Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Policy Revision 100 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents press board over planned-instruction and human-development language as trustees advance 100-series first reading
Summary
Two residents urged clarity on proposed 100-series policy changes — questioning who sets planned-instruction guides, whether adoption would be retroactive, and whether human-development instruction is being removed — while the board approved the first reading of the 100-series policies and agreed to add cross-reference notes for retired language.
Two public commenters asked the Conestoga Valley board for clearer information before the March adoption of revised 100-series policies. Lisa Bartelt told directors she had specific concerns about policy 106 (guides for planned instruction) and policy 107 (adoption of planned instruction), asking "Who is creating the guide and or choosing the reading list of supplemental titles?" and warning that, in her view, the changes "seem like they're based on misinformation and fear that undermines the hard work that teachers put into lesson planning."
Nut graf: At the board's first reading the trustees moved through a large set of 100-series changes and approved the first reading as presented. Several parents said they need more information before adoption: they asked whether the policies duplicate or replace existing curriculum work, whether teachers were informed, whether language is retroactive to current courses, and whether human-development content is being removed from instruction.
Melissa Klingan, a resident and parent, described elementary ELA as a "piecing together sort of situation" after the district declined to adopt a single elementary ELA curriculum and expressed concern that special-education representation was missing from curriculum committees. She also asked whether human-development instruction was being "tossed out" or simply relocated within district policy.
The superintendent responded directly on the human-development question: "Policy 107 primarily addressed ... the parents' right to exempt their child from human development. That language is now in the revised version of policy 105," he said, adding that "getting rid of the policy isn't removing it from the curriculum." He also committed to having an administrator follow up with commenters and to provide explanations and supporting materials.
Board action: after public comments the board took a roll-call vote earlier in the meeting to approve consent items and later moved to approve the first reading of the 100-series policies as presented; directors also asked staff to include cross-reference notes on policies being retired so the public can see where retired language now resides. "When I upload next time for second reading, have that note on the...after policy," a director requested.
Ending: The board approved the first reading, but staff agreed to follow up with commenters and to add explanatory cross references in materials before the second reading and final vote in March.
