Christina School Board finalizes listening-session script, schedules community outreach

The Christina School Board met on Oct. 29, 2025, for a workshop focused on preparing scripted community "listening sessions" that board members will host across the district to gather input for 3–5 year student outcome goals and board "guardrails." Rodney Jordan, the district’s engagement coach, opened the session by saying, "Our focus today is to continue progress towards your, community engagement and outreach sessions, listening to the community for its vision and values."

Board members reviewed the draft script and accompanying slides, debated specific wording and examples, and practiced delivering the opening in pairs so that a moderator (reader) and a scribe can reliably capture community input. Monica Moriac, introducing the rehearsal, read the script verbatim: "Thank you for taking the time to share with us today. Your voice is incredibly important. My name is Monica Moriac, and with me is, doctor Amy Trapp, and we are both members of the Christina School Board."

Why it matters: The board intends to use these sessions and a mirrored online survey to identify 1–5 student-focused goals and 1–5 guardrails that will direct the superintendent’s priorities and the district’s budget and monitoring over the coming years. Staff emphasized that the board’s role in these sessions is to listen from an "owner" perspective — gathering long-range vision and values — and to avoid turning sessions into customer-service problem-solving. Jordan told members to capture participants’ words as close to verbatim as possible and to "repeat back" each comment to confirm accuracy.

Key script and slide decisions: Board members asked staff to (a) mark every PowerPoint slide in the script so the slide operator knows when to advance, (b) compress or generalize demographic statements (one member questioned a 41% low-income figure pulled from the website), and (c) include a one-page handout of district outcome data at sessions. Staff agreed the in-person survey and the online survey would use the same questions so comments can be combined during analysis.

Logistics and accessibility: The board reviewed a day-before checklist covering site selection, child care, refreshments, translation services, American Sign Language interpreters, ADA access, and media outreach. Members discussed using "pocket talk" translation devices for less-common languages and assigning staff or volunteers as table-by-table interpreters where needed. Staff also suggested QR codes linking to the survey to capture additional input from attendees.

Facilitation format and data capture: For large audiences, the board will use roundtables with table scribes reporting out; for smaller meetings they will solicit whole-group responses. Two board members will attend each listening session: one to moderate and repeat back participant responses and one to scribe. Scribes will later enter captured responses into a district form so the administration can aggregate words and keywords across sessions.

Practice and guidance: The workshop included rehearsal of opening remarks and sample exchanges. Participants practiced redirecting immediate operational or customer-service complaints to district staff while keeping the session focused on the board’s solicited questions about vision and values. Jordan urged board members to practice the script ahead of public sessions to maintain fidelity and consistency.

Schedule and next steps: Board members reviewed and consolidated a master outreach list of community groups and organizations and were asked to sign up to host or attend sessions. Staff cited a potential early engagement on Nov. 5 (an invitation from a teachers’ group) and a backup date of Dec. 3; the board agreed to populate session dates and publish them on the district communications template and website once confirmed. Staff also noted the November full board meeting date was moved from Nov. 12 to Nov. 18 and said reporting back to the board on aggregated listening results will follow.

Public comment and unique populations: A public commenter and board members urged that special-program sites (for example, Brennan and Reach special schools) be scheduled and heard separately because they represent distinct student populations and needs. Staff confirmed they will keep those sessions distinct.

No formal votes: The workshop was preparatory; the group did not take formal action or vote on policy. The board directed staff to finalize script edits, align the slides to the script, distribute a logistics checklist, finalize the one-page handout, and publish session dates and sign-up tools so board members can begin hosting listening sessions.