Student Wellness and Safety Task Force

FIRST NAME	LAST NAME	ROLE	REGION	SCHOOL
Mackenzie	Martin	Student	EAST	Woodinville High School
Kylie	Sammons	Student	EAST	Timbercrest Middle School
Amelie	Fry	Student	EAST	Woodinville High School
Dhruv	Shankpal	Student	NORTH	North Creek High School
Aarish	Kumar	Student	NORTH	Leota Middle School
Lilian	Berrios	Student	SOUTH	Inglemoor High School
Laney	Brackett	Student	SOUTH	Inglemoor High School
Taanvi	Arekapudi	Student	SOUTH	Northshore Middle School
Evelyn	Ortiz	Student	SOUTH	Inglemoor High School
Gianne	Douangphouxai	Student	WEST	Canyon Park Middle School
Zia	Sandhu	Student	WEST	Canyon Park Middle School
Kristi	Saitz	Principal	EAST	Timbercrest Middle School
Shannon	Thompson	Principal	WEST	Shelton View Elementary
Laura	Staneff	Family/Community Member (PTA)	DISTRICTWIDE	Inglemoor High School
Melanie	Trowbridge	Family/Community Member	EAST	Bear Creek Campus
Melissa	Pugsley	Family/Community Member	DISTRICTWIDE	Preschool
Mridula	Mohandas	Family/Community Member	NORTH	North Creek High School
Aisha	Siddiqui	Family/Community Member	NORTH	Kokanee Elementary/Skyview Middle School
Rodney	Fleming	Family/Community Member	NORTH	North Creek High School
Lois	Hernandez	Family/Community Member	SOUTH	Northshore Middle School
Jamie	Pawlikowski	Family/Community Member	SOUTH	Northshore Middle School/ Inglemoor High School
Chris	Hanson	Family/Community Member	WEST	Frank Love Elementary
Myriam	Juritz	Family/Community Member	WEST	Bothell High School/Inglemoor High School/Northshore Middle School
Steven	Balee	Family/Community Member	WEST	Bothell High School
Sharyn	Mehner	District Staff	NORTH	North Creek HS
Ellen	Esteves	District Employee	EAST	Wodinville High School
Tamorah	Redshaw	District Employee	SOUTH	Lockwood Elementary
Garrett	Ware	District Employee	WEST	District Employee Bothell High School
AnaMaria	Foy	District Employee	DISTRICT WIDE	All
Bill	Brooks	District Employee	DISTRICT WIDE	All

Taskforce Meeting Minutes: November 2, 2022

Student Wellness and Safety Taskforce Powerpoint 

5:45 - 5:50 p.m., Welcome by Superintendent Tolley

• Interim Superintendent Tolley welcomed the Taskforce members. General comments included:
• Having students at the table was very intentional and gratitude for their participation
• The district’s mission is to strengthen community through excellence in education
• Taskforce’s charge: Make recommendations to the Superintendent and staff on an enhanced suite of supports, services, and practices to support student safety, belonging, and wellness.
• A clear timeline and budget are necessary items for this work - will also be a deliverable.
• “We want to hear from the broader community as well and the communities that each of you represent. Engagement with the community will be part of the work.”
• Introduced Parameter 7: Student Learning Environments
• Explained policy governance and how the Board evaluates the Superintendent on a monthly basis. The Superintendent is evaluated against criteria outlined in the parameters.
• Introduced Goal 2 of the District’s Strategic Plan: Learning into the Future.
• Parameter 7 and Goal 2 are the foundational documents for the work of the Taskforce.

6-6:15 p.m., Meeting Schedule Overview

Appreciation for the Taskforce and the broad perspective represented. Competitive process, over 60 applicants. It was important to make sure each region was represented and we have strong participation from students, families, and staff.

 “Try to prioritize being here, because your voice matters. We want your input to inform the Superintendent Tolley and the Board.”

• Review of the agenda for the evening.
• Meetings are on the 1st and 3rd Mondays of each month.
• Introductions around the table. Each member shared their name and why they chose to apply for the Taskforce.

6:15 -6:30 p.m. Norm Development

• Respect all perspectives
• Listen to understand
• Listen without judgment
• Seek out other opinions to make their own conclusions
• Have a clear goal to improve communication
• Take a different perspective
• Be open minded
• Assume positive intent
• Wrap up at the end of the meeting; clear next steps
• Be in the moment to reduce distractions
• Be honest - commit to radical candor
• Practice mindful listening and don’t shoot down the ideas of others
• Center what is best for our students
• No shaming one another
• Being able to respectfully disagree
• Not singling anyone out
• Make everyone feel included
• Understanding when facts and emotions are coming into play
• Take an extra step to uplift student voice (consciously and actively)
• Making sure students are safe and that they are able to learn and communicate
• Honor the agenda and stay focused

6:30-6:50 p.m. Polarities Lesson

• Polarity conversation. Introduced the concept of polarity. Examples: breathing in and breathe out, training for a marathon, and individual vs. community, family, or team.
• Must shift carefully back and forth without over accentuating and becoming positional or oppositional. Ask questions about frames of reference and thoughts. Help us create the best possible outcomes for students.
• Group participated in a polarity activity. .Self care vs. care for others. Groups documented the positives and negatives if focused too much self or focused too much on others.
• There are many polarities that we try to solve as problems, however, if we take a few steps back and ask more questions, we may find that the situation is not as unbalanced as we first thought. This is one way to unpack a difficult issue.
• In this work we will encounter polarities - this is one lens or tool for us to use.

6:50 - 7 p.m. Concentric Circle Activity

• Two groups of participants were created. There was an inside circle and outside circle of Taskforce members. Participants were matched with a partner.
• Partners were asked to answer a question and then after two minutes the outside circle rotated clockwise. Three questions total were asked.

Questions:

1. What is your greatest concern regarding student safety and wellness?
2. How are student safety and wellness connected?
3. If this Taskforce is successful, what will be the outcome or change for students?

7-7:25 p.m. Development of Sub Committee Ideas

• Each Taskforce member responded to the following prompt: What needs to be put into place to achieve the commitments outlined in Parameter 7 and Goal 2.
• Members individually listed 10 ideas and then worked with a partner to narrow to 5.
• Groups provided one example:
  • Student perception surveys and the ability to monitor across the district.
  • Intentionally teaching conflict resolution to students.
  • Time built into the day for students to build community.
• Card with prioritized recommendations were collected for the following meeting and development of sub committees.

Next Session: Finalize norms and develop topic areas for the sub committees, Nov. 16.

Taskforce Meeting Minutes: November 16, 2022

November 16 Meeting Slide Deck

5:50 - 6:10 p.m. Welcome and purpose by Carri Campbell

We reviewed the Superintendent’s charge to put forward recommendations to meet the goals of Parameter 7: Student Learning Environments and Goal 2 of the District’s Strategic Plan:

• Increase the percentage of students who report a perception of safety, fairness, inclusiveness and supports for emotional, behavioral, mental, and physical health.

Ms. Campbell also acknowledged the school shooting in Seattle and asked that members hold space for the families in the Seattle Public Schools who are affected.Our important work is even more urgent now than it was two weeks ago.

We reviewed the agenda:

• Refining group norms
• Creating subcommittees
• Subcommittee assignments
• Identifying our first “knowledge session”

6:10 - 6:30 p.m. Identifying Norms and Introduction of a Parking Lot

The group reviewed our norms from the November 2nd meeting and agreed upon 12 norms

listed below:

• Take the extra step to uplift student voice
• Listen to understand
• Be open minded
• Disagree respectfully
• Honor the agenda and stay focused
• Respect all perspectives
• Be honest- radical candor
• Make sure students are safe and that they are able to learn and communicate
• Make everyone feels included
• Understand when facts come into play
• Assume positive intent
• Listen mindfully and do not shoot down the ideas of others

The group also defined the parking lot as a location to place ideas that may arise throughout meetings for thoughts that might not fit the current topics but might need to be addressed during later meetings. Members were invited to write ideas on sticky notes and place them “in the parking lot” so they aren’t forgotten. The parking lot may also serve as a location to provide feedback for the facilitators.

6:30-7:30 p.m. Priorities/Consensus Activity

Prompt: What needs to be in place to meet the commitments of parameter 7/goal 2?

Participants worked in a partner group to create a 5-7 word description of each priority item that should be in place to meet the commitments of Parameter 7 and Strategic Plan Goal 2.

Group moved their top priority to the wall, then added their second choice. They began to create subgroups based on the movement of the ideas presented. Conversations around grouping the topics into common themes which will become subgroups for the work was where the meeting ended.

We will return to this work at our next meeting on November 30, 2022. In the next meeting, the Taskforce will continue to group the priority ideas/actions, label the group idea/actions as subcommittees, and be assigned to each group.

Taskforce Meeting Minutes: December 7, 2022

December 7 Meeting Slide Deck

5:50 - 6:00 p.m., Welcome and purpose by Dave Wellington

Taskforce Purpose

• Help further define what welcoming, supportive, and safe means to students and families in relationship to the learning environment.
• Make recommendations about an enhanced suite of student wellness and safety tools and supports.
• Inform development of a baseline continuum of supports, services, and practices - including a multi-year timeline and budget - necessary to meet the Guiding Principles of Parameter 7.
  •  Provide recommendations to the District on how to measure progress towards the Parameter 7 Guiding Principles.
• Inform development of procedures to support implementation of Board Policy 4311, School Safety and Security Services responsive to changes to state legislation, community engagement, and recommendations and the work of the 2021-22 School Resource Officer (SRO) Task Force.
• Inform and support broad and targeted engagement with students, families, and community to ensure the voices of those most impacted are included in the task force deliberations and final recommendations to the Superintendent.

We reviewed the agenda:

• Finalizing subcommittees
• Subcommittee assignments
• Prioritizing knowledge sessions
• 1st knowledge session - Mental Health

6:10 - 6:15 p.m., Review Norms and Parking Lot

"Mr. Ferrell responded to the parking lot question from our last meeting. The question was regarding when Northshore offers sex education to students. Sex education is offered at the secondary level, but parents do have the ability to opt their students out if they prefer.”

6:15-7:15 p.m., Finalize Subcommittees

We returned sub committee topic cards to each group and placed the cards under the themes determined at our last meeting. We finalized our subcommittees based on placing the final cards.

