transfer if I learn English. But, main idea,
inference, visualization, all of those pieces that are the most important components
of literacy transfer. So it doesn’t matter which
language you learn it in. I do understand because in the governmental state that we’re in and also with the push for
getting our kids to grade level and meeting benchmarks, that all has to be
done in English. I get that, totally. But why are we worried
about Fourth Grade? As Christina had shared,
it is seven years. Kinder, First, Second, Third,
Fourth, Fifth, Sixth Grade before we can even
worry about them. Then, when we’re
looking at the data, I can tell you, for
our Fifth Graders, how many of them have
exited the program. So, what about those
ELLs who are 6.0s by Third Grade, Fourth
Grade, Fifth Grade? Where are they counted? Are they counted under the ELs? Because they’re really
not ELs anymore, they’re exited kids. Are they counted under
native English speakers? I’m not quite sure. So I would wonder where
those kids are at. And then, once you
pull those kids out, who are the exited kids,
which I think at Sullivan, if I remember off
the top of my head I think maybe half? I wouldn’t say half. Maybe a third to a
quarter of our kids were completely exited
from the program. They were 6.0s. So they were considered to
be fully English proficient. So, that’s fabulous! By Fifth Grade they were
fully English proficient and they no longer needed
ESL or bilinugal support. But they were still
in a bilingual program because our focus is bilingual,
bicultural, biliterate. And many of our parents
of course want their kids to learn English. But the problem that
they run into is they get very very excited
when their children are Kindergarten, First
and Second Graders and they’re speaking English. Then all of us, I have my
teenager, right back there, who is going to be 18. He doesn’t like to talk to me. And guess what, we
both speak English. Now, how about I’m a
native Spanish speaker. I don’t speak English very well. My son has been
learning English. And now I take him to
the doctor with me. I take him to the
post office with me. I take him places with me. Where’s that power
shift in the family? What happens then? And now, as a school district, we’re pushing them into English. So we’re not gonna
support that family in being able to
maintain communication with their own children. And yes, that is partially
their responsibility and I do tell my parents that,
because they’ll say to me, “Well they don’t
wanna speak Spanish.” And I’m like, “But you’re
the parent, that’s your job.” I’m getting a little
off-topic and I apologize. But one of the things that,
when I was with Escamilla, in Puebla in 2014, one of the
big things she talked about to us is that concept
of paired literacy. I remember very vividly, she talked about that
our children are not two-string guitars. They are twelve-string guitars. And so they use all of their
strings at all of the time. And that’s what I do. I have some of my students who
are second generation here, and they speak both languages. One of my students only knows
all of his colors in English, and so when we read, it’s
very difficult for him to read “Rojo”, or excuse me “Verde” because it’s “Green” in
English and “Verde” in Spanish. It’s completely different. And so I have to
kinda work with him. I have to decide how
I wanna handle that. There are other kids who
are perfectly fluent. I do it all the time, I’m fluctuating
between both languages. I’m using those twelve
strings all the time. And it was very very
difficult for me to hear, as Sarah said, all the things
that teachers are not doing that we have been doing. As an Interventionist, I was
pulled into Second Grade. I taught under the BUFs
in Second Grade one year. My students did not get
Intervention for that year. That was in, I think 1516. And I taught Second Grade under the Bilingual Unit Frameworks as a literacy specialist
and loved it. Because I was able
to, if I wanted to, use a science text, and teach
inference and visualization. Or use social studies
textbooks and do that. The Spanish science
textbooks were pulled. The Spanish social studies
textbooks were pulled. Some of the other materials
we used were pulled out so the teachers were
left with “What do I do?” They go to teachers
Pay teachers. Because they don’t
know what else to do. So we had BUFs for two
years, then we had CEDs, then we had Calkins. teachers don’t know what to do. That’s why they’ve been
leaving the district. I’ve had teachers tell me,
“I can’t do this anymore. “I can’t change
