[{"_1":2,"_115":-5,"_116":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,85,95,105],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":59,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":65,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6199064,"mediaKeyId","3841223-c17caf742ee46dd767177161b94c15ea","parentId",3841223,"title","District 102 officials defend Park junior high bell schedule; promise monitoring and community updates","audioSeconds",711,"startMs",1822000,"endMs",2533000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3841223-c17caf742ee46dd767177161b94c15ea&start=1822&end=2533","thumbnailUrl","https://d352y6ypj4mjo3.cloudfront.net/AudioPlaceholder.png","articleUrl","/articles/6199064/Illinois/District-102-officials-defend-Park-junior-high-bell-schedule-promise-monitoring-and-community-updates","mediaUrl","author","La Grange SD 102","date","2025-06-12T00:00:00Z","article","District 102 administrators on June 12 reviewed the development and planned monitoring of a new bell schedule for Park Junior High that creates a daily “flex” period intended for targeted academic support, enrichment and executive‑functioning skill work.

Superintendent staff and Park administrators said the schedule—which the board approved earlier in the year—aims to ensure students see English, math, science and social studies every day, add time for executive functioning and create scheduled opportunities for teacher collaboration and data‑driven interventions.

Chris (Park administration) told the board the schedule is the product of more than a year of staff work, site visits and strategic planning and that the district’s goals included adding daily core content time, improving support structures and creating consistent professional learning time for teachers. “We set off with a couple different specific goals… to add four content areas to the daily life of a student,” the presenter said.

Staff acknowledged concerns from parents and teachers that the schedule reduces weekly instructional minutes for ELA and math in some grade bands and that communications about the change were not always timely. “They’re concerned that we have instructional minutes reduced in language arts and math by about 38%,” Chris said, referring to parent feedback received after district communications. The district said some academic minutes were reallocated to increase social studies and science instruction by roughly 18% and to create the flex/support period and extended advisory time.

To address concerns, the administration proposed a monitoring plan: regular data reports (including participation data from the flex system, MAP scores and other academic indicators), added climate and student surveys, scheduled community engagement meetings and updates to the board. Chris proposed reporting academic and participation metrics at least twice a year and said monthly updates on flex usage are available via the vendor’s analytics.

Board members pressed for earlier checkpoints and clearer metrics. One board member asked administrators to return in August with a plan for when and how the board will review early indicators. Administration agreed that early, leading indicators and quarter‑by‑quarter grade snapshots can be part of an accelerated check‑in schedule.

Administrators said implementation details include: teacher training, a PowerSchool‑enabled selection and attendance process for flex, and explicit plans for parents to override or guide their child’s flex selection when appropriate. For students who miss the opt‑in window, the plan calls for teams to assign a support or enrichment placement and then check the student’s status the following week.

No board vote was required at the meeting. Board members and staff said they will continue community engagement, survey students and staff, and present monitoring reports to the board during the 2025–26 school year.

Ending: The administration defended the schedule as aligned with district strategic goals and promised frequent updates and data reporting; parents and some board members said they want faster monitoring and clearer communication about instructional minutes and student outcomes.","mediaType","Audio","parentTitle","La Grange SD 102 - Regular Meeting June 12, 2025","oneSentenceSummary","District 102 administrators on June 12 reviewed the development and planned monitoring of a new bell schedule for Park Junior High that creates a daily “flex” period intended for targeted academic support, enrichment and executive‑functioning skill work.","taxTitle","La Grange SD 102, School Boards, Illinois","taxId",74183,"location","Illinois","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":50,"_51":82,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":83,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":84,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6199054,"District 102 presents revised student handbook emphasizing restorative practices and tiered consequences",344,7476000,7820000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3841223-c17caf742ee46dd767177161b94c15ea&start=7476&end=7820","/articles/6199054/Illinois/District-102-presents-revised-student-handbook-emphasizing-restorative-practices-and-tiered-consequences","District 102 administrators presented a revised student handbook and a relationship‑centered discipline framework at the June 12 board meeting, describing a tiered system of behaviors and responses coupled with restorative approaches.