By the end of our time, the following subcommittees emerged:

1. Comprehensive Safety, Security, and Supervision
2. Policy, Procedures, and Accountability
3. Mental Health Training and Supportive Adults
4. Student-Centered Diversity, Equity, and  Inclusion

We also finalized the items each sub committee will be responsible for addressing as part of the recommendations:

1. Robust Communication
2. Resources (budget, timeline, supports)
3. Professional Development Opportunities
4. Inclusion of  Students in Decision Making
5. Measurements/Metrics for Accountability/Identifying what success will look like

All leading to a comprehensive, coordinated plan.

7:15-7:30 p.m. Prioritizing Knowledge Sessions and Subcommittee Assignments

Members placed four stickers on the subject they are most interested in learning more about during the upcoming sessions. Knowledge sessions will inform refinement of the key work of each sub committee. Taskforce members also completed a sheet indicating their subcommittee interest. Subcommittee membership will be balanced across regions, areas of expertise, and role.

The following are the highest rated sub-topics, and will be prioritized for the initial Knowledge Sessions. The Taskforce co-facilitators will begin to coordinate internal and external experts to NSD to share information, research, and resources on the following topics:

1. Mental Health
2. Safety and Security for School  Buildings (specific to NSD and or promising practices)

• Having someone ready to intervene in the case of an incident.

3. Restorative Practices
4. Proactive Services for Students Struggling with Behavior

There will likely be more topics that arise as we work through the initial areas of focus. Meeting adjourned at 6:28 p.m.

Taskforce Meeting Minutes: January 4, 2023

January 4 Meeting Slide Deck

5:50 - 5:55 p.m., Welcome and purpose by Dave Wellington

Taskforce Purpose - Reviewed

•  Help further define what welcoming, supportive, and safe means to students and families in relationship to the learning environment.
•  Make recommendations about an enhanced suite of student wellness and safety tools and supports.
• Inform development of a baseline continuum of supports, services, and practices - including a multi-year timeline and budget - necessary to meet the Guiding Principles of Parameter 7.
  • Provide recommendations to the District on how to measure progress towards the Parameter 7 Guiding Principles.
• Inform development of procedures to support implementation of Board Policy 4311, School Safety and Security Services responsive to changes to state legislation, community engagement, and recommendations and the work of the 2021-22 School Resource Officer (SRO) Task Force.
• Inform and support broad and targeted engagement with students, families, and community to ensure the voices of those most impacted are included in the task force deliberations and final recommendations to the Superintendent.

 

We reviewed the agenda:

• Review of subcommittees
• Subcommittee assignments
• 1st knowledge session - Mental Health
• Draft Engagement ideas - Consult and Feedback
• Subcommittee break out sessions

5:55 - 6:00 p.m., Subcommittees

Ms. Campbell described the subcommittee selection process based on the requests of task force members along with working to balance the membership of the task force along with the expectations of the committees.

For each subcommittee area, members will need to provide recommendations on:

•  Including students in decision-making
• Professional Development
• Robust communications
• Resources (budget, timeline, etc.)
• Measurement and Accountability

Note: Subcommittee membership can be found in the Jan. 4th PPT deck.

The idea was raised that there may be a need for cross-pollination of ideas between subcommittees. Facilitators will consider this possibility moving forward in the development of the agendas.

6:00 - 6:05 p.m., Knowledge Session Schedule

In the December meeting before winter break, the Taskforce members voted on topics they would like included in Knowledge building sessions. Listed below are topics with the highest Taskforce interest. Each Taskforce member got 4 votes.

• NSD Safety and Security & Current Programs/Plans (30)
• Assess physical safety and building conditions
• Have someone ready to intervene
• Procedures and Operating Standards
•  Involve students in emergency planning

Student Mental Health/Wellness/Behavioral Supports (17)

Adult role models

• Social/Emotional learning curriculum
• Proactive services for students struggling with behavior
• Reforming NSD mental health supports - current status
• Train staff/have professionals for mental health and safety

Restorative Practices/Comprehensive Care (11)

During the Jan. 5th meeting, Ms. Campbell noted that topics related to the Diversity, Equity and Inclusion subcommittee were not identified as areas of high interest for the Taskforce. She asked the Taskforce membership if a session on REJ should be added. A number of Taskforce members acknowledged this would be a good idea, and a hand vote was called. Two votes took place to ensure high enough interest. An REJ Knowledge Session has been scheduled for early February in response. Topics will need to be determined by the Taskforce.

It was noted by one of the Taskforce members that we have a lot to accomplish by April and a Board check in. Subcommittees may need to or want to meet between scheduled meetings.

Subcommittees will work with their facilitators to determine additional research and information they need to complete their task. Time to share out the progress we have made at other meeting times will need to be built into our action planning schedules.

6:05 - 7:15 p.m., Mental Health Presentation by Rick Ferrell

PROGRESS OVER THE YEARS

ELEMENTARY

• 2019-20         8 School Counselors placed at 16 schools w/ the highest need
• 2020-21         12 School Counselors placed at 21 schools (.5 at each school)
• 2021-22         All schools with over 500 students received a full time School Counselor (18)
• 2022-23         All 20 schools approved to have at least (1) full time School Counselor

PROGRESS OVER THE YEARS

MIDDLE (6-8)

• 2019-20         Counselor to Student ratio reduced → 1:375
•                         At least 3 School Counselors placed at each school
•  2020-21        Counselor to Student ratio reduced → 1:365

 

HIGH (9-12)

•  2019-20        Counselor to Student ratio reduced → 1:365
• 2020-21         Counselor to Student ratio reduced → 1:325

 

Current Staffing and Supports

• 9.0 FTE District Mental Health Therapists
• 2.0 FTE Central Support to School Leaders, staff, and families
• 2.0 Grant Funded Therapists (Center for Human Resources)
• 1.0 FTE  Mental Health Therapist at each comprehensive high school
• Shared Mental Health Therapists at middle schools
• Float Therapists within regions

Support Scenarios

Referral: Self-referral, parent or staff referral, school counselor referral

Threat Assessment: Individual mental health evaluation following an incident. Coordinated effort between school, Student Supports, and Safety & Security.

Rapid Response: Broad mental health/counseling supports provided in response to a school crisis, for example student or staff death.

Challenges

• Therapists in High Demand
• Staffing Turnover
• Partners Focusing on Community Support
• Unlicensed Applicants
• School Counselor vs Therapist Role
• Location

Discussion time with the Task Force (Mental Health, Part 1)

ASCA is where we get most of our information.

Question: Does working with a therapist funnel only through the counselors or is this known to students? Answer: This is school dependent. Some schools have put the information in newsletters, but some students do not read the newsletter. Working to figure out a solution. Counselors often triage and refer to a mental health specialist.

Question: How does a student let someone know that they are in need of support during a  crisis? Some students may be wary about disclosing information to counselors. What is the chance (with the current model) that a student would ever get to a therapist if the student to counselor ratio is so high? We know that not all students ever see their counselor. Answer: This is feedback we have also heard from the Student Advisory Board. This will require a shift. Lots of ways for kids to share with each other - kids take care of one another and trusted adults. They share with teachers, administrators, nurses, other students, friends, etc. There are many touch points, but need to make the path to getting support more clear.

Question: What kind of support programs have come to Northshore? Answer: First Aid Mental Health has come to the district - it would be nice to have them come to the district on a monthly basis to train students to be able to look for signs of crisis. Peers often see the signs before the parents and potentially other adults. UW Forefront is another organization who also can provide this kind of a service. Suggestion: Maybe this could be something we could provide during Saturday school time? - consideration for the subcommittee.

Taskforce Member Comment: At the high school level we would benefit from specific types of therapy. For example, drug and alcohol therapy, cutting, gaming addiction, eating disorders, etc.  Maybe ongoing training for specific issues that might be able to be provided to students throughout the year. Also consider support for students of color, different cultural backgrounds, etc. Representation matters in our therapy/counseling support for students.

Question: What are the top issues that students need to see a mental health counselor for? Answer: Social isolation, depression, anxiety, addiction to devices, etc. We will try to collect some more data from our therapists.

Question: Do we have any pipelines to move counselors into mental health therapist positions - similar to pipelines for certified staff? Answer: We did reach out to colleges to see if we could work with them to provide internships so they could eventually become therapists. Online therapists could be an option in the future through referral. Suggestion: Maybe online therapy could be a way to provide tailored support (gaming, depression).

Question: Following up on the idea that a student could see a therapist that specializes in a certain area, what if the issues change - then what? Do they switch therapists or have two? Answer: A student should not see two therapists at the same time. You would run the risk of competing goals and could be harmful for the student/patient.

Question: What is the process to inform parents in working with a school therapist? Answer: If under 13 the therapist needs to receive consent. If over 13, there is not a requirement to receive consent in alignment with WA state law. But if a child is going to harm themselves or others, parents are informed and students are told this in advance.

Note: There was a discussion about why some students may not want to disclose seeing a therapist to their parents.

Comment: It sounds like there is a very limited number of mental health professionals, but there may be the ability to provide individuals who can provide staff who can help facilitate wellness programs on the weekends or other opportunities. Suggestion: Crisis Connections is another resource.

Comment: Cross-training of staff on what to look for and how to refer students for support is something the subcommittee could consider.

Question: Do we have any idea how many staff members have taken the student mental health training? Answer: I do not think we do. Comment: Has there been any talk to see how many individuals on campus have the training? This might provide baseline data as a starting point and then to see where we might be able to arrive in 5 years.

Request: Those of you on the mental health committee please be thinking about what additional

information you may like to have to support your subcommittee recommendations.

 

7:15-7:30 p.m., ENGAGEMENT INITIAL IDEAS (January - February 2023)

Presented by Amelie Fry based on her conversation with the Student Board:

Various definitions of safety - thought different students would define safety differently and would like to see that represented. Clarified that the District should ask students how they define safety as a part of the engagement.

Students would value focus groups and the value of gathering data in this manner along with the possibility of a survey

• Demographics will be important to represent in the findings (race, gender, background)
• Location - UW Bothell and Northshore - safety will look different at different settings. Students cautioned that the UW Bothell survey may not be a good place to start.
• Important to have different language options and to take the survey in school anonymously so that students feel comfortable
• Would love to meet with us - January 18 meeting to share additional perspectives. This invitation will be made by the Taskforce facilitators.

