November 4Minutes: Resources

Schools of the Future Home Page : Resources

November 4 Minutes: Resources

Time:	7:00 - 8:55 pm
Location:	Ed Center Auditorium
Present:	Janet Calvert, Roscoe Caron, Svea Gold, Anand Keathley, Pat Latimer, David Meredith, Keli Osborn, Kaye Robinette, Marilyn Thielke, Betsy Clewett, Caroline Passerotti, Lee Holden, Bette Shoemaker, Wally Bryant, Trevor Steele, Sherri Morgan.
Absent:	John Attig, Aaron Helgeson, Junko Toll, Pat Payne, Mark Zunich.
Notetaker:	Bette Shoemaker

Time	Topic	Presenter
	Introductions Wally Bryant welcomed members to the first meeting of the task force. Individuals introduced themselves to other members of the task force.
	Membership A request was made to update the task force member list. A print copy will be provided to all members at the next meeting.
	Review of Purpose, Charge, and Timelines Wally reviewed a set of printed materials provided to the task force. They included the charge to the task groups and the calendar and work plan provided by the Schools of the Future Committee (S.F.C.). The task force requests a list of all other task force members, meeting dates, and minutes. It was suggested that this information be provided via District 4J's website. Betty Shoemaker, facilitator, agreed to pursue this with Evie Matthews, Coordinator of the Schools of the Future process.	Wally Bryant
	Group Agreements Lee Holden facilitated the development of a set of group agreements for the task force. They are as follows: 1. Decision making: For a decision to be made a consensus must be reached. This means that each person must agree to the decision or be willing to abide by the decision without sabotaging the decision. Consensus is operationally defined as follows: All participants contribute resources, encourage the use of one another's resources and opinions, and view differences as helpful rather than as a hindrance. Everyone understands the issue and is able to paraphrase it. Consensus does not mean that the decision gives everyone his or her choice; rather, consensus means that members are sufficiently in favor of the decision that no one will become an obstacle to carrying it out (no one will sabotage the decision). All share in the final decision; if consensus is not reached, the discussion is automatically recycled for more information. *Note 1:* The essential vehicle for testing for consensus is the survey -- a non-binding opportunity for individuals to convey their thoughts, feelings, impressions. A survey may be called at any time by any member. The person asking for the survey states what he or she would like other members to respond to (and the convener may ask someone else in the group to paraphrase the request, if necessary, for clarity's sake). Other members in the group then relate their responses in one or two short sentences. *Note 2:* If consensus cannot be reached on a proposal or recommendation and there is insufficient time to reach consensus, group members will be surveyed to determine who is in favor and who opposes the proposal/recommendation. That information will be noted for the record. 2. Revisiting of an issue: Members will limit revisiting an issue once consensus is reached. An issue can be re-raised when there is consensus that subsequent events or discussions warrant re-examination of the issue. 3. Directness and openness: It is OK for members to say that the behavior of an individual is helpful or not helpful. It is never fair to talk about people; it is only fair to talk about ideas. Ideas belong to the group. 4. Survey: It is OK for any group member to initiate a survey. Members can pass when a survey is taken. 5. Ownership and commitment to group decisions and actions: Once an agreement is made all members own that decision. Each person is responsible for how the group behaves. 6. Attendance: Each member is encouraged to attend all committee meetings; due to the complexity of our task members may not send alternates. If you are unable to attend a meeting, you will e-mail all members as far in advance as possible. Absent members may e-mail their thoughts about agenda items to other members before and following the meeting. 7. Assessment techniques: It is OK at any time for anyone to bring to the attention of the group how it is interacting and to make suggestions on how it might instead proceed. Members should remind each other to stay on track. 8. Debrief: Each session will be debriefed at the end of the meeting. As a part of the debrief the task force will: 1) summarize decisions made and 2) in general, set the agenda for the following meeting. 9. Posting decisions: During meetings a list of decisions made will be recorded and posted on chart paper for view of late arrivers. 10. Minutes: Minutes will be distributed as soon as possible following each meeting to members. If a member is absent, he/she will refer to the minutes to keep abreast of the task force work 11. Formal communications: Task force members will avoid formal communications about the work of the task force. They will refer requests for formal communication to Wally Bryant. 12. Check for understanding: During the meeting if a member is confused about an item shared by someone else, he/she may ask for clarification.