Tracy Millich, assistant superintendent of student services, and Dr. Feena Lockhart, director of equity and student services, told the board the handbook is intended to make expectations and consequences more transparent for students, staff and families and to align discipline practices across elementary schools and Park Junior High.

The proposed discipline model pairs restorative responses with logical consequences. The handbook organizes behaviors into three tiers: Stage 1 (low‑level classroom behaviors handled by teachers), Stage 2 (medium behaviors handled by teacher or dean/administrator), and Stage 3 (severe behaviors handled by deans and administrators, possibly resulting in in‑ or out‑of‑school suspension or expulsion). Examples in the draft range from classroom disruptions and repeated Stage 1 behaviors (Stage 2) to threats to safety or serious property violations (Stage 3).

Millich and Lockhart emphasized that restorative practices are intended to accompany — not replace — accountability: restorative conversations and repair are paired with logical consequences designed to uphold safety and fairness. The presentation also included a clarified appeals process, an updated dress and appearance section and a plan for annual review and community engagement. The dress code language in the draft states that student clothing must cover private areas with opaque fabric, tops should have straps, hats and cultural head coverings are allowed, and clothing that advertises alcohol or contains offensive language is prohibited. The administration noted the list is not exhaustive and that administrators will make judgment calls when an appearance is questionable.

On recordkeeping, administrators said Stage 2 and Stage 3 incidents will be tracked in PowerSchool; they are still finalizing whether every Stage 1 incident will be centrally logged, though classroom teachers will be encouraged to document repeated behaviors. Staff said they plan large‑ and small‑group training for teachers and administrators and plan to return the handbook for final board action in August so materials can be distributed before registration.

Parents on the board’s PTAC committee who participated in earlier drafts praised the outreach and said committee suggestions were incorporated. Board members asked clarifying questions about parent contact protocols, documentation of repeated Stage 1 behavior and how restorative practices will be implemented when parties do not agree to a joint restorative meeting; administrators said individual restorative work and accountability steps would still occur if a joint meeting is not possible.

Ending: The handbook draft will return to the board in August for final consideration. Administrators said training, PTAC review and community communication will continue in the summer and early fall.","District 102 administrators presented a revised student handbook and a relationship‑centered discipline framework at the June 12 board meeting, describing a tiered system of behaviors and responses coupled with restorative approaches.",{"_33":86,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":87,"_41":88,"_43":89,"_45":90,"_47":91,"_49":50,"_51":92,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":93,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":94,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6199058,"District 102 adopts new K–8 ELA materials after yearlong review; board approves contracts",808,5252000,6060000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3841223-c17caf742ee46dd767177161b94c15ea&start=5252&end=6060","/articles/6199058/Illinois/District-102-adopts-new-K8-ELA-materials-after-yearlong-review-board-approves-contracts","The La Grange School District 102 Board of Education on June 12 approved a set of new K–8 English language arts instructional materials after a yearlong, committee‑driven review and a multi‑teacher pilot.

District staff recommended and the board approved three purchasing actions: a six‑year contract for Benchmark Advance (including the Adelante Spanish editions) for kindergarten through grade 5, a six‑year adoption of Savvas My Perspectives for grades 6–8, and a one‑time upgrade of William & Mary materials for the LA‑Plus accelerated program. The board approved the purchases by roll call votes during the meeting.

Administrators and curriculum staff described the adoption as the product of a multi‑year process that included: research and alignment to the Illinois Comprehensive Literacy Plan and science‑of‑reading principles, formation of a cross‑district LA review committee, vendor demonstrations, and a formal pilot in which 55 teachers from across grade levels and buildings tested candidate programs.

“Teachers really had a lot of great things to say about Benchmark. They loved that there was so much stuff, the online components and the opportunities for differentiation,” said Maureen (curriculum staff), summarizing pilot feedback about K–5 materials. Rachel Owens, coordinator of curriculum and multilingual learning, highlighted the dual‑language Adelante materials’ Spanish authentic texts and scope and sequence.