 

Further Conversation about Engagement:

We have committed to engaging the Northshore community in this work. If we engage the community, we must use the data we gather. How would we plan to collect this data? Survey? Focus groups?

In smaller groups, people will be willing to have conversations, but they are not willing to put their real thoughts on a survey. It is almost like it takes a few layers to get to the real concern below the surface. Recommend focus groups.

• Recommend partnering with PTAs, more likely for families to respond if associated with their child’s school. Possible initial presentation to PTAs to gather feedback on the engagement plan.
• With staff it will depend on which staff you engage and how you approach it. Administration and above coming from the district may be fine. Need to really think through engagement with educators and other school-based staff. Recommend partnering with the union. If the union sends out a survey you will get more honest information than if it comes from the administration.
• Question: What is a normal survey response rate? How many responses do you get? Answer: For the superintendent survey we got 1200 responses.
• Wordy surveys will not work. Bullet points may be more effective.
• Important to be able to stop anytime you want rather than have to complete the entire survey in order to turn in.
• If we think a survey is important, then we could do it.
• Maybe complete a community cafe model instead. Another way to gather input.
• Cell phone (text survey) and email options are nice to have.
• Statistics, graphics, etc.

A more refined Community Engagement Plan will be introduced at the Jan. 18th meeting.

Facilitators  will send out a survey to gather what subcommittee information you would like to have for your action planning meetings.

Meeting adjourned at 7:32 p.m.

Student Safety and Wellness Taskforce Meeting Minutes: January 18, 2023

January 18 Meeting Slide Deck

5:55 - 6:00 p.m., Welcome and purpose by Carri Campbell

Taskforce Purpose - Charge and Key Deliverables

• Help further define what welcoming, supportive, and safe means to students and families in relationship to the learning environment.
• Make recommendations about an enhanced suite of student wellness and safety tools and supports.
• Inform development of a baseline continuum of supports, services, and practices - including a multi-year timeline and budget - necessary to meet the Guiding Principles of Parameter 7.
  • Provide recommendations to the District on how to measure progress towards the Parameter 7 Guiding Principles.
• Inform development of procedures to support implementation of Board Policy 4311, School Safety and Security Services responsive to changes to state legislation, community engagement, and recommendations and the work of the 2021-22 School Resource Officer (SRO) Task Force.
• Inform and support broad and targeted engagement with students, families, and community to ensure the voices of those most impacted are included in the task force deliberations and final recommendations to the Superintendent.

We reviewed the agenda:

• Subcommittee questions summary
• Engagement Plan - Review/Finalize
• 2nd Knowledge Session - NSD Safety and Security
• Questions and Answers
• Reminder: Knowledge Session Schedule

5:55 - 6:00 p.m., Subcommittee Questions - General

Ms. Campbell described the subcommittee questions in general and responded to the first set of

questions.

• What type of recommendations can we make?

We will be asked to evaluate the recommendations through a racial and educational justice lens. We will want to ensure our recommendations are also fiscally sound. We may need to think hard about what we can really accomplish within the constraints of a public system.

• Does the whole committee have to be in agreement with our recommendations before we submit to the board? Is there a whole vote done by the committee or does each subgroup present its own findings/recommendation directly to the board?

We are likely to use some consensus protocols to support our decision making processes.

• Will the assigned sub committees be meeting separately to address issues and come up with solutions and suggestions?

Yes, but as a group we will work on how to cross pollinate. We will find work in one subcommittee that may also involve another sub committee.

• If so will all members be involved and informed about it?

We will continue to post all minutes to the district website as well as find a way to report out to the entire group.

• Will there be specific duties or assignments for members of the subcommittees?

Yes, we may have duties between and among members. We may need to cover tasks between members. For example, in one subcommittee you may have 2 or 3 people working on one task.

• What are the main areas of concern under each subcommittee? For example, what all will we cover under the Mental Health subcommittee? It would help if members receive a detailed list or summary of the topics/ issues to be addressed, for reference sake.  

When we completed our consensus work to identify the four subcommittee topics, we also determined that for each sub committee’s recommendations there needs to be a process for centering students in the decision making, a budget, outcomes that will be tracked, and how we will hold ourselves accountable.

• Also, if there are no restrictions and if it does not violate any rules of privacy, I would like to know who the other members of my subcommittee are as it's difficult to keep track of all the names and members.

We can send this out again (subcommittee names/topics) as well as make sure that what comes out of the subcommittees is shared out with the entire group so that we can leverage one subcommittee’s body of work with other subcommittees.

• It would be nice if the broad outline of the different subcommittees and the issues they address could be shared among all members, in the form of slides or notes. This will help us remember the pressing concerns and also help us do research and be prepared before meetings.

Please see the January 18 Slide Deck for additional questions/information requested by the subcommittee members.

6:03 - 6:28 p.m., Communications and Engagement Plan – Student Wellness and Safety Taskforce

We reviewed the DRAFT Engagement Plan

There are three strategies:

1. Engage students in defining what wellness means to them and in providing feedback on the subcommittee recommendations.
   1. There is a student SEL survey (3rd-12th) grade that should give us a high level understanding of how students are doing. Will be implemented at all schools and as requested by students it will be anonymous.
   2. Based on survey results, students will run focus groups with other students. HS to MS. HS to HS. Will look at possible engagement with 3rd to 5th grade students. Could be conducted by a trusted adult or MS students. (Survey, focus groups, translations)
   3. Findings will be provided back to students and to the Student Wellness and Safety Taskforce.
2. To gather feedback from from adults, we will partner with PTA groups and NSD Discussion groups on subcommittee recommendations. We plan to send out a very simple survey that families can complete in translated languages followed up by sessions on Zoom as well as embedding ourselves into events that are already taking place.
3. We will provide the community at large with ongoing and transparent communication regarding the work of the taskforce - using predictable channels for ongoing communication - newsletter, minutes, information from the Superintendent. In addition, we will provide schools plug and play information to send out in newsletters as appropriate. Regional meetings, targeted meetings for specialized groups for families.

 

Suggestions or clarifying questions regarding the Student Wellness and Safety Taskforce Engagement plan:

• Could we target survey questions on Facebook? The thought was maybe we could use Northshore discussion group for a place to post responses.
• What is the timeframe between the student surveys and family focus groups? Will any parent surveys be provided in person or on paper. We think there needs to be a paper option to be culturally responsive to our sovereign nations families and Hispanic families based on recent conversations.
• Could we also present this opportunity to our PTA Council at a Council meeting?
• Schools will appreciate the plug and play content. Some schools send newsletters weekly and others biweekly so the timing needs to be a consideration. Schools may be willing to send out a separate note, but it may be overlooked if it is not part of the general newsletter.  Timing is important.
• Please provide clarity regarding the high school SEL survey. Answer: It will be online, anonymous, taken at school, and high school students are not leading it, but they may be leading follow up focus groups. The information would need to be brought together and students who are running the groups would need to be trained.
• Question: What grade levels will complete the surveys? Answer: Student survey grades 3-12
• Question: Are the focus groups only for high school and middle school? Answer: Yes. Elementary school students are not very chatty. Suggestions: Maybe they would speak more openly with their teachers. Those students may have things to say that are really honest, but may not share with outside people coming in. This is something we could determine if we have the capacity to consider.
• Question: We are messaging people, but what were we hoping was going to happen as a result of this? Answer: We need people to weigh in on the work coming out of this group and the recommendations. We also need to know more about what comes out of the SEL survey - do students feel their school is safe? Can they connect with an adult at their school? How is racism addressed at their school? The focus groups can give a deeper understanding of the complexity of the issues and help us develop possible solutions and recommendations. All responses are with the goal of giving us a deeper understanding to share with the Superintendent and the final recommendations.

Some of the actions seem to be using one strategy while others seem to be collected in  multiple ways.

I hope the focus groups are run by students but not at the high school where the focus group is taking place for anonymity. Will the school receive the information as well as the district? Answer: The goal is to eventually support individual students with targeted interventions. However, for our task force purpose, the survey results will be provided to us. 

• Question: Do we know if all special education classes will be given the survey? Answer: This is the plan.

Comment: ASB, BSU, other groups are identified to reach out to. BHS BSU is not currently active at the moment. However, even if there is not an active group, we would want to ensure we are talking to all groups of students when we meet with focus groups. 

Middle school students participated in the SBIRT. This could be another tool we use for information. Response: This was only given to schools in King County as it is a King County Grant.

• Question: What do we do when people provide outlier results or try to skew the results. How do we manage and interpret those results? Answer: Reviewed the survey items. Strong survey construction includes multiple survey items asking a similar or the same question. This helps validate the data.

Comment: Is there a way to facilitate middle school to elementary participation in focus groups?

• Last week we talked about survey returns at about 1-2% of the people to whom the surveys were sent.  Those I have spoken with did not feel like their input had value to the result of the survey and so they deleted their survey and moved on.

6:28-7:30 p.m.,  Presentation by Henry Simon, Director of Safety and Security

Background information on Safety Assessments:

• Spring 2014: Crisis Reality Training/ Jesus Villahermosa: Site assessments/Emergency operations plan (verify date)
• 2015: Force Dynamics Security Consulting–Jon Landines – school site assessments
• 2018/2019: NAC Architects– Site physical safety - statistical approach, done in coordination with the Safety and Security Department.

All three used CPTED Theory – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design.

Below are the four subcommittees from the 2018-19 work group.

2014 Bond (1 million):

Funded:

• Intercom upgrade.
• Emergency Console, consistent emergency announcements across all schools and grade levels.
• Added speakers to fill in gaps.