every single year “and stay in this district. “I’m leaving. “I can’t do it anymore.” This is research based,
this is research based, this is research based. Well we’re not getting the
outcomes after two years, so let’s do something else. Oh that’s not working,
let’s do something else. And that’s the way bilingual
teachers are feeling. Trying to think about
anything else I wanted to say. I think that was
all I had to say. Katie: I’m gonna hold you to
that. Thank you very much. And our last speaker,
Danielle Ibarra. Okay, push the face with
the lines coming out of it. Danielle: Danielle Ibarra,
3535 Cherrywood Lane I was a bilingual teacher
at Howe and at Midtec. I have been teaching 44 years, 24 of them have been
in bilingual education. Or more maybe, I don’t
know, it’s been a long time. But, I had no idea
of the new model. When Howe’s program
was dissolved, they send us to
different schools so they gave us
options to transfer. So, I looked at Tank and
was under the impression that I was gonna go in there, and I was gonna be a Fifth
Grade bilingual teacher for my last year ’cause
I am re-retiring. And that was what
I was looking for. Last year Fifth Grade
teacher with I think there was 25 or 26
kids in the class. Then school started
and they said, “No. “It’s changed. “You’re gonna be
an SLA teacher.” What does that mean? “Oh we’re gonna be
doing paired literacy.” So I was really confused
because like Mary Ellen said, we’ve been doing paired
literacy for a long time. And now, as a SLA teacher, I was gonna do paired
literacy for one hour. And my schedule was to be that I was to go and observe
the Gen. Ed. teachers. And from there,
kind of try to work the paired literacy
kind of stuff. I do not believe
in that program. And I told them right away. I said, “Because what I have
been doing for so many years.” I was willing to give it a shot. I said, “Okay, I love teaching. “and I love working with
the bilingual students.” Although I have
worked in Gen. Ed. over in Madison, Wisconsin also. So, they told me that
I would be able to do the program my way,
use my creativity. And so I had high hopes. We had a new principal,
and I talked with her about what I wanted to do. They did make some changes. You know, bilingual teachers
are a rare commodity. But they did make some
changes where they took a bilingual teacher and
made him a Gen. Ed. teacher. And then they took me and
they made me an SLA teacher. I had the impression that
I could give the students what they needed. So when we started
teaching, we had a new-to-the-country child. Fourth Grade, she had
only gone to First Grade. Immediately I said, “Oh, I can do the program there
the way that they told me.” so instead of going to
observe those mini-lessons, I can go ahead and schedule
half an hour of time with that student
to bring her skills. And I talked to the principal and she was like,
“Sure why not.” You know, they told us
we could do the models the way we wanted to do it. Couple of weeks
later, she came back, held an impromptu
meeting and said, “We gotta follow
the Lucy Calkins. “And you gotta do this
and you gotta do that.” So that was it. The teacher who is bilingual
was told he was Gen. Ed., he was to speak only English. That, he could support the
kids but he was not supposed to be teaching or whatever, so it made it very
very restrictive. So, I would go in there
to observe sometimes and he would be doing sign
language with the kids in English, talking
to them in English and doing body language
that I’ve used in the thing. So, no, we do not
have the flexibility that they said
that we could have. The Third Grade
teacher, she was crying in the beginning of the year. And she was like, “How can
I do this with my kids? “How can I teach
them”, I think it was, “Veggies in English.” Well, this is what we’re doing. So you gotta just adapt
this or adapt that. So anyway, I have been
working and doing my best in working with what I have. Then, because they took
away the 26 kids that I had, they divided them,
and put them with the two General Ed. teachers. It brought up their
numbers pretty high, 25 or something like that. Well there’s all
kind of behaviors and there’s a teacher that
cannot deal with the behaviors. So then they came
in, they told me, “Okay, you’re going
to do your SLA, “but you’ll do math to support
the Gen. Ed. teachers.” I said, “Okay, I’ve
done math, I can do that “for one hour and
still do my four SLAs.” And then, as I was
talking to the teachers, they said well, it would be
best if you could help us during reading and writing. So then we suggested that we do, that I help with the
