The Hinsdale Township High School District 86 board on Aug. 7 directed administrators not to implement the proposed lunchtime intervention pilot as a credit-bearing course and to ensure that nothing related to the pilot appears on student transcripts.

The directive came after public comment and an extended board discussion about a proposed pilot that would convert existing lunchtime "intervention" sessions into optionally credited quarter courses (described in the meeting as "literacy eLab" or "algebra lab"). The board said it wants clearer data on attendance and staffing before approving any credit on transcripts.

Why it matters: Parents, former board members and other commenters told the board that labeling lunchtime interventions as credit-bearing could stigmatize students, catch families by surprise and affect college applications. Board members expressed concern about late-stage changes to schedules and asked for student-level attendance data by campus, by lunch period and by staff member.

Public commenters urged caution. Liz Smith, quoted via board member Mary Satchwell, said the changes "were only brought to the board's attention as a requirement earlier this week, and the details are not clear," and that parents were not told the intervention might appear on transcripts. Parent Heather Kartsounis described her prior understanding of lunchtime interventions as a voluntary, drop-in tutoring space and said she did not expect the program to shift into "foundational skill recovery" or become a transcripted, credit-bearing course.

Board members pressed administration for concrete numbers and implementation details. One board member said: "I would like to know exactly how many actually attended lunchtime interventions, and I would like to understand how we have that data — so that would be by lunch period. I mean, I would like both campuses, so by campus. And then by staff member that was staffed. I would like to know how many students per lunch each staff member saw." (Member Fisher)

Administrators acknowledged the proposal aimed to increase participation by offering a credit incentive but confirmed the board could opt not to add transcripted credit. A staff member said the quarter-credit option would be "optional for parents should they, and students, should they want to actually have that there." (Administrator Mike)

Board direction and next steps: The board agreed it was not authorizing any credit tied to lunchtime intervention at this time. One member summarized the direction: the administration is to remove any implementation that would put credit on student schedules or otherwise negatively affect transcripts, confirm with IT and building administration that nothing will appear on transcripts, and send clear communication to families of students who had been automatically assigned to the lunchtime intervention. The board also requested attendance and staffing data for the prior year by campus, by lunch period and by staff member.

Related contracts: Public comment and board discussion also referenced online credit-recovery platforms. A contract renewal for Imagine Learning (listed on the consent agenda as item 9.1) was pulled from consent and formally tabled to the Aug. 26 meeting for further review. Commenters and board members requested additional details about cohort size, staffing and supervision for any video-based or online credit-recovery offerings. One board member suggested the vendor had agreed to wait while the district completes due diligence.

What was not decided: The board did not approve converting lunchtime interventions into credit-bearing courses at this meeting and did not adopt a specific alternative intervention schedule. Several board members asked administration to return with more data and implementation options, including non-credit study-hall alternatives and ways to avoid stigmatizing students.

Ending: Administration agreed to the board's direction and to provide the requested data and communications prior to the start of school; no formal vote to adopt credit was taken.