2018 Bond (9 million - almost all spent):

Funded:

• Thumb turn locks for all classrooms with a lock indicator.
• Video Management System and camera improvement at secondary, currently adding cameras to elementary schools. Video systems used to be a building funded option. Now this is covered by the district and beginning to become updated throughout the district.
• Video intercom at school entrances.
• Fencing/gates. Depending on the location of the campuses, we are working to create fencing and gate plans to force people to enter from the front of the building. Some campuses do not have gates or fence lines.
• Signage / wayfinding.
• Access control systems initiated. Working on contracting to add access control. To get two building to access control ($440,000 - these are two buildings with internal hallways and close to access control already)

2022 Bond (9.2 million)

Funded:

• Radio system. Campus use and district wide coverage. #1 issue in after action reports.
• Intrusion and Fire Alarm updates.
• Access control systems. Key cards for entry, more control, accountability.
• Complete camera and video intercom projects.
• Security Window Film coverage. If funds are available

Safety and Security Department Roles

Staff: Mike, Bill, Robert, Heather, Tom

Duties:

• Alarm and emergency response 24/7/365
• Support schools, students, and staff with security, training, and drills.
• Provide support at special events as needed.
• Work with police and fire as needed.
• Document safety/security incidents. Identify safety concerns any time on campus.
• Support two Video Management systems, three different Access Control Systems.
• Advise on security for new projects.
• Other duties as assigned.

Our team takes care of the following items: some camera installation and care, burglary, fire alarms, animal responses, suspicious activity, students in crisis, special events, threat assessments, liaison between schools and police, advise on capital projects, playground inspections and we provide trainings (see list below)

Training of our team:

• Crisis Prevention Institute (CPI Trainer)
• De-escalation and safe management of disruptive and assaultive behavior
• ACT Trainers- Antidote, CPR, Tourniquet
• ICS (Incident Command System/FEMA)
• Playground Inspector.

Trainings provided by the Safety and Security Department:

• CPI (de-escalation and safe restraint)
• ACT- Antidote, CPR, Tourniquet
• Search and Rescue
• Evac Chairs
• Intrusion/Fire alarm systems
• School bell programming
• Intercom/Emergency console

Trainings provided by the Safety and Security Department (continued):

• Cameras/Video Management System
• Easy Alert and Rapid Responder
• Crossing Guard Academy(have photo)
• Safety & Eprep coordinator meetings/training
• Mental health first aid (youth and adult)
• Completed legislative required training (13 areas of focus, highlighted by the house hill)

EPrep TOSA (Emergency Preparedness Teacher on Special Assignment): Tom Petersen

• Budget for 1/5 of Water and Emergency Food, No discretionary budget.
• Trains EPrep coordinators, monitors and assists with drills, manages Rapid Responder mapping system, provides training on RR, ACT, Evac Chair, Easy Alert.
• Eprep Supplies: helps Eprep site staff manage the supplies and storage sheds/containers. Bulk purchase coordination for safety supplies, (example: Stop the Bleed kits bought by PTAs)?
• Assists schools with updating Emergency Operations Plans annually, and with setting up EOC (Emergency Operations Center)at Admin if needed.

BHS students will begin building EPrep sheds for our supplies. PTSAs raise money for EPrep kits in each classroom.

Physical safety projects in progress:

• Classroom Thumb turn door locks
  • Status: Complete
  • Phase 2: office locks, planning in progress.
• Camera system (5 elementary, 2 high schools, and Pop Keeney left to finish)
• School Bus Cameras modernized
• Office Monitors for 4 cameras views
  • Status: 25 installed and configured; 11 left to complete
• Video Intercom
  • Status: 12 Installed, 6 of those are integrated with Access Control. 6 more under contract.
• Visitor Management
  • Pilot at 6 locations, all schools by Spring 2023.
• Fencing projects(PICs)
  • Status: Completed at FL, CS, AH, KE, MO; 6 more sites under contract.
• Radio System
  • Engineering consultation phase I nearing completion.
  • Emergency communications district wide - implementation summer 2023.
  • New campus handheld radios Spring/Summer 2023.
• Signage wayfinding – on going
• Intercom integration with access control emergency console and visual indicators- on goin
• Security Film at entrances, first floor. If remaining funds are available

Discussion

One school Campus: Concern regarding procedural issue - like to see badges on those who are on campus for safety reasons. Many parents enter without wearing badges. Do not want to police this, but do want to establish a procedure that is followed for the safety and security for all involved.

Question: The high school campus supervisors: how do they interact with your department? Answer: They report to the school leader, not the Safety and Security Dept. We train them on some things. They are all used a little differently depending on the needs. There are 2.5 at IHS. There are 1.5 at NHS.

Question: As a parent, I have been reading a lot about school incidents. From a parent perspective, I want to lock the campus up and not allow anyone access to the children. From a mental health perspective, the more we practice lockdowns, we add mental health issues to our children. Answer: We have a resource called safety squad to help our students deal with this issue. We have parents who don’t want parents to even be spoken to about these issues to parents who want their kids to be Navy Seals. We need to find the middle ground to help everyone find the safe spot where students feel safer without feeling institutionalized. Plastic and decorative fencing rather than metal fencing is one example.

Question: Could you talk about students who may be engaging in behavior warranting disciplinary behavior? Answer: We first ask principals what level of support they need? If there is something immediately dangerous, we will react. Otherwise, we will support Rick or principals as advisors. If it warrants referral to law enforcement, do you refer? Sometimes we are mandatory reporters, every case is different depending on the situation. Bothell has more resources than Snohomish County. The City of Woodinville may respond differently than other departments. Most police departments will defer to the school district.

Question: As a parent, is there somewhere that explains more about what may occur during a lockdown. I hope there is a plan. I have zero idea what that is. Answer: It may vary by school and where the school is located. Start with your principal, then the EPrep Coordinator, then come to me if needed. Some of our plans are protected and we would not share them because it is like giving away our playbook to someone who may have a plan for harm.

Question: You talked about cameras and fencing as part of the plan for safety and security. What is the anticipated completion date for the cameras and fencing plans? Answer: It is hard to say at this time. We put fencing plans out during COVID and some of the quotes were so large that we cannot handle them at this time. The cameras we are also working on as we can afford them. I cannot speak to timelines as some of the timelines rely upon architectural drawings for the City of Bothell.

Thank you for coming tonight. The next knowledge session will be about SRO programs in general and Bothell specifically.

Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.

Student Safety and Wellness Taskforce Meeting Minutes: February 1, 2023

5:55 - 6:00 p.m., Welcome and purpose by Carri Campbell

Taskforce Purpose - Charge and Key Deliverables

• Help further define what welcoming, supportive, and safe means to students and families in relationship to the learning environment.
• Make recommendations about an enhanced suite of student wellness and safety tools and supports.
• Inform development of a baseline continuum of supports, services, and practices - including a multi-year timeline and budget - necessary to meet the Guiding Principles of Parameter 7.
  • Provide recommendations to the District on how to measure progress towards the Parameter 7 Guiding Principles.
• Inform development of procedures to support implementation of Board Policy 4311, School Safety and Security Services responsive to changes to state legislation, community engagement, and recommendations and the work of the 2021-22 School Resource Officer (SRO) Task Force.
• Inform and support broad and targeted engagement with students, families, and community to ensure the voices of those most impacted are included in the task force deliberations and final recommendations to the Superintendent.

AGENDA:

• 3nd Knowledge Session - SRO programs/Bothell Police Department
• Questions and Answers
• Reminder: Knowledge Session Schedule

5:50 - 7:32 p.m., SRO Presentation and Question and Answers

Bothell Police Chief Ken Seuberlich: City of Bothell

I served as the former Bothell High School SRO for 5 years.

Tonight I am here to talk about how our program works. Our partnership goes back to 1994.

The foundations of our Bothell SRO program go back to something more than a police officer on campus. Campuses are like a city of their own. The program has to be suited to the school they are serving. The program has to adjust to the campus. We begin this relationship by bringing the school in to help select the SRO who will be on their campus.

Once the selection is made, there is a lot of training that goes above and beyond the training of a regular police office. SROs receive more in-depth training as to how to work with staff, students, districts, policies and the politics that goes along with a school district.

One foundational component that led me to want to be an SRO was to keep kids out of the criminal justice system. How do we accomplish this? Law enforcement does not get to see students on campus or talk with teachers and students to find out what is going on in students' lives. They would not know if a student is exposed to drugs, if they are victims of bullying or  harassment, etc..

The SRO serves as mentor, educator, and law enforcement office - for us to work with staff to keep children out of the system. What works best is when we can come together to work as adults with our colleagues to try to come up with creative ways to support our students. We have had programs in the past where the idea behind the initiative was to get the victim of a crime to allow us to defer this to an intervention program. We worked with Northshore Youth and Family Services to address the underlying causes and if we do so effectively the other things often go away. We want to keep kids in school and keep them out of the criminal justice system. Our trained professional SRO is the person working with staff to stay outside the criminal justice box.

We may have an officer who has an interaction with someone in school who can help find a way to work outside of the system to support a student. Most of our officers can learn that skill, but it takes time to gain this experience and get them up to speed to work with schools. We are not putting a one year office up at a school. We want someone with experience to be creative to support our schools.

Globally, as far as SRO programs go, they differ regionally and from school to school. NASRO training is consistent and the gold standard. I don’t think other models work well. I don’t think other programs are designed to keep kids out of the system.

I am not a fan of programs where the school does not have a part in deciding who is the SRO on their campus. Police organizations are human organizations. We hire people and do background investigations. We are very careful and look deeply into people’s history. We do show people the door if we need to do so. I firmly believe in leaving people better than you found them. That is the foundational component of our SRO program.

ACLU of Washington statement: The ACLU of Washington is working to dismantle the “school to prison pipeline,” a series of policies and practices that push youth (particularly youth of color and youth with disabilities) out of schools and into the juvenile  and adult criminal justice systems. Sending kids out of school and into courts and jails doesn’t help change adolescent behavior - in many instances, it harms children. Recent advances in neuroscience have confirmed that young people are still developing and benefit tremendously from treatment, positive reinforcement, and opportunities for rehabilitation. We push to end harsh discipline policies that suspend or expel,students from school; eliminate the use of school police to address minor misbehavior; end incarceration for “status offenses” like truancy or running away from home; replace juvenile incarceration with effective community-based supports and opportunities for youth and families; and eliminate excessively punitive laws (like “auto-decline”) that treat youth as adults in the criminal justice system.

The ACLU statement matches what the Bothell Police Department strives to do. We strive to find alternate resources for students. We work with families and staff. And, we stay out of discipline issues whenever possible.

 

Captain Mike Johnson, Bothell Police Department -

I also began in 1994 with the Bothell Police. I became the public information officer in 2010.