reading and writing and I guess that maybe
that was my mistake. I don’t know, but I
didn’t realize that
they took it to mean or the principal took it to mean that it was the
whole literacy thing, which I was not thinking
of the whole day. So then last week, I was told you’re gonna
be a Gen Ed teacher. And I’m like we’re a rare
commodity in the district or in the state and you’re
gonna have me do Gen Ed? And then they try to convince me that oh yeah, because you’ll
be able to help those kids that don’t speak
that much English. They’ll be comfortable
in your class and then you’ll be able
to do one hour of SLA, which means I would combine
all my 23 fifth graders for one hour plus do Gen Ed. Okay? So I thought about it and I
said no, I cannot do that. And if it’s that way, because they were thinking
of changing over to me being a Gen Ed teacher at
the end of the trimester. I said I’m done, and I walk away at the end of the trimester. So now, you’re losing
a bilingual teacher in the middle of the year. Okay? So, we did not, oh, another
thing that they did tell us in the beginning of the year when I wanted to
help that student and they came back and they
told me that I couldn’t because I had to do Lucy
Calkins and the way it was, there’s a coach was
assigned to help me, 44 years of teaching, doing parent literacy
all this time, that she was gonna come
in, and she’s amazing. I have to say she’s amazing,. She was gonna come and show
me how to do Lucy Calkins. So I was talking to her
and I was like, you know, this is really not what
I would sign up for. I would love to help the
new-to-the-country student, who has a story that she
was also detained at ICE or in Texas detention center, so she’s gone
through a lot drama. Now she’s only expected to
be doing things in English and I said I really
would like to help her. And what she told me, and I
heard this from other people, is that why would I
offer that service to her when our students
that are bilingual are gonna be with the
English speaking model for most of the day, why should they get any
support because the Somali and the Hmong don’t
have that ability. And I was like, wait a minute. We’re going to way back
when bilingual first started and it’s not right. If I’m able to help that
child in their first language, why can I not do it? So no, we’re not
given any flexibility, except this is the way
it’s supposed to be. They have not told us
that we could be flexible. Okay? I just wanted to put a face to what’s going on
in the district. Thank you. Shane: (laughs) Shane Espinoza,
3178 East Breeze Lane, Green Bay, Wisconsin. Just to start, I wanna say
that, as a bilingual educator, I am a firm believer in the
bilingualism, biliteracy. I do have my 3-16 back when
I was an interventionist at my current school at Dion’s with my 3rd, 4th and
5th graders, I started alternating Spanish and
English week by week and transferring those
skills back and forth between the areas, the
generative literacy skills that Mike and Nancy
and Gina spoke about. I was told that at that time no, you’re not allowed to do that. You need to only be doing
Spanish intervention. And then, two years ago, the
RTI person interventionist from the district was pulling
straight English groups out of the 2nd grade classroom. So, there are things that we
know as bilingual educators that we do and that we’ve
been doing ahead of the curve, even if that does
involve more English than the district
initially even said, so just to be upfront, we’re
not against English education, and bilingual and
bi-literate education. Kind of is a little
bit of comic relief, I was on the website, too. It does still say 80/20. It says dual language. I would invite you all
to go there and see it. The comic part is, if you’re at a lot of
businesses these days, if something’s advertised
different than what you get, you get your money back, so
I wonder what we’re doing to comply with that
with our families ’cause we’re not giving
what we’re advertising. So on that page, it talks about
our dual language program, and that’s what it says, dual
language immersion program. It says that our
goal is bilingualism, bi-literacy, and bi-culturalism. But then, also when
Nancy was talking, she was talking about our goal
being English proficiency. And so, I asked and I think all
of us as bilingual educators are asking what is the goal? Is bilingualism just
a means to an end of English proficiency? Or is it truly in practice,
a means and an end to itself? And I think that
needs to be clarified because it says different
things different places, and what we’re
