Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Results Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Racine Unified governance committee outlines community outreach plan to inform results-policy review
Summary
The Governance Committee agreed to develop focused community engagement—targeting families, students, elected officials, businesses and colleges—to gather feedback on the district—s results policies; staff will draft 3–4 questions and consult Dr. Steech, with outreach starting in January and synthesis by March.
The Racine Unified School District Governance Committee on Dec. 1 agreed on a plan to solicit community input to guide a scheduled review of the district—s results policies.
The committee chair opened the meeting by saying the board intends to use public feedback to shape the "interpretations and indicators" that specify what the district expects students to learn. "The actual results policy is pretty short," the chair said; "the meat of it comes in the interpretations."
Board members recommended targeted outreach. Mister Coe urged a geographic approach with a mix of in‑person meetings at neighborhood buildings and virtual surveys to combine qualitative and quantitative input. Miss Tapp recommended limiting the public prompts to three or four focused questions and running a short, intense engagement window of three to four weeks. Staff said they would use an Excel stakeholder matrix (elected officials, business community, families, certified staff, and students) to guide outreach and suggested tapping existing groups such as academies and college partnerships to reach different audiences.
The committee asked staff to draft specific questions and consult with Dr. Steech for wording and best practices. The chair proposed presenting a drafted plan at the next governance meeting and, if approved, beginning outreach in January with a goal of synthesizing responses by March so the board can use the findings when finalizing indicators and interpretations.
The committee emphasized clear framing for participants: organizers should explain what the board will do with responses and what decisions remain solely for administrators or are outside the board—s authority. Several members warned against overly broad prompts that could generate off‑topic grievances rather than targeted, policy‑relevant feedback.
Next steps: staff will coordinate with the committee to produce proposed questions, a mixed-methods engagement plan, and a timeline for January–March implementation.