I also have two small kids in the Northshore School District and I teach leadership in the Police Department which is a 40 hour class.

We have a Resource Officer at Cascadia, UW Bothell and at Bothell High School.

The Resource Officer works as part of the administrative team on campus to help solve problems and they operate under the least intrusive model.

With this model you get the same officer on campus every day. The officer can create relationships with everyone on campus and foster a positive environment on campus.

We do allow students and staff to ask questions at our SRO interviews. This supports our process and helps our integration onto the campus.

We have had one campus SRO who had to be changed out because it was not a great fit, but we have had a great run of successful SRO officers on campus at Bothell.

The School District has expectations of our entire department. The School Board takes a vested interest in how we interact with the administration and others. The campus safety director and I also talk often.

Students have an opportunity to talk with a police officer informally when they would not otherwise do so. Approachability is a benefit in finding ways to gain support for students who might not have otherwise found support. This happens through established relationships.

SROs work through the least intrusive actions in an incident when something may occur on campus. A patrol officer may refer to the prosecutor’s office versus an SRO who may be able to avoid a referral to the prosecutor’s office for theft.

The SRO does not get involved with the discipline. The administrator determines the discipline and students are kept out of the criminal system pipeline.

We are also working on a community court system to try to find a way to get a different kind of court system for juveniles.

SROs have a quick response time when you are on campus. When there is an emergency, there is a police officer on campus.

School violence incidence - immediate interruption of the event - solo officer response - Our SRO will go toward the response and work to save lives. Also get staffing for outside of school events. The SRO leads the parade down the hill to Pop Keeney, attends other sporting events and provides consistency and a high level of service.

Having the same police officer on campus assures you of a level of consistency responding to incidents on campus that you may not get if you call in the police. Some of the other items the SRO does include:

Goes into classrooms and responds to questions from students - Bill of Rights

• Mentoring
• Meet and greets
• Group on Climate and Culture
• Adaptive PE
• Accountable learning strategies
• Cougar Madness
• Bullying Prevention
• Adult Transition Program
• DUI Assembly
• Fire Drills along with other evacuation drills and the evaluation of these drills
• Attends sporting events
• Emergency response team and the creation of the plans
• SRO meetings regionally and trainings
• Meets with Boy Scouts and Night to Shine event (works with students with disabilities)
• There are many other events the SRO does
• Outreach to families during COVID - home visits

We understand what the committee is facing with a holistic view to safety. We wanted to give you what value we think we add to campus.

The SRO has knowledge of campus, staff, students, relationships. A typical police response will be absent those key things when seconds count. Our SRO program is in line with the Strategic Plan and Parameter 7.

We are just one city. Kenmore covers Kenmore, Woodinville covers Woodinville and Snohomish County Covers the North. (North Creek High School).

Every campus has its own culture. How do we create a consistent program and culture? District wide we do not have a consistent culture. I cannot speak to the Woodinville culture. One of the reasons I became a police officer was a bad experience with law enforcement. I do not want to minimize your lived experience with law enforcement to help students and staff feel safe and secure.

Maybe Bothell hosts the SRO program at Bothell. The other agencies send their employees, but they have to go through the training process, but we could run the program.

Kenmore contracts police services with King County. The officers who had the relationships at IHS left and there was no consistency afterwards.

Questions and Comments:

Student: It is concerning that the [SRO interview] question regarding the BIPOC community is the question that came to your mind. Students of color and how they feel about having SROs on campus must be considered. One student feeling unsafe is one too many in my mind.

Bothell PD Response: We are working to be equitable specifically with the BIPOC community. We have been really working to evaluate our work. We typically see white law enforcement officers and we have been working to understand the needs of all of our community - all members of our community. This would include our BIPOC community. It is a good goal to strive for. It may not be possible to make everyone feel safe, but we can work toward this goal. We can eventually get to a place of understanding.

Student: I have spoken with so many students of color and how they feel unsafe when they see an SRO brandishing a gun. The police officers who murdered him were black. The structure and the weight of the job. It is a complex system.

Bothell PD Response: We don’t do it passively. We train annually on cultural competency and continue to train on recognizing the comfort level of people and work to improve the comfort level of people by wearing the Cougar hoodie rather than a police uniform. We work to further our own competency and continue to try.

Student 1: For students of color who have been raised, wearing a Bothell hoodie is not enough.

Student 2: What about the students who are not feeling safe without an SRO?

Student 1: I was also trying to say this. Students are on both sides.

Student 3: Can I say something? When your school gets a threat with a date and a time that your school will be shot up. Thankfully the Bothell Police Department is only 5 minutes away.

A clip can be unleashed in less than five minutes.

Student 1: That is correct. I did not go to school one day. Woodinville got threats as well.

Bothell PD Response: The idea that the police department is only 2 minutes away is not necessarily helpful. The idea that we are all staged with gear, ready to go, is not accurate.

Student 1: A school liaison is another possible option.

Student 4: There was a fight at school and some of my friends were comfortable with a police officer there, but others did not feel comfortable.

Task force member: We had 50 mass shootings in the last month. The FBI is looking into their policy as run, hide, fight because of so many guns with the capacity to take down so many people. I cannot feel that my kid is safe in many environments. I hear that we are not all the same Bothell police force. It really only takes one bad SRO to make it all look bad. I hear the need for more SROs but that we need a very careful selection process. This is a really primal fear I am having.

2017 - 58 school shootings

2022 - 303 school shootings

2023 - 30 so far this year

Student: I experienced a simultaneous fear watching officers stand around while officers watched students get shot. Can you share with me other numbers that support SROs? Uvalde was a school district run department. I am not a fan. It made no sense. Bothell has stopped 2.

Task force member: I was at Bothell for 5 years prior to North Creek very cohesively on a number of situations. Everything you have described was absolutely amazing. Building relationships was number 1. Offering to help and acting like a staff member to support the school community. Having the police department know the ins and outs of the school and the school system. Garrett knows students who have disabilities that might need a different level of service.

Task force member: If we could get the type of mentorship at North Creek that we had at Bothell, then we would actually have a program again.

 

Bothell PD Response: Special education and SRO - the SRO knows who has IEPs and how to support students with IEPs. Because of that, we have added to our training about how to communicate with students with disabilities.

Question: Is there training specifically for officers regarding disabilities - specific disabilities? Bothell PD Response: Video immersion training - the instructor is operating the system.

Question: Who has worked on training the system to react to how the student with disabilities will act?  Bothell PD Response: We work with a company called Virtro.

Question: Does the company work with anyone with specialty information to provide information to the Virtro machine? Bothell PD Response: Unknown, however, we do have guest speakers to talk about individuals with disabilities you might see in the field and how you might be able to respond.

Task force member: I have seen multiple pieces of data that demonstrates that we have more disciplinary data for students of color and students with disabilities. I have seen evidence that there was a case with an officer’s name on it forwarded to the Bothell Police Department. This was received through public records. District Response: The data that was presented in a recent study session is part of the question. The rest of the committee does not have access to this information at this time. Let’s set this to the side.

Task force member: I am curious about how an SRO would know about many IEPs regarding a student?

Bothell PD Response: The SRO will only know information about student IEPs that are relevant to the work they do during their day. The SRO will learn about the students they come in contact with. The SRO will proactively seek out information to support the students who need support.

Task force member: We were talking about students with special needs and the relationship that develops between students. If it is not an officer who has developed a relationship with students, then they may not be able to respond well. Police officers who are not SROs should be able to respond appropriately. Bothell PD Response: Every police officer should be able to respond to a student with special needs. It is helpful if they have a relationship with the students and staff. It makes it easier and you might get a better outcome. It is not integral and essential.

Task force member: Every community has a different response time. A 7 minute response time was considered fast. I have been told I might be on my own at my place of work for 7 minutes. My daughter was so upset and said she would not go to school if there was not an SRO. What does mitigate fear and perception to a police officer is the relationship and exposure to a police officer. My son was helped by Officer Ware who helped jump his car one day after school. I am proud of our police and Officer Ware and what our department has done for our community. I am grateful for the protection at the school.

Task force member: We have students with very specific needs. For the students' sense of compliance or support, it doesn’t matter about who helps, it is the student’s perspective that allows them to be successful. It is not necessarily the perspective of the others involved.

Meeting adjourned at 7:30 p.m.

Student Safety and Wellness Taskforce Meeting Minutes: February 15, 2023

5:46 - 5:52 p.m., Welcome and purpose by Carri Campbell

Welcome and review of the public meeting rules and the role of individuals who come to view the meeting who are not members of the Student Wellness and Safety Task Force:

Public Presence at Taskforce Meetings

Thank you for your interest in the work of the Student Wellness and Safety Taskforce. Our group is a working body whose recommendations will be given to the Superintendent, School Board, and Cabinet. Observers must adhere to the following protocols:

• Be seated in seats assigned for visitors and guests
• If you have comments or questions, they can not be asked during the meeting. Please write your question or comments on an index card and turn into a Taskforce facilitator. Include your name, email or phone number so that a facilitator can provide a response.
• Recording or taking photos during the Taskforce can be distracting to the process and requires approval by all committee/taskforce members.
• Minutes will be posted within three working days of the meeting on the Taskforce website.

 

5:52 - 5:56 p.m., Taskforce Purpose - Charge and Key Deliverables and

Polarities by Dave Wellington

• Help further define what welcoming, supportive, and safe means to students and families in relationship to the learning environment.
• Make recommendations about an enhanced suite of student wellness and safety tools and supports.
• Inform development of a baseline continuum of supports, services, and practices - including a multi-year timeline and budget - necessary to meet the Guiding Principles of Parameter 7.
  • Provide recommendations to the District on how to measure progress towards the Parameter 7 Guiding Principles.
• Inform development of procedures to support implementation of Board Policy 4311, School Safety and Security Services responsive to changes to state legislation, community engagement, and recommendations and the work of the 2021-22 School Resource Officer (SRO) Task Force.
• Inform and support broad and targeted engagement with students, families, and community to ensure the voices of those most impacted are included in the task force deliberations and final recommendations to the Superintendent.