putting into practice is different in
different places. Also, looking at the data,
know from some experience that I had over this Summer
that students were moved, native English
speakers were moved out of the two-way
program into the, or they wanted to be
moved, or not they wanted, the district wanted to move
them into a monolingual setting, because they were not making
the progress in English or Spanish,
especially in English. And so, my question is if we’re only looking
at district data,
is our data skewed, because we’re only looking
at the selective group of students that we’re choosing
to be on the two-way side of our bilingual
two-way program? Next, I was talking to Sarah,
and I guess I’m wondering if this bilingual
advisory counsel just started meeting last month, I believe that Sarah looked
into the state statute back in August of 2018. If this was all in the works all during the last school year, why wasn’t the board
and the administration, why wasn’t that committee
functioning and working in tandem as these
discussions were happening? It was sad that we didn’t
have a sculpt sequence, that was on one of the
slides in English or Spanish. There wasn’t a set
sculpting sequence of you have to teach this
first like through the year. There were certain things that
we had to teach in 2nd grade, 3rd grade, or 4th grade. But do the things
like Einstein Kids that you order for
first trimester, or second trimester
or third trimester. There was some variation of the order of some of how
those units were taught. So that even in
monolingual classrooms, different schools weren’t
teaching those units in the exact same order. So I don’t know what
the argument is with
scope and sequence but we have the
same expectations. They might not have been
taught in the same order in monolingual or bilingual. Also, for Calkins, for
the classroom for Calkins, there are amazing, basically
it’s almost like giving like a behind the glass when
you read the Calkins units. And, so if you’re looking at ’em and they talk
about the text used and we got those text
sets and everything, well, then there’s
recommendations of what to use as
Spanish substitutions. Well, we knew, as a district
and I think around the country, they knew that some
of those substitutions were not very appropriate. They didn’t have the
same teaching points. They may have been
about the same topic, but they weren’t
the same text level. Lots of things like that. So, kudos to Elizabeth
Wright last year for putting together
a team of educators at each grade level to
look at and really consider what text would fit to
teach the teaching points, the level of text difficulty and we work together and
those were finally ordered and given to us at the end
of the school year last year. So we’ve been doing Calkins, you guys adopted
Calkins years ago. And as you wonder why
our data isn’t good, we’ve been trying to find
resources to teach it with and then try to figure out how do we take
those units of study and all that amazing
behind the glass type, okay, this is what they’re
doing in a Calkins classroom, how to apply that to
these Spanish books that we don’t have
the same ones, we’re picking and choosing
and trying to figure it out. Another thing is math. Where does math fit
into all of this? I know we’re talking
about literacy, but what about STEM and math? I just don’t get, well, I mean,
if we’re talking about Ford, our report cards are based
on literacy and on math. Where’s all the talk about math? There is a lot of literacy
in science and social studies and math and how
you see patterns and, even I mean,
specials, reading music, like all of these
things are interrelated and I think that
was touched upon. But we need to not lose sight
of the forest for the trees. And then also, there’s
bias in standardized tests. I think you all would know that. I went through CESA 7 and
this gets to my last point. So I had started
at Saint Norbert and then I went to
College in Illinois, got certified in Psychology
and then came back and they needed bilingual
teachers in the district. I was gonna get my Master’s
in Social Work instead, but they needed
bilingual teachers. So I went through CESA
7 to get my credits and they they
asked me after that if I would help
tutor another teacher who was having troubles
passing her Praxis text. I think it was her Elementary
Content Knowledge test. I took the middle school route
’cause elementary/middle, you can either do middle
school or elementary, or early childhood. And I did middle school and
I’m a pretty good test taker. I actually am a graduate, one of the valedictorians
