The Portland Public Schools Policy Committee on Oct. 20 agreed to refer a substantially revised field-trip policy to the full school board for consideration after public testimony from students, teachers and parents who said the district's current rules have hampered longstanding international research residencies for Dual Language Immersion (DLI) programs.

Committee members said the draft policy moves operational details into administrative directives and removes a requirement for individual board approval of many trips, while keeping equity and student-safety goals in policy language.

Committee Vice Chair Michelle DePass, board vice chair, said the policy 'sets the direction and defines the goals' and that staff should operationalize the details in administrative directives. DePass said she supports sending the revised policy to the full board so all seven members can review it.

Why it matters: DLI communities testified that the 2019 field-trip policy has imposed repeated administrative hurdles, delayed ticket purchases and increased costs for families taking students on school-year research residencies in Taiwan, Japan and China. Supporters described the residencies as capstone academic experiences that many students—including low-income students and students of immigrant background—rely on for cultural and language immersion.

Public testimony was led by students and program leaders. Yuki Sakai, a student from Mount Tabor Middle School, said, "the students really work their tails off and they come back often, with a new perspective." Kojo Hakam, a Mandarin teacher at Harrison Park Middle School, said the program began at his school before COVID and that "every student goes regardless of their economic background," adding that in one recent year six of 23 students received full scholarships.

Shu Ren and other DLI parent organizations also addressed the committee. Kelly George, a Shu Ren board member, said, "this research residency is not a trip, but a capstone educational opportunity that our students work towards for the whole of their academic career leading up to the eighth grade."

Committee discussion and staff recommendations: Board member Stephanie Englesman, Zone 6 representative, explained that policy-making best practice is to set goals at the board level and leave implementation steps to administrative directives. Committee members and staff repeatedly said there is little evidence that requiring board approval of individual trips improves student safety; staff and risk management already vet many safety elements.

Those opposed to automatic removal of board-level review urged caution. Members noted the policy change would alter the visibility of certain approvals and that the board historically sought to review some high-impact trips. The staff-led draft retains staged approvals by principals, senior directors and risk management for day, overnight and international trips while removing automatic board-level approval for many categories of travel.

Timing and next steps: Committee members described the anticipated timetable if the full board pursues the draft: a first reading could be scheduled in late October or November, followed by a 21-day public-comment period and a final vote potentially in early December. Committee members asked that all supporting documents (including a staff memo dated Aug. 27, 2024, and the "fully revised field trip policy 10/19/2025" draft) be provided to the full board.

Clarifying details discussed in committee included a staff calculation that the $150,000 contracting threshold (discussed elsewhere in the meeting) has roughly the buying power of $224,000 in 2025 dollars; that the Japanese program has faced ticket increases (committee members referenced an approximate $500-per-student increase in at least one recent year); and that one recent residency had 23 participants with six full scholarships.

Ending: The committee voted to refer the revised field-trip policy to the full board; committee members and the public asked for longer review time and fuller materials before any final board vote. The full board will receive the draft policy, comparison charts and related administrative directives for further public deliberation and a decision following the public-comment period.