AGENDA:

Public attendance at Taskforce meetings

• Our charge
• Review Norms
• 4th Knowledge Session - Restorative Practices
  • Dr. Lori Lynass, Sound Supports - 45 mins.
  • Judge Jessica Ness, Monroe Municipal Court - 30 mins.
• Questions and Answers
• Reminder: Knowledge Session Schedule

Dave Wellington shared the following quote:

“If you are in a meeting where no one ever disagrees, where no one ever pushes back and says ‘can we think about this another way’, then you are either in a space where there is no trust, or you are in a meeting that should have been an email.  Most likely, both.”

Comment: “Grounding in the polarities that will exist in our conversation. We were so proud of the conversation our students brought to the table at our last meeting. Not that the adults didn’t have a good conversation, but our students really demonstrated their ability to share their voice and all sides of the issue (last week’s topic was the SRO program).”

Taskforce reviewed our agreed upon norms. Members were asked to read them outloud and give a thumbs up if they could adhere to them.

6:00-6:38 p.m., Dr. Lori Lynass - ran a restorative circle, shared prompts, and a visual of the intersection between respect, dignity, and mutual care.

6:38-7:15 p.m., Judge Jessica Ness, Monroe Municipal Court

• Began legal career in 2007 as a prosecutor
• Then worked as a defense attorney
• She began working as a judge in 2012 (filling in for other judges)
• Been on the bench for the last 11 years
• Appointed to the municipal court bench in 2020
• Restorative justice refers to a way of responding to a wrongdoing with a focus on restoring the relationship between those who were wronged and the individual/s that committed the wrongdoing
• In the traditional criminal court system the traditional method to change behavior is punishment. In the restorative method we do not use punishment.
• What happens is that a person is charged with a crime in criminal court and they make an appearance at a hearing, then enter an appeal. They then make an appearance at sentencing and may choose to seek treatment - substance abuse or mental health. It is much different than our community court track.
• In the community court a defendant has an arraignment hearing. If they are motivated to change then we assess them for needs. Their needs may range from housing to substance abuse treatment, living needs, bus passes, etc. Every week they meet with their team to reevaluate their current needs. Their court team includes the judge, prosecutor, public defender, representative from the police department and possibly more people to help them get out of the criminal justice system. The theory is that they are not getting something in the criminal system that they need. We want to support them to get out and they want some change. The team asks - What services can we help them get? Every Friday they come to check in with us. We ask about services we can get them connected with in order to support them. Not every type of crime will be eligible for this. DUIs are not eligible for this. Theft, criminal trespass are eligible. We have found success with this.
• The team wraps around defendants. The defendant also needs to complete community service hours to finish their program commitment.
• This is a much different approach to the criminal justice system. It can be successful when utilized appropriately and properly.
• The Bothell youth court also has a system set up for students to handle traffic citations. Students may opt into the program - choose the program vs. parents who pay the ticket. For students who opt into the program, the student first comes to the court. They have a student prosecutor who has witnesses. They run the proceedings like a mini-trial. There is a jury of six peers with a student judge. The only adult is the public safety member as an expert witness. Students present opening statements with a prosecution statement with the dangers of speeding presented or failing to stop at a stop sign (whatever the infraction might be). Then, the defense presents. The student is then cross-examined. The jurors come down with the judge and sometimes parents come as well. They create a restorative circle and determine how the person can repay the community. Sometimes they might have to write a paper explaining the dangers of their infraction to the community or perform community traffic safety hours.
• The worst that can happen is the ticket is redistributed. They might also have to serve on the jury in the future. They have to commit more time to the process than just paying the ticket.
• This process can be empowering for the student. It builds faith and trust in the system.
• The inclusivity in this process is also powerful.
• What is most powerful is that this can actually cause change in our students and their behaviors.

 

Questions and Comments:

Question: What is the age of the community court? Answer: We don’t handle any adult offenses. Juveniles only.

Question: We send cases to the different county cases. I mention what we think a student might benefit from, but we do not hear back for 8 months or so. What I struggle with is that once the case is sent off, there is nothing else there. The case is declined and we are completely out of the loop on it. After they get in trouble legally, there is nothing else we can do. Have you seen in your career municipal courts having a juvenile program? Answer: The system is designed and set up that way. SRO or not, if someone is selling fentanyl on campus, we will not know what will happen for many months.  I hear this from many officers, not as often from municipal courts because we are smaller and can handle cases more quickly. Because you are referring to a county system, we know they are already backlogged and the state has up to 2 years to resolve cases. The harm and safety to other students is the struggle. It would be great to have a liaison to the courts, but I do not know how you go about doing that. Hearings are all public, but much of the information as it relates to their treatment is private. I do not know if there are some data bases you can check to determine how far along cases are or not.

Question: Where is the student during the 8-10 months? Answer: Once it is criminal, I don’t know that a school can do anything with a pending charge.

Question: What is the maximum number of offenses before they can be ineligible for community court? Answer: We do not look at their past offenses? Question: So do you only go through the program once? Answer: That is a team decision. Did we not address the need enough? Did we miss some services that we should have offered? We determine what we need as a team and look at it in a case by case decision. Question: Who decides which way the individual goes? Answer: The individual decides as well as the team. 

More information: People accepting court decisions - form perceptions of procedural fairness - who is included? Are they given the opportunity for restorative circles? Higher perceptions of fairness lead to greater compliance with court orders. Research shows that the ability of allowing litigants to participate in the courts gives them greater “buy in” to what occurs in the court system. Individuals who are treated with respect will comply with the results. Helpfulness, trust, the view of the courts as supporting the family and understanding the procedures and why the courts are making the decisions they are can make the difference as to the acceptance of the outcome of the court decision.

Preventative in the schools: check and connect - counselors, administrators - does every child have someone in the building that they can talk to and relate to every day?

One of my teachers does a really nice job creating a classroom charter based on the composition of the classroom. They show up and build expectations around that and have a voice in how they cocreate the student voice and agency together in the classroom.

Student empowerment - creating an environment where students may shape the space that meets all of their needs.

What is our current state around restorative practices? We had a district training around discipline - our attorney came in and spoke to us - we looked at disproportionate discipline across the system. After our attorney spoke with us, we are really looking at working to eliminate suspensions in line with the expectations of the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI). If we could begin with small pieces of restorative justice work, then we need to examine the fine line between safety and the rights of the students.

We had a push for restorative justice work a while before COVID (2018-2019), then we have moved away from it.

We need to work in compliance with the law and we also need to help students learn from their mistakes. When we keep students out of school we begin a cycle where they miss academic content, then do not find success which begets more feelings of failure.

We are working to find ways to teach into seeing the behaviors we want them to do and lean into the positive behaviors. We need to stop assuming students know what it means to be respectful and responsible - especially when students are dysregulated at the moment.

If we were to bring restorative practices to the schools, Does the individual have the choice to enter into the restorative practice? When then do we decide the restorative process is not working for that individual student? The restorative process may not work for all students and the student may need an individualized behavior plan for the student. It really is dependent upon the student.

SEL Survey feedback (baseline data for taskforce): On my end and the student perspective - we felt it was very inconsistently given out by teachers. The link was not working. The QR code was not working. On a student by student basis, some students said they had parents who did not want them to take the screener because they were unsure about the anonymity of the survey.

Staff response: We provided teachers with a slide deck for the screener - to increase consistency. The goal was to have the screener taken during a specific time of day or during a specific class. That did not always happen. We will work on seeing what we need to fix to make this roll out better next time (during the spring).

This is not a required screener. We do have all the information on the student services webpage, We did not take any student information and students could opt out of the survey if they wished to do so.

Student Safety and Wellness Taskforce Meeting Minutes: March 1, 2023

March 1 Meeting Slide Deck

5:45 p.m., Welcome and purpose by Amity Butler

Welcome and review of the public meeting rules and the role of individuals who come to view the meeting and who are not members of the Student Wellness and Safety Task Force:

Public Presence at Taskforce Meetings

Thank you for your interest in the work of the Student Wellness and Safety Taskforce. Our group is a working body whose recommendations will be given to the Superintendent, School Board, and Cabinet. Observers must adhere to the following protocols:

• Be seated in seats assigned for visitors and guests
• If you have comments or questions, they can not be asked during the meeting. Please write your question or comments on an index card and turn into a Taskforce facilitator. Include your name, email or phone number so that a facilitator can provide a response.
• Recording or taking photos during the Taskforce can be distracting to the process and requires approval by all committee/taskforce members.
• Minutes will be posted within three working days of the meeting on the Taskforce website.

AGENDA:

• Our Charge
• Review Norms
• 5th Knowledge Session - Discipline and Racial and Educational Justice Analysis Tool 
• David Wellington, Discipline - 45 mins.
  • Q&A
• Ayva Thomas & Ranna Harb, REJ Tool - 45 mins.
  • Q&A

 

Taskforce Purpose - Charge and Key Deliverables

Help further define what welcoming, supportive, and safe means to students and families in relationship to the learning environment.

• Make recommendations about an enhanced suite of student wellness and safety tools and supports.
• Inform development of a baseline continuum of supports, services, and practices - including a multi-year timeline and budget - necessary to meet the Guiding Principles of Parameter 7.
  • Provide recommendations to the District on how to measure progress towards the Parameter 7 Guiding Principles.
• Inform development of procedures to support implementation of Board Policy 4311, School Safety and Security Services responsive to changes to state legislation, community engagement, and recommendations and the work of the 2021-22 School Resource Officer (SRO) Task Force.
• Inform and support broad and targeted engagement with students, families, and community to ensure the voices of those most impacted are included in the task force deliberations and final recommendations to the Superintendent.

Reminder of the following quote:

“If you are in a meeting where no one ever disagrees, where no one ever pushes back and says ‘can we think about this another way’, then you are either in a space where there is no trust, or you are in a meeting that should have been an email.  Most likely, both.”

We reviewed the taskforce Norms: “As Superintendent Tolley begins every Cabinet meeting asking us to review our norms, please read through the norms on the board this evening and choose one that you can hold front and center in your mind this evening as we listen and learn together.”

6:00 p.m., Assistant Superintendent Dave Wellington: Disproportionate Discipline

“We make mistakes, humans make mistakes, we all do this. We want to discuss the mechanisms for discipline. We want to highlight the consequences we apply so that the conversation we have today enters into your committees later.”

“Discipline is not a bad word. It is something that happens to all of us. Describe a time that discipline was actually spot on when it occurred in your life. It could be a rule that you thought worked.”