from Green Bay West, so I feel very strongly
about the district and proud to be a
district graduate, employee and mother
of an ELS student. So, I mean, this is
very important to me on a variety of levels. But so, I tutored this teacher and she kept taking the
test and taking the test and she couldn’t pass it. There were things
she just didn’t know. And one of the things she said
to me that kind of stood out and as I thought tonight
that kept coming back to me is that she was in pull-out
ESL classes a lot of times in high school, so I
think she was missing some of that heavy
lifting of content in middle and high school
that we’re talking about. And so, she didn’t have some
of that background knowledge that a lot of us
had when we were in our regular ed
content classes and I think that really
did a disservice to her. And then the last thing
I wanna talk about, Nancy talked about it, too,
was that we do have a shortage of bilingual teachers,
and unfortunately, we’re not even utilizing the
bilingual teachers we have to do what they’re capable
and trained in doing. Like I say, I went
through CESA 7 and I had to take 22 credits ’cause I had to take my
elementary certification. I was certified in elementary, ESL and bilingual in one year because I wanted to be
employed the next year. I took 22 credits in addition
to teaching in one year. I paid $600 of credit to
Silver Lake College and CESA 7, so that was over
$12,000 that I paid. From talking to people now,
I guess bilingual teachers are given $1,000 a
year for three years. Well, $3,000 does
not touch 12,000 and then when my husband
went through the program, it was $14,000. Well, if that would
have been my case, I probably would have
gone into social work and not into education. So, the good part,
though, at that time, the reason I did it is
because I was reimbursed half before the MOA and Act 10. So I got reimbursed
that $6,000 initially after I took those
credits each semester. And then, for every year I
was in the district after, I got reimbursed six of
those credits each year, so I got fully
reimbursed, for that. And then, I was able to use
those credits towards my 3-16. We need to open opportunities
and encourage education instead of
discouraging education. So, that’s pretty much
what I have to say. Katie: Thank you for
not holding back! (woman laughing) -No one has ever–
Katie: All right, all right. I don’t have any more people who are interested in speaking. And I’m wondering… You are welcome to come up, but I don’t know that
we’re gonna go down. (inaudible) At this time, but I think we’ve captured
a lot of information and I appreciate people’s
willingness to speak up. And I appreciate the
work that you’ve done and I think it’s good. John: Sure, I wanna reiterate
that there definitely is a lot of opportunity
for more conversation. That we’ve just begun the work with the parent advisory group, and so we’ll want
to continue that. But I think that
there needs to be some additional opportunity
for additional voice from a wider variety of people than just the people that
are in the advisory group. With nearly hour and 1/2
to two hours of questions, I really don’t think we… I quite often agree with Sarah, but I most often agree
with the standpoint that I think that we
need to take some time to reflect on these
questions, go a little deeper, rather than try and give
an immediate response to each of these questions. I think that that could
be not as fruitful as taking some time and looking
for what are the patterns of question that we want
to answer, and making sure that we have opportunity for
greater voice in that work, as well, as the work of
the parent advisory group. And I too, would like to share,
as well as Gina and Nancy that we are all
passionate about this work and we all have committed a
significant portion of our lives to serving kids and in
particular, several of us, in serving bilingual students. And that’s something that we
won’t take lightly and I think, just the fact that there is
so much passion around this, it’s an important point
that we need to take some additional time to make
sure that we are engaging in dialogue, having
further conversation, and moving forward. I do think it would
be helpful, though, that once we do
some initial sifting of some of the questions
and looking for themes, if we’re able to share that
with the board, as well, so that we can ensure
that the themes that we’re seeking answers on are represented
within that search. So, rather than just
what we come up with related to the main
themes that have merged. Katie: Thank you. -Thank you very much.