	Meeting Dates The task force reviewed the suggested meeting dates and established the following schedule: Note: We agreed to extend meeting times for task force meetings to 2 hours, meeting from 7 - 9 p.m. each time. Tuesday November 9, 1999, 7-9:30 p.m.: Optional Meeting with the S.F.C. to hear LCOG Presentation Tuesday November 30, 1999, 7-9 p.m.: Task Force Meeting with a focus on Human Resources Thursday December 9, 1999, 7-9 p.m.: Task Force Meeting with a continued focus on Human Resources Tuesday December 14, 1999, 7-9 p.m.: Meeting with the Schools of the Future Committee to review preliminary findings Thursday January 6, 2000, 7-9 p.m.: Task Force Meeting with a focus on Financial Resources and Time Thursday January 20, 2000, 7-9 p.m.: Task Force Meeting with a continued focus on Financial Resources and Time Tuesday February 1, 2000, 7-9 p.m.: Task Force Meeting to synthesize and develop a preliminary report Tuesday February 8, 2000, No meeting: Preliminary Report due to S.F.C.* Thursday March 2, 2000, 7-9 p.m.: Task Force hosts public hearing on draft preliminary report recommendations Tuesday March 7, 2000, 7-9 p.m.: Task Force Meeting to synthesize feedback and create a final report for the S.F.C. Tuesday March 14, 2000, No Meeting: Final report due to the S.F.C.* * These dates are regularly scheduled meeting times for the S.F.C. Task force members are welcome, but are not required to attend. Task force members agreed that on occasion, smaller work groups could be assigned to refine the work of the larger task force.
	Format and Focus of Meetings Task Force members discussed the format and focus of meetings. Questions were raised about how narrowly or broadly we would define our task and how narrowly or broadly focused our key recommendations would become. It was reinforced that the S.F.C. asked the task force to conduct its work in three areas: human resources, financial resources, and time as a resource. We agreed to define "human resources" broadly to include other human resources than the employees of the district. At our next meeting on November 30, 1999, Anand Keathley and Marilyn Thielke (both members of the S.F.C.) agreed to provide some clarity from the S.F.C. around how narrowly or broadly our key recommendations might be framed. In addition, feedback was provided to staff in the manner in which information sharing will occur. This feedback included: 1. Task force members desire that formal presentations before the task force and accompanying print materials be focused and concise and that, when possible, the task force would like to have any print materials available before the meetings for prior review. It was suggested that those making presentations to the task force be asked to confine their print presentations to two pages front and back. 2. It was suggested and the task force endorsed the notion that when individuals are asked to present to the task force that they be given a set of key questions around which to respond. 3. Discussion centered around whether the task force should primarily focus on what is or on "what ought to be." The charge to each task force reflects the notion that, while task force members may need to acquire some background information before focusing on the future, the intent of the S.F.C. was to have task forces look to the future and provide key recommendations that would bring the school district into the 21st century. 4. It was suggested that presenters be encouraged to have their presentations be expository in nature rather than persuasive and reflect the strengths and weaknesses of existing district systems.
	Next Meeting, November 30, 1999, 7-9 p.m. Several topics/areas of interest were brainstormed as possible topics for the November 30th meeting. They include: Demographics of School District 4J's existing workforce Contract Provisions - Where to go for help in understanding them Communitiy Human Resources - For classroom and individual student support Preservice teacher training Mentoring new staff Professional development opportunities for staff Parent Involvement and Training Recruiting a diverse workforce It was suggested that the leadership of each of the district's employee groups be invited to share strengths and weaknesses from a human resources point of view at the November 30th meeting. Bette Shoemaker agreed to poll members to prioritize the above mentioned items and to craft and publish an agenda accordingly.
8:55	Debrief and Adjournment The debrief included a review of decisions made and a summary of the focus for the following meeting. It was suggested that the meeting went about as well as any first time meeting.

	< Return to Resources >

4J Home Page

| Schools of the Future | Site Map | Search

Please send comments or questions to the 4J Web Team. 200 North Monroe Street - Eugene, Oregon, 97402 Phone: 541-687-3123

Eugene School District 4J