“Most likely the times when discipline worked, it was supported heavily in conversation and love.”

“Policy, Procedure, and Practice need to translate into impacts that we are mindful of being beneficial in building relationships. We also all believe in public safety, due process, and corrective action. We also want to be sure that we align what we do in public education with these beliefs.”

When our attempts to correct misbehavior don’t work (or have negative impacts on students), it is often because:

• Strategy reflects an overreaction about what constitutes misbehavior
• Narrow focus on rules and procedural norms
• Missed opportunity to address the reason behind the behavior
• Policy or practice worsens student misbehavior

The work of discipline:

• Done in Love
• Research based
• Skillfully administered
• Goal oriented
• Student centered
• Culturally responsive
• Effective

Discipline as a net: Wide at the top and narrow at the bottom. At the very top you have discipline administered by teachers, peers, counselors (small, minor infractions that the school says we want to change). The net gets more narrow as it goes down. As you get farther down, you find deans of students, assistant principals, principals. When you get to the bottom of the net you find police officers, the court system, etc.  Then, if you think about a pipe at the bottom, you see the school to prison pipeline that will be detrimental to the student and their future. The net idea is easy to get in and out of. The further you fall into the net, the harder it is to get out of. We have ways and mechanisms to increase the size of the net. We can make it wider or deeper. We make it wider by creating additional rules or making it deeper by making the punishment worse.

Provided examples of this theory looks in practice:

Example: Students are coming to class late and teachers are tired of it.

Students are out in the hall after the bell rings. The principal writes detention slips when students are late and in the hall after the bell rings. Teachers will capture more students by widening the net. Kids start learning that they need to be in their seats when the bell rings because the teachers start writing detention slips when students are late, not just the principal.

Now, when the student skips detention, they receive a suspension. This is when the net deepens. This is when the student gets in more trouble.

Now, think of examples when the school or society has either widened or shrunk the net.

We socially construct the rules.

Most students are never suspended or expelled from school.  However, all students have daily interactions in which their behavior is subject to regulation or they observe their peers being regulated. These moments are important because:

They highlight who is and is not a full member of the school community and they call out important things about the sociocultural context

• Differences in suspension and expulsion rates originate from large differences in how minor, often subjective offenses are treated by teachers and administrators
• Focusing on how students’ actions and behaviors are regulated allows us to more carefully unpack how race and gender intersect and diverge in the practice of school discipline
• This is data about our system and how our system reacts, NOT data about our students.
• “We must never see any person as an abstraction.  Instead we must see in every person a universe with its own secrets, with its own treasures, with its own sources of anguish and with some measure of triumph.” Eli Wiesel
• Quantitative data - when coupled with humility and courage - can be a first step in seeking “root causes over quick fixes” if it inspires and promotes “deep and skillful listening and an orientation to authentic, present, mindful engagement with stakeholders.”  If not, at best, it’s just data.  At its worst, it continues to promote a deficit mindset, victim blaming, and marginalization of our students and families.  Safir, S., Dugan, J., Street Data

Data Review: When exploring the data, we have roughly 50% of our student population who are white and approximately 50% of our suspensions were represented by white students. 25% of our student population identify as Asian and they represent approximately 6% of our student suspensions. Approximately 13% of our student population identify as Hispanic/Latino, and they represent 27.3% of our student suspensions. 2.5% of our student population identify as Black and they represent 5% of our student suspensions.

We also see disproportionality in our categorical populations, IEPs, 504s, students receiving English Language Development Services and students receiving highly capable services.

“Student likelihood of getting in trouble at school is shaped by the intersections of students’ identities; [educator] beliefs; school practices; national, state, and local policies; and school locations.  These influences ebb and flow over time and space.  The growing rate of reported misbehavior and discipline disparities in official reports does not solely reflect actual changes in the ways children and youth behave.”   - Irby

Questions and Comments:

Task Force Member: I analyze this from a data perspective. When I look at the data, I feel it is an assumption when we use the word disproportional. We are assuming for the same incident we are disciplining one ethnic group for the same offense. But it is not about race that we need to analyze, but we need to see if the same offense is treated differently depending on the race. - do we need a clearer definition across the district?

Answer: That is a technical fix that needs to happen, but if we have an offense with an amorphous definition we also need to ask why one demographic group experiences more discipline in that category than another group.

Task Force Member 1: Attendance is the second highest offense that was listed for Hispanic students and at the bottom for White students. Data points such as that reflect disproportionality.

Task Force Member 2: But if we continue that kind of thought, if you miss school for that number of days, I don’t see ethnicity playing a role there.

Assistant Superintendent Wellington: The question I think is, is it reasonable to assume that we would suspend more Hispanic/Latino students than White students.

Task Force Member: Those numbers - we need to think about what kind of supports are already there. The support piece needs to be asked. - What is needed? We are charged with defining what support means.

I do appreciate the art of leadership from you with my son, but you used a global perspective and coached him up about how you are managing the student. When you look at the data, what is the accumulation of offenses for a particular student. Why? How do I coach this student up for success? There is never a cookie cutter answer. Sometimes it is difficult to come up with clear answers, but maybe not fall in one approach.

Assistant Superintendent Wellington: The final thought I will leave you with is that this is not a Northshore issue. This is every single district across the nation.

7:00 p.m. Rick Ferrell introduced Ayva Thomas and Ranna Harb from the Racial and Educational Justice Department who work with him on many issues along with student discipline. They will be supporting us learning about the Racial and Educational Justice Review Toolkit. We will be using this Toolkit to review the plans we come up with through our subgroups.

The toolkit was created about 5 years ago after our equity policy was created by the Board Diversity and Equity Policy No. 0001, but we would like to revamp it and begin to use it as we review our policies, procedures, programs, and practices (the 4 P’s). 

Toolkit design: Inclusivity, Opportunity, Equity, Cultural Relevance, Sensitivity, Obligations

Review the Toolkit silently for 5 minutes

Organize yourselves in small groups (3-5 people)

Review the toolkit

• How do you see this being valuable in your work as a task force?
• How do the checklist categories relate to overall student wellness and safety?
• How might this toolkit be helpful in prompting you to creatively and equitably think about models of student safety that are truly justice-centered?

Missing within the Toolkit: special education and mental health and neurodivergent needs

Policy and Procedure subgroup: works well with the new Danielson Framework

We will begin working in our subgroups next time on March 15th.

Adjourned at 7:30 p.m.

Student Safety and Wellness Taskforce Meeting Minutes: March 22, 2023

March 22 meeting Slide Deck

5:50 p.m., Welcome and purpose by Carri Campbell

Welcome and review of the purpose of today’s meeting. We will be breaking into rooms for Action Planning

Review of public presence:

Public Presence at Taskforce Meetings

Thank you for your interest in the work of the Student Wellness and Safety Taskforce. Our group is a working body whose recommendations will be given to the Superintendent, School Board, and Cabinet. Observers must adhere to the following protocols:

• Be seated in seats assigned for visitors and guests
• If you have comments or questions, they can not be asked during the meeting. Please write your question or comments on an index card and turn into a Taskforce facilitator. Include your name, email or phone number so that a facilitator can provide a response.
• Recording or taking photos during the Taskforce can be distracting to the process and requires approval by all committee/taskforce members.
• Minutes will be posted within three working days of the meeting on the Taskforce website.

 

AGENDA:

• Charge and Norms
• Progress
• Parameter 7 Strategies
• Action Planning
• Review/refine strategies
• Prioritize
• Key Actions/Tactics
• Calendaring
• Coordination
  • Briefing Paper Introduction
  • Sub Committees

 Taskforce Purpose - Charge and Key Deliverables

• Help further define what welcoming, supportive, and safe means to students and families in relationship to the learning environment.
• Make recommendations about an enhanced suite of student wellness and safety tools and supports.
• Inform development of a baseline continuum of supports, services, and practices - including a multi-year timeline and budget - necessary to meet the Guiding Principles of Parameter 7.
  • Provide recommendations to the District on how to measure progress towards the Parameter 7 Guiding Principles.
• Inform development of procedures to support implementation of Board Policy 4311, School Safety and Security Services responsive to changes to state legislation, community engagement, and recommendations and the work of the 2021-22 School Resource Officer (SRO) Task Force.
• Inform and support broad and targeted engagement with students, families, and community to ensure the voices of those most impacted are included in the task force deliberations and final recommendations to the Superintendent.

Progress to date:

• Development of Taskforce norms
• Creation of goal areas in support of Parameter 7
• Knowledge sessions:
  • NSD Mental Health
  • NSD Safety and Security
  • SRO Programs - Bothell Model
  • Restorative Practices and Models
  • Disproportionate Discipline
  • Racial and Educational Justice Analysis Tool introduction

Today: Action Planning  

Subcommittee Goals/Topic Areas

To meet the goals of Parameter 7 and Goal 2, Northshore School District will put the following into place:

• Student-centered diversity, equity, and inclusion
• Mental health training and supportive adults
• Policy, procedures, and accountability
• Comprehensive safety, security, and supervision

For each subcommittee area, members will need to provide recommendations on:

• Including students in decision-making
• Professional Development
• Robust communications
• Resources (budget, timeline, etc.)
• Measurement and Accountability

Step 1: Review current goal strategies

• As needed clarify intent of each strategy
• It is OK to get rid of or add strategies in response to your learning over the past few weeks
• Identify any strategies that better align with different goals - note for your facilitator
• Use the Racial and Educational Justice guiding questions/tool to analyze and refine intent of each strategy

Step 2: Rank order the strategies by the most important to address to least important; where you can - combine strategies (ideally we have 4 or 5 max strategies per goal area)

Step 3: For each strategy conduct a strengths/weakness analysis

• As appropriate generate different approaches to fulfill the strategy - may require a briefing paper
• Talk through potential benefits and risks of each strategy and various approaches

Step 4: Confirm commitment to the strategy/approaches

Step 5: Brainstorm actions required to implement each final strategy/approach

Organize actions into a timeframe - what comes first, second, third, etc.

Subcommittee’s met until 7:30 adjournment.