John: Thank you! Katie: And that concludes the
teaching/learning work session. (laughing) And now, your son can run
skipping from the room. -He did it on
purpose for being here– Katie: I see how it is! Okay, so he wasn’t just
supportive of his mother, okay. (inaudible) Katie: Good, good, all right. Well then, you’re
all welcome to stay! Brenda: All right, next
is organizational
support work session. That’ll be facilitated
by Andrew Becker. ANdrew: Right, thank you. We have two business and
finance discussion items with an opportunity
for public comment, although we haven’t had
any papers turned in. First of all, for this one. First of all, we have the
2019/2020 budget transfer. This is… This is just putting
down in writing something that we had talked
about about recalculating. Vacant positions, and to
better reflect the spread that not all vacant
positions when filled will take the family insurance. And, anything you’d
like to say about that? -I’m gonna start and give
Angela the opportunity to fill in some of the details, but this is a common
occurrence in school districts that I’ve worked in both
as a business official and as a superintendent where from time to time the
board will request transfer of funds from
one fund to the other. We don’t have the
authority to spend out of the function
of the budget that was passed by the board, unless the board officially
does a transfer of funds. And so this would be a
document that would represent the request that was
made by the board to accomplish that. When I think about the size
of the district, though, and the amount of money, it seems like a lot of money, but in a district that
I’m more familiar with in terms of the size, that would be about one tenth
the size of this district. About 50 thousand dollar
change in health insurance would be something that
would be quite frequent in terms of the
ability to project who’s gonna take family and
who’s gonna take single, and what type of
insurance they might take. And some in fact
waive the insurance. So, this is not an unusually
large amount of money. It certainly would be in
line with whatever budget characteristics that you put
together with the budget, but nevertheless it’s what we
believe would be more accurate based upon how people have taken the insurance choices
more recently. So, we did the best
job we could, gleaning that money from the budget. Now, having said that,
there is a possibility that every new
hire that you have will take family
health insurance. In which case you’re gonna
go over that, that budget. Andrew: But there really isn’t. I mean, you are a math teacher. I mean, we’re talking about,
if we’re talking about 140 people all taking
family health insurance, you’re talking about
something that would be, what? One in 10 to the
30, 10 to the 50? I mean it’s possible only in
the same way that it’s possible that the space station could
crash onto Green Bay tomorrow. Which, I mean. -I think that, that that
would be more likely, that more people would take
family health insurance than the space station
crashing on Green Bay, but I’m not a scientist,
astrophysicist, so. Andrew: Laura? Laura: When will we know
if this is panned out? I mean, when will
know that the numbers, that this was a safe risk? -In districts that I’ve
served in the past, typically board transfers
happened in February, March. And we have a more
predictability at that time. In a district that’s this large, sometimes vacancies are
not able to be filled that board would like
to fill immediately. And as hard as administration
tries to recruit and retain individuals,
sometimes those vacancies would not be filled entirely
for the school year. I think this is a very safe
guess, as Mr. Becker had indicated, this is much
safer than the space shuttle landing on the district, so. Andrew: Any other questions? Michelle? Michelle: I just appreciate
you putting it in writing and all that, that was
a request of the board. And I think it’s very important
to memorialize that request. So, I appreciate your
work on that, as well. And I think it’s a good move
and I know that Mr. Magus is already working to
address that with you in partnership, and Human
Resources with Terry as well. So thank you. Andrew: Anything else? Okay, thank you. -I think you’ve got to brush up on your bilingual education. -May I address that? -Sure. -The reimbursement rate
for bilingual education from the state of Wisconsin,
and we actually should be, instead of working
among ourselves maybe talking to
state legislatures. It’s 8%. 8%. So a district that has a
large bilingual population that needs to serve that
population is extremely disadvantaged by the
lack of support from the State of Wisconsin. -Thank you. Brenda: So, we may have
a statute, but we have
no money behind it. -Yes. -Basically. -That was part of the
Blue Ribbon Commission. -Why didn’t you say
that two hours ago? -Pitiful and pathetic. -We knew it wasn’t
