Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Oe4 Indicators topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Staff proposes new OE‑4 indicators including 10% turnover target and diversity hiring goals
Summary
District staff presented recommended revisions to OE‑4 monitoring points: a proposed annual voluntary turnover target of 10% or less, indicators to increase qualified staff on day one, recruitment strategies to reflect student diversity, and revised evaluation completion targets (95%/90%).
District staff presented a detailed package of proposed changes to Operational Expectation 4 (OE‑4) at the governance committee meeting on Dec. 1, recommending new monitoring points and measurable indicators meant to clarify expectations for staffing, qualifications and workplace culture.
Stacy, a district staff presenter, introduced a new indicator proposing that "the District will maintain an annual turnover rate of 10% or less," with progress measured by monitoring voluntary resignations across the district. The proposal links turnover to morale and organizational culture, and the board discussed whether turnover is an appropriate high‑level indicator of the superintendent’s success in maintaining culture.
Other proposed indicators aim to strengthen staff qualifications and professional development: the district would require job postings and hiring practices that ensure required certifications and licensure, new employees would attend orientation and role‑specific training, and continuing professional development would align with job responsibilities.
The staff also proposed concrete evaluation targets: 95% of classroom teachers and building administrators would be evaluated, 90% of district‑level administrators and nonacademic personnel would receive evaluations—figures staff said are more attainable than prior 100% goals.
On diversity and recruitment, the superintendent’s team suggested active outreach strategies and partnerships with colleges to expand teacher pipelines from educational assistants into certificated roles, and annual staff‑to‑student demographic comparisons to monitor progress.
The package includes a new anti‑retaliation monitoring point: the superintendent must not retaliate against employees for filing legitimate complaints, and human resources would monitor allegations and investigations with appropriate follow up.
Board members asked clarifying questions about implementation, who supervises volunteers during extracurricular activities, and how the district will verify progress. Staff identified human resources and building principals as responsible for background checks and building‑level supervision, and agreed to provide more operational detail as the indicators are refined.
The committee praised the clarity of the revisions and asked staff to bring the refined language back through the governance pipeline for consideration on the consent agenda where appropriate.