The district described implementation supports that will follow approval: a multi‑tiered professional learning plan in August (activation), vendor coaching, building‑level coaching from the district instructional coaches, and ongoing feedback loops in year 1. Staff said they will make intervention and supplemental materials a follow‑up priority once core materials are in use and that special‑education, EL and intervention staff will have digital access to materials for planning.

District administrators provided budget estimates during the presentation: Benchmark Advance is a six‑year purchase with a first‑year cost “just over $800,000” (materials and licensing up front), Savvas My Perspectives for grades 6–8 carries a first‑year materials/professional learning cost described at “just under $200,000,” and William & Mary upgrades and consumables for LA‑Plus were described as a one‑time investment of about $218,000 for initial materials and recurring workbook purchases thereafter. The board approved all three purchases.

Board members thanked teachers and curriculum staff for the extensiveness of the process. Administrators said they will place orders promptly if the board’s approvals are final so that teachers can have digital access and printed materials for fall implementation.

Ending: The district will proceed with year‑one activation and professional learning this summer; staff said they will monitor implementation and respond with supplemental intervention materials as needed.","The La Grange School District 102 Board of Education on June 12 approved new K–8 English language arts materials after a yearlong review, adopting Benchmark Advance (K–5), Savvas My Perspectives (6–8) and updated William & Mary materials for accelerated LA‑Plus instruction.",{"_33":96,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":97,"_41":98,"_43":99,"_45":100,"_47":101,"_49":50,"_51":102,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":103,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":104,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6199069,"Parents, alumni and teachers urge District 102 to keep Science Center",1211,394000,1605000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3841223-c17caf742ee46dd767177161b94c15ea&start=394&end=1605","/articles/6199069/Illinois/Parents-alumni-and-teachers-urge-District-102-to-keep-Science-Center","Dozens of current and former District 102 students, parents and teachers urged the La Grange School District 102 Board of Education on Thursday to preserve the district’s Science Center, saying the facility offers hands-on, year‑to‑year STEM experiences that smaller school-based labs cannot replicate.

Supporters used the meeting’s public comment period to describe long-term benefits from field trips to the center, the planetarium and year‑round, multi‑day lab experiences that they said fostered curiosity and careers in science for many alumni.

The appeals matter to the community because the district is planning expanded STEM labs in each school under the Renew D102 plan but has also discussed repurposing space at the Science Center. Speakers said losing the consolidated facility would reduce access to repeated, immersive science experiences that they said provide equitable curriculum opportunities across grades and schools.

“Please consider in the Renew D102 plan to maintain the Science Center as it is and build additional STEM curriculum within each school,” said Anna Peterson, a Forest Road parent and District 102 alumna. “There is a magic that happens when students can take a field trip to the Science Center and experience a honed curriculum from expert teachers that I feel that we are going to lose if we lose the concentrated science center.”

Several former students said the center's planetarium, animal collections and extended lab time shaped their interest in STEM careers. Mackenzie Leslie, an early‑childhood educator and former District 102 student, described repeated, curriculum‑aligned visits — from dissecting a lamb’s eye to planetarium sessions — and said the center’s size and staff permit multiple grade levels to use it simultaneously.

Bonnie Webster, whose son attended Forest Road, said parents moved into the district for access to resources like the Science Center and urged the board to keep it. “How can you sit here and take away such unique and novel resource from our children?” she asked.

Several speakers suggested transparent, narrowly scoped options the district could pursue instead of closing or converting the center — for example, targeted fundraising, volunteer staffing, or clearer explanations of whether the issue is space, funding or staffing. Alexandria Zuck, a La Grange Park resident who serves on the park district board, urged administrators to be specific about whether constraints are budget, volunteer capacity, facility space or staffing so the community could help.

District staff acknowledged community concern and said the Renew D102 plan includes STEM expansion to every school while also noting the value of the Science Center; district leaders said they will continue implementation planning and consider public input in coming months. No formal board action on the Science Center occurred at the June 12 meeting.

The public comment period that produced these appeals was followed by routine agenda business. Board members thanked speakers; the meeting continued to other scheduled reports and votes.