gonna be robust. -I’ve said it before. Andrew: Okay, let me have School
Board Member Compensation and Expenses Policy, which
has been put off a few times, when there’ve been more pressing items. I would propose that we
probably do that again. -Put it off? Brenda: Put… Andrew: Yeah. Brenda: Put what off? Katie: We just freed up 500
thousand dollars. Andrew: We did,
and I think that… -I’m kidding. Andrew: Well, so here’s why I
just don’t wanna just say let’s not even look
until next year. The board policy is that
we look at it by April, when the new board is elected. I think it probably makes
sense to do something to increase board
member compensation, but have it not take effect until some amount
of time has passed. I think that, but I,
certainly we’ve have a lot going on. We’ve been here for a long time on a heavy subject and if no one else has any idea of what we might do differently, I don’t have the
right answer either. I just know that in probably
about 18 years or so since we moved from
a per-meeting model to a per-month model, it’s been
the same for 18 years or so, and it doesn’t go as far, and I don’t want the, you know, to me, the, for
me it’s strictly, it’s not a vote whether I
ever benefit from this or not. It’s about, are we
offering something that’s some kind of
reasonable compensation to allow someone to
make a choice that whatever they might
have to give up as far as a second
job to do this, or need assistance
with babysitting to
do this, whatever. But it’s meaningful, and we, when we thought it
was 18 years ago, if we thought it
was 18 years ago, either we were wrong then
and we were overcompensating, or we weren’t wrong, and
I don’t think we were, and then it’s probably
under-compensating for, again, this isn’t about, (clears throat) this isn’t about
me working in a, you know, it’s not about me
working a professional job and having time, it’s about who, who
maybe couldn’t run because the money isn’t enough
to give up a second job, or reduce hours of a second job. But I don’t have
the answer tonight. I would suggest
we look at it in, just move it back a month. Brenda: And how will you
have an answer in a month? Andrew: I don’t have to
always have an answer, though. Brenda: No, but I mean, what
information do you need to be able to have an answer– Andrew: I– Brenda: In your own head, to
have an answer in a month that you don’t have tonight. Andrew: Oh, I
suppose I would probably
wanna dig a little deeper into CPI and that kind of thing, and also look at, probably
find out if there’s any, probably do some, although
I don’t base things entirely on what other districts do, maybe some comparisons there. But we do have more, you know, if you look
at who, you know, we have seven people
representing 150 thousand. You know, the city council has
12 people representing 120, yes, more topics, but the
county board has 26 people representing 250 thousand. So the, we, you know, and
we don’t have districts. So we could get, we each of us
has 150 thousand constituents and that’s, it takes some time. So, Kristina? Kristina: Thanks, Andrew. I agree. I think, well one, the fact
that Rhonda’s not here, and this directly
impacts her, as well, I feel like she would
definitely need to be here for that conversation. But I agree. I think maybe if collectively
we could pull together some of those data points, like you said, looking at
other local governing boards, what other school districts do, I know I started
looking at some of that, but, yeah, the fact that it
hasn’t been updated in 18 years gives you pause to
really think about how does this impact who’s able to represent
our community. Right? Because there are potential
and probable impacts on damaging the diversity
and inclusion of voices who could sit here. So I think it’s a
bigger conversation, and, yes, I feel like
after three hours my brain is not capable
of diving into that, and perhaps we could wait. So. Andrew: Brenda? Brenda: My concern is that
this is probably the fourth, at least, time that
we’ve brought this up with serious intention
to look at it, and we’ve had comparisons,
we’ve looked at other districts, what they do, we
never get to the point of actually doing something. And so that’s why when I
asked you that question, of what would it take for
you to have an answer, to be able to make a decision, because we’ve talked about
it as to women who can run, and of course, it’s always, it’s not hard for
every elected body, but it’s hard for
this elected body to raise the pay when
we know it comes out of our students’ pockets. But I, and so I would just, I guess I’m personally
not interested in having this
conversation again, and us saying, oh, we’d
better not do anything, we’ll just keep
it the way it is. So we can bring the comparables. They’re not really very helpful because you have districts that pay their board
members nothing (clears throat) and then everything in between. That, and what we make, and then there’s board members that are paid more than we are. And so I feel like we
