Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Selection Criteria topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee tightens language on selection criteria for instructional materials
Summary
Members proposed rewriting the selection‑criteria lead‑in and the numbered items (1–8) so every item reads consistently and to move statutory citations into footnotes; the goal is clearer, legally defensible criteria for judging materials.
Committee members spent significant time resolving inconsistent sentence starts in the selection criteria section of draft Policy IIA. One member argued the list’s varying forms (some fragments, some sentences) created confusion and suggested a uniform approach: either full sentences or a single lead‑in with colon and dependent fragments.
Participants discussed multiple editing strategies: start each numbered item with 'Materials...' (making each a sentence), or make the lead‑in a full sentence and present the numbers as fragments. The committee also agreed to move the ORS citation(s) to the references/footnotes rather than keeping a long statutory citation in the policy body. As one member noted during the meeting, "You could say the selection criteria listed below will be used for evaluating instructional materials," and then list the criteria consistently.
Members repeatedly returned to the simplest readable option to reduce ambiguity for administrators and the public. The redraft aims to make the selection criteria enforceable without reprinting statute language inline.