Ending: Parents, alumni and staff who addressed the board asked administrators to provide detailed, transparent information about why the Science Center might be repurposed and invited the district to spell out the specific constraints so community members could propose targeted solutions. The board did not vote on the center’s status at the meeting and indicated the matter remains under consideration.","Dozens of parents, alumni and teachers addressed the La Grange District 102 board on June 12 urging the district to retain the District 102 Science Center and to preserve its role as a concentrated, hands-on STEM resource rather than dispersing its materials into school-based STEM labs.",{"_33":106,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":107,"_41":108,"_43":109,"_45":110,"_47":111,"_49":50,"_51":112,"_53":-5,"_54":55,"_56":57,"_58":113,"_60":61,"_62":63,"_64":114,"_66":67,"_68":69,"_70":71,"_72":73,"_74":73},6199049,"District proposes grading pilot at Park Jr. High to combine coursework letter grades and standards‑based summatives",1351,8729000,10080000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3841223-c17caf742ee46dd767177161b94c15ea&start=8729&end=10080","/articles/6199049/Illinois/District-proposes-grading-pilot-at-Park-Jr-High-to-combine-coursework-letter-grades-and-standardsbased-summatives","District 102 staff recommended a targeted pilot of new grading and reporting practices at Park Junior High at the June 12 board meeting, proposing a hybrid model that preserves standards‑based summative feedback while giving students and parents more frequent experience with percentage and letter grades.

The grading committee said the pilot aims to achieve five outcomes: provide students some experience with percentages and letter grades before high school; keep the permanent record focused on mastery; avoid double grading for teachers; align retake and assessment practices with Lyons Township High School where possible; and improve the clarity of reporting for families.

Under the committee’s proposal, most day‑to‑day coursework (homework, quizzes, class assignments used for practice) would be entered into the grade book as points and would display as percentages and letter grades to families. Summative, standards‑aligned assessments that measure end‑of‑course outcomes would be reported as proficiency ratings on a 1–4 scale (with an additional recommended 2+ notation). Skills for Success (SEL/work habits) would remain a standards‑based 1–4 rating. The committee also proposed a new, separate “work completion” metric reported as a percentage so parents can see to what degree students complete assigned work.

The committee said the approach is a compromise intended to give parents a familiar letter‑grade summary while preserving standards‑based, descriptive reporting for mastery. It acknowledged technical limits within PowerSchool that make it difficult to present both systems without extra teacher workload; the committee recommended a pilot and suggested the district explore longer‑term grading‑display tools or plugins to simplify teacher workflows.

Implementation proposed: a fall pilot with volunteer teachers and families in selected Park classes; classroom feedback gathered after a quarter; expansion to the entire junior high second semester if pilot results warrant; and broad stakeholder surveys and parent outreach events before final adoption. The committee recommended preserving current retake practices and adding a “NC” (non‑compliant) code to distinguish lack of work completion from lack of mastery.

Board members and parents raised questions at the meeting about complexity, teacher workload, PowerSchool display limitations and transitions for students who transfer mid‑year. Several public commenters strongly opposed keeping standards‑based grading as the primary measure for mastery and urged full alignment to Lyons Township High School reporting.

Ending: The committee will seek volunteer teachers to run the pilot at Park in the fall, gather early indicators after a quarter, and return implementation data and recommendations to the board before any permanent change is adopted.","A District 102 committee proposed a pilot at Park Junior High that would report everyday coursework as percentage/letter grades while keeping end‑of‑unit summative assessments as standards‑based proficiency ratings (1–4). The plan also adds a work‑completion percentage and maintains retake policies; the committee recommended piloting in volunteer","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

District 102 officials defend Park junior high bell schedule; promise monitoring and community updates

District 102 presents revised student handbook emphasizing restorative practices and tiered consequences

District 102 adopts new K–8 ELA materials after yearlong review; board approves contracts

Parents, alumni and teachers urge District 102 to keep Science Center

District proposes grading pilot at Park Jr. High to combine coursework letter grades and standards‑based summatives