need to do something, and so I would ask
you to consider what it will take
to finally do that. Because otherwise,
we’d be sitting here 10 more years, still making
the same amount we made, then it would be 28 years ago. So I, so if there are
other things that you need besides comparables, we can
put it back on our agenda for next month. Let me know and I
can gather that. (inaudible) Brenda: About? (inaudible) Brenda: Oh, okay. (inaudible) Brenda: Yeah, and I seriously, I really, I don’t think any
information is gonna help us. Because what has been, what has
prevented us from doing this is the fear of taking money
out of people’s pockets, and the fear of being criticized for giving ourselves
a pay raise. I don’t know that the
comparables are gonna help us make that decision. So it’s just something to
think about for next month. And we’ll put it
back on the agenda. Andrew: Laura? Laura: I wonder if maybe an
option, then, is to have, if we’re gonna have it, if we’re gonna do something, like really do something, we put some kind of
structure in place so there’s some kind of
automatic, periodic increase. So that we know it’s coming, it won’t matter
who’s on this board. We could all be gone, or we could some still be here, but that it’s, it is, there’s
some kind of mechanism where it happens automatically every, we can, you know,
talk about how often. It’ll take that personal
aspect out of it, and just make it part of the, part of how we do business. Brenda: Yeah,
and we’d just have to make a decision to do
something, I think is… Laura: Yeah, I mean, and that
might be a bigger discussion. There’s endless
possibilities then. But that way, future boards
will be relieved of this kind of thing, and
then it would be more impersonal,
frankly, you know. Brenda: Yeah, right. That’s a good idea. Andrew: And we could even be,
you know, potentially indexed to something, it could be a
certain proportion of that, so, okay, so next month, and then we’ll do something. Okay. Eric? Laura: Sorry. Sorry, I, you, it
wasn’t my turn. Go ahead there, Eric. Eric: You know,
just on that topic, maybe if we, if you
do pass something and say that maybe it doesn’t
take effect for three years, so that every single person would have to go
through an election, again, before that takes place, so no one could accuse us of
giving ourselves pay raises. We’re doing something. So, just something we need to
talk about more next month. -And it– -I’m sorry. Katie: That’s it. (laughs) Katie: Is this
something that can even be put on the
Superintendent’s Report for our next meeting, rather
than waiting another month? And that we can just… Andrew: Or we could just– Or we could just leave
it on Operational Support for next month and someone
could make a motion. I mean, for this month. I mean, if there’s nothing
gained by waiting another month, I don’t have a strong… (inaudible) Andrew: Yeah. Right. Laura? Laura: Maybe our money people
can give us some guidance, or have some ideas of
how this could happen. Yeah, and I would love to hear
anything you have to suggest. Katie: Are they doing that just
in sitting here watching this? (inaudible) Brenda: Microphones. (inaudible) Brenda: Microphone. Michelle: No, I
said that I raised my hand because we actually
talked this morning about what other districts have done in terms of just what
you’re talking about. Some consistent ways to do this so every time it comes up, people are put in positions that maybe they’re not
comfortable with it. So, I know we talked
about it earlier today. Because we knew it was on,
we always discuss the agenda, on Monday, so. They can bring back some ideas. (inaudible) Brenda: But they could just
bring it back in writing, so we don’t have to sit here through
another long meeting. Michelle: Well, yeah,
we’ll share it all. Andrew: Okay. And, probably no public
comment on any of this, so Human Resource Discussion
Items and Public Comments, we have none on the agenda. So we have, last thing, then,
that we would have would be any topics for future agendas. Anyone? All right. Then that concludes
Organizational Support. Katie: Move to adjourn. Eric: Second. -Third. Brenda: All in favor? All: Aye. Brenda: Opposed? (light rhythmic
synthesized music) ANNOUNCER: You have
been watching the Green Bay Area Public
School District’s Board of Education meeting. Please visit the school
district’s website, www.gbaps.org, to view the program again. (light rhythmic
synthesized music) If you cannot fully access
the information on this video, please let us know
the accessibility
issue you are having by calling (920) 448-2025, or by email at
[email protected] We will try to provide
the information to you in an alternative format, and/or make the
necessary improvements to make the
information accessible. (light rhythmic
synthesized music)

Be First to Comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *