School Community Council Meeting Minutes
Sprucewood Elementary
January 22, 2024
Members:
Faculty | Community |
Cathy Schino (Principal) | Mindy Cupello (Chairperson) |
Emigh Lo (K-2 Teacher) | Jen Bradford (Vice-Chair) |
Jen Dean (3-5Teacher) | Jason Dyer |
Alex Horwood | |
Alicia Lemus | |
Dustin Ondrasek |
Members Absent: Jason Dyer, Alicia Lemus, Emigh Lo
- Call to Order
4:08 pm
- Approve last month’s minutes
Alex Horwood moves to approve
Dustin Ondrasek seconds the motion to approve
- Begin writing TSSP and LAND Trust plans for next school year.
-TSSP will be worked on by school and goals/direction shared with SCC for input.
-SCC will write and develop LAND Trust plan to address one or more academic goals from TSSP.
Item for Vote: What Landtrust goals would SCC like to develop with support from BLT? | |
Member Name | Member Vote/ any additional note |
Jen Bradford | Fully on board with keeping Landtrust funds geared toward ELA. There is a high percentage of ML (multi-language) students at our school. Can we also support our English language learners? Answer: Canyons has an immersion philosophy for learning English. Also, Tracy Bytendorp is doing English Development classes with some of our ML students. There are already systems in place for supporting non-english speakers. |
Mindy Cupello | Keep using funds for ELA |
Jen Dean | It makes sense to build up the ELA while we haven’t yet met our goal. We have goals for math and a plan too, but let’s use the Landtrust funds to keep MTSS aides in ELA focused. |
Jason Dyer | |
Alex Horwood | Keep funds for ELA |
Alicia Lemus | |
Emigh Lo |
|
Dustin Ondrasek | We’ve set the goal in ELA, we’re not quite there yet. Let’s stay with ELA so that we’re not losing our progress in ELA to give to math. Maybe down the road we can start to put some funding towards math so that we can build both skills up. Vote to maintain funds in ELA. |
Cathleen Schino | I support the decision to continue funding ELA supports with Landtrust budgets. We are focused on the growth model and helping all levels of learners make progress at their levels. Funding our ELA aides is an integral part of supporting all students. |
Vote Summary: SCC group agrees that Landtrust funds should focus on ELA | |
- Final report for previous year’s plan
59% of students demonstrated typical or above typical growth for the Winter measurement in January of 2023. By May of 2023 72% of students demonstrated typical or above typical growth. We missed our 80% goal by 8%. However, following our action steps resulted in student academic performance increasing 13% between the Winter and Spring measurements. We started with $45,942.88. Our plan was implemented as written. All action steps were followed. However, some of our projected expenditures were not needed. We spent $41,677.30 on Multi-tiered Systems of Support aides salaries instead of the estimated $40,000 (action step 4). We did not purchase $5,000 for texts as we were able to utilize texts we already had access to and did not need additional purchases (action step 3). We did not purchase $1,000 of supplies as we had ample supplies already available and did not need these additional purchases (action step 1). As a result, we spent $41,677.30 of our estimated $46,000 on salaries and rolled over $4,267.04.
- Assure SCC roster on website and state site is accurate
Everything is entered and accurately shows the information shared
- Review current year’s LAND Trust plan, data, expenditures, and review if on course or if amendments are necessary.
We are on course with this year’s plan. We are spending funds as planned. We will share Mid-year growth data in February’s meeting.
- Other
1) BLT half day subs paid by district funding
Item for Vote: Does the SCC give approval for 3 sub salaries to be paid through district funding for February’s half day BLT meeting? | |
Member Name | Member Vote/ any additional note |
Jen Bradford | Agree, there’s a lot for the leadership team to accomplish, a half day out of the classroom will allow for them to do that |
Mindy Cupello | In favor |
Jen Dean | Yes, good use of funds. Leadership team does a lot of heavy lifting in our building, so they need the time out of the classroom to get this important work done. |
Jason Dyer | |
Alex Horwood | In favor |
Alicia Lemus | |
Emigh Lo | |
Dustin Ondrasek | In favor |
Cathleen Schino | Yes, absolutely in favor. Good use of funds, will use time wisely |
Vote Summary: unanimously approved by SCC | |
2) Response to Governor’s SCC letter
- Clarification and follow up from district administration:
While we appreciate the attention being given to this important issue, decisions about cell phone use in Canyons schools are made at the local level and in accordance with policy approved by the Canyons Board of Education, which was duly elected to represent the local citizen’s voice. The governor’s thoughts about cell phones in schools are welcome but should not be considered a directive. These decisions are developed and put into place by you, as the school leaders, with input from your school communities.
For guidance, we refer you to the CSD policy 500.06, “Technology Resources – Electronic Devices and Network Acceptable Use.” For your convenience, here is a link to the policy, which also can be found on the Canyons District website: https://www.canyonsdistrict.org/policies/student/expectations-protections/500-6/
This policy adheres to state administrative rule R277-495-3(1) and requires every CSD school to “develop a school electronic device policy/procedure for students, employees, and guests, governing the use of electronic devices on school premises and at school sponsored activities.” Parents, students, teachers, staff, and School Community Councils should be included in the discussion regarding the school’s cell-phone use rules, per the policy.
Please note the policy includes a section titled “School Level Guidelines for Personal Electronic Devices.” These are examples Canyons elementary, middle, and high schools can follow when establishing their plans, which should then be communicated to parents and guardians and posted on the school’s website.
Item for Discussion: Any further thoughts on our Devices Plan after reading the Governor’s letter and reading our district’s response? | |
Member Name | Notes |
Jen Bradford | Reflecting on the conversation about watches that we had back in November, I can see both sides of the argument. District clarifying on their policy helps. Governor is bringing light to the situation on a bigger stage. |
Mindy Cupello | See both sides of the issue. As a single parent, having a device is an easy way to get in touch with the kids. |
Jen Dean | Personally don’t like |
Jason Dyer | Not present |
Alex Horwood | Okay with the District & School plans |
Alicia Lemus | Not present |
Emigh Lo | Not present |
Dustin Ondrasek | See both sides of the issue including the politics of the issue from the Governor’s office. Likes Canyons plan & Sprucewood’s implementation of the plan. Does not want to create an environment where teachers are device police. |
Cathleen Schino | This is a hot topic right now. Our discipline dashboard data shows some technology violations, but this is not even close to being our top issue. Our device plan focuses on making decisions about access depending on distraction levels. |
Discussion Summary: Our SCC can see the benefits from banning and not banning. Our hope is the Governor’s message can serve as a wake up call to parents so understandings can be gained regarding the issues around personal devices being used in schools. | |
3) Planning Time for Teachers:
Inequity between secondary and elementary for planning time. Proposals regarding planning time are presented to the board. See powerpoint
Item for Discussion: Questions or comments about the possibility of increasing teacher planning time? | |
Member Name | Discussion Notes |
Jen Bradford | Increasing the Booster schedule to 4 days seems the most beneficial. How have our test scores improved with the extra planning that you’ve already implemented? Answer: We have used this similar schedule for two years. Last year our 4th and 5th graders made the most growth throughout our district on the elementary RISE assessment in the areas of ELA and Science! |
Mindy Cupello | I like that teachers will have more time to plan. |
Jen Dean | Initial proposal shared in the PPT summary was too aggressive (only having students for 3 ½ hours on Fridays). More planning time is nice, but shouldn’t come at the expense of instructional time either. Clarification shared: the proposal includes increasing the day by 10 minutes to gain 40 minutes of instruction back from the extra booster time |
Jason Dyer | Not present |
Alex Horwood | Increasing planning time sounds beneficial. Fine with the plan as proposed. |
Alicia Lemus | Not present |
Emigh Lo | Not present |
Dustin Ondrasek | I support teachers having planning time so they are prepared to help students grow and learn. |
Cathleen Schino | More planning time is good for teachers and students. Excited to see if the plan is approved by the board so planning for next year can start happening soon. We are currently building capacity in backward design skills to strengthen our planning routines across grade levels. It is important that the quality of planning increases with the increase of time. |
Vote Summary: Our SCC feels that increasing elementary planning time will be beneficial to our teachers and our student growth | |
- Adjourn until next month’s meeting February 12, 2024
Jen Bradford calls to adjourn the meeting until February 4:57pm meeting adjourned
Mindy Cupello seconds the motion