 

Student Safety and Wellness Taskforce Meeting Minutes: April 19, 2023

Step 1: Review current goal strategies

• As needed clarify intent of each strategy
• It is OK to get rid of or add strategies in response to your learning over the past few weeks
•  Identify any strategies that better align with different goals - note for your facilitator
• Use the Racial and Educational Justice guiding questions/tool to analyze and refine intent of each strategy

Step 2: Rank order the strategies by the most important to address to least important; where you can - combine strategies (ideally we have 4 or 5 max strategies per goal area)

Step 3: For each strategy conduct a strengths/weakness analysis

• As appropriate generate different approaches to fulfill the strategy - may require a briefing paper
• Talk through potential benefits and risks of each strategy and various approaches

Step 4: Confirm commitment to the strategy/approaches

Step 5: Brainstorm actions required to implement each final strategy/approach

• Organize actions into a timeframe - what comes first, second, third, etc.

Inclusivity regardless of cognitive/physical ability

• Action Steps
  • Establish accessible playgrounds for all schools
  • Gender neutral restrooms on all campuses by the end of the 2025-26 school year.
  • Dividers in male restrooms (urinals).

Provide and advocate for every student = belonging 

• Action Steps
  • Reinforce the idea of mentorship(big sister/big brother) between schools (elementary, middle, and high schools that are nearby).
  • Explore mentors from Cascadia College and Bellevue College for 1st generation college students.
  • Advocating for the LGBTQ community- giving them the opportunity of information, and breaking the barrier of being out there.
  • Advocating for MLL students - assisting them to access resources, mentorships, events, and sports.

Extracurricular diversity and encourage opportunities for engagement (clubs, breaking down the walls, etc)

• Action Steps 
  • Recruitment of volunteers to become involved as mentors, club leaders/advisors.
  • Explore faith based organizations within schools.

Daily time for student/staff and community building

• Action Steps
  • ​​​​​​​Explore engaging lessons for advisory (Elementary, Middle, High)
  • Incorporate advisory/lunch schedule (games, interactive activities)
  • Tutoring/club time
  • Support LINK Crew students and faculty to connect and cheer the student body to get involved, connected, and cheering at school sports/events.

Providing healthy school meals that are respectful of ethnic backgrounds, dietary restrictions, and preferences. 

• Action Steps
  • Asking student input/student board to help advise Food & Nutrition department on what to put on the menu.
  • Have student voice teams in each school met to know what they want and ideas of demographics and food that they feel like it would represent.
  • Partner with community organizations/resources about providing food in a backpack for weekends and breaks.
  • Adding labels to the food in the cafeteria that identify what allergies it might contain, or cross contaminate.

May 3 Meeting Slide Deck

Student Safety and Wellness Task Force Meeting Minutes: May 17, 2023

5:48 p.m., Welcome and purpose by Carri Campbell

 

Review of public presence:

Public Presence at Taskforce Meetings

Thank you for your interest in the work of the Student Wellness and Safety Taskforce. Our group is a working body whose recommendations will be given to the Superintendent, School Board, and Cabinet. Observers must adhere to the following protocols:

• Be seated in seats assigned for visitors and guests
• If you have comments or questions, they can not be asked during the meeting. Please write your question or comments on an index card and turn into a Taskforce facilitator. Include your name, email or phone number so that a facilitator can provide a response.
• Recording or taking photos during the Taskforce can be distracting to the process and requires approval by all committee/taskforce members.
• Minutes will be posted within three working days of the meeting on the Taskforce website.
   

AGENDA:

• Community Engagement Update
  • Student focus groups
  • Questionnaire
• Update on all 4 goal areas and feedback session
• Action planning - IF we have time

 

May 30, 2023: Next School Board update, 5:30-7:30 p.m., Public Meeting

June 22, 2023: Final Board presentation, 5:30-6:30 p.m., Public Meeting

 

Taskforce Purpose - Charge and Key Deliverables

•  Help further define what welcoming, supportive, and safe means to students and families in relationship to the learning environment.
• Make recommendations about an enhanced suite of student wellness and safety tools and supports.
• Inform development of a baseline continuum of supports, services, and practices - including a multi-year timeline and budget - necessary to meet the Guiding Principles of Parameter 7.
  •  Provide recommendations to the District on how to measure progress towards the Parameter 7 Guiding Principles.
• Inform development of procedures to support implementation of Board Policy 4311, School Safety and Security Services responsive to changes to state legislation, community engagement, and recommendations and the work of the 2021-22 School Resource Officer (SRO) Task Force.
• Inform and support broad and targeted engagement with students, families, and community to ensure the voices of those most impacted are included in the task force deliberations and final recommendations to the Superintendent.

 

Progress to date:

Development of Taskforce norms

Creation of goal areas in support of Parameter 7

• Knowledge sessions:
• NSD Mental Health
• NSD Safety and Security
• SRO Programs - Bothell Police Department Model
• Restorative Practices and Models
• Disproportionate Discipline

Racial and Educational Justice Analysis Tool introduction

• Action planning - ongoing
• Study Session Part I, April 24
• Student Wellness and Support: Conversations with the Board, May 2
• Community engagement, May 2 - 14 (questionnaire and student focus groups)
• Study Session, Part II: May 30
• Study Session, Part II: June 22 (report with recommendations/budget/timeline)

Common Themes

Bullying/Taunting: Bullying/taunting was a strong theme. There is a sense that these behaviors undermine learning, and it would be helpful if NSD could do more to address it.

Mental health: Mental health was a strong theme. Parents want NSD to help students deal with mental health issues.

Safety: Safety was a strong theme and not limited to the safety-related question. Safety from violence included the presence of officers, the presence of armed security personnel and impact on students, specific safety measures to take (locks/access), and the openness of NSD campuses. One parent said a student was avoiding the bathrooms because of drugs. One student addressed a concern here that there was more to this bullet that was not captured in these notes. There was a concern for the presence of officers and the presence of armed security. However, there was also support expressed by parents as to the presence of officers providing safety for students.  

Discipline: There were three issues here – inequity in discipline, lack of cross-institution consistency, and bias. Bias probably referred to race or gender, but there was one comment about bias against students who had previously been in trouble.

Social Media/Phones: This theme emerged in two ways. One was the potential harm caused by social media. A related concern was the accessibility that phones give students to information that might be harmful. Another issue involved NSD programs using social media which could exclude families without that level of technological access. Another concern was that a teacher not responding by email was really disappointing to a student. This was only a single comment, but I suspect this anecdote is representative of a bigger issue.

School Communication: There were a few concerns that school communication could be streamlined and clearer.

Social Support: This was primarily about students finding their people and receiving support in that way. This was connected to clubs and activities that might enhance that level of social support. I included in this dimension social support from educators and staff.

Identifying Students by Performance: Two different people had the impression that at least one person had identified students explicitly by intelligence and that doing so was harmful.

 

It was noted that students may not feel safe when having to evacuate in the event of an emergency.

Student Focus Group Questions and Methodology:

• Student-led, May 8-15
• Groups represented: General - Bothell HS, BHS Ignite Club, Inglemoor Climate Club, NCHS - General
• Same focus group questions as community meeting (Conversations with the Board)
• Qualitative data reviewed by Dr. Foster and Taskforce facilitators

Dr. Foster presented information regarding qualitative versus quantitative approaches to gathering data. See the slide presentation. Having a mixed-methods approach (using both qualitative and quantitative) provides the best way to measure what we are looking for.

Most qualitative data was from Bothell High School (BHS). There were some from Inglemoor(IHS) and North Creek(NCHS), but more limited. At Inglemoor and North Creek, the absence of the conversation about an SRO model on the school grounds may be significant.

Common themes: Strong support for Officer Ware at BHS. Student perception that NSD is focused on reputation rather than doing the “right” thing. Students appreciated teachers when they get to know them. Educators might not be as responsive as students want them to be on email. However, educators may need to share email expectations and these need to be made clear to the entire school community.

Some comments indicated recognition that “bullying” is somewhat nebulous as a concept. Students want more to be done about being bullied. Students referred to hidden bullying. Hidden bullying suggests that some students bully in ways that avoid outright detection. This is an indication that student groups understand what we were looking for.

Three comments about surveys not being anonymous. We want to ensure that when we say anonymous really means anonymous. We need to care for those who provide us feedback and nurture an environment where we can get honest feedback.

Student Wellness and Safety survey was anonymous. The survey did not solicit name, IP port, email, and so forth. The only way to identify a student would be an uncommon instance where the demographics could be used to identify a single person.

Questionnaire Methodology

Construction:

• Investigated two areas of interest/follow up to Panorama Survey
  • School culture (learning, social-emotional, and safety)
  • Bullying and Disrespect

Distribution:

• Shared with school leaders on Friday, May 5
• Distributed via Connections to students, staff, and families on Monday, May 8
• Reminder direct email on May 9
• Reminder direct email on May 12

There were approximately 1,500 responses.

Ratings on any of the three school climate measures (Learning, SE Growth, Safety) predicted the other two measures strongly for both student and parent sub-populations. This indicates that the results are to some degree informed by a halo effect where students and parents tend to be satisfied or less satisfied.

Student perceptions of school climate as a function of high school: Generally, students view their schools pretty similarly. Students only reported statistically significant differences in terms of school safety with ratings occurring in the following order (most positive ratings first): North Creek, Bothell, Inglemoor, and Woodinville. Middle school students reported positive perceptions of school climate with room for growth across learning, SE growth, and safety.

Do students view bullying differently than they view disrespectful behavior? Disrespectful behavior was identified as occurring more frequently than bullying behavior. Furthermore, students perceive these behaviors occurring more commonly than they believe they are receiving them. Participating students do not perceive that they engage in disrespectful or bullying behavior with much frequency. This suggests that students are likely unaware of the times other students perceive their behavior as disrespectful or they disagree with the other students' perceptions. There are many nuances to unpack in the slide regarding the Perception of Bullying and Disrespect.

Predicting perceptions of school safety: Student perceptions of disrespectful and bullying behavior predict negatively students perceptions regarding school climate

Questions/comments about the data: We often hear about students being bullied and this being an issue, however, the data shows that possibly students are only seeing bullying only once every two to three weeks.

Are we missing an opportunity to see why students are worried about violence? There was a correlation between bullying and disrespect. We don’t know the correlation between students not feeling safe and outside threats. We are not asking those questions.

Purpose of the questionnaire was to gather information on all of the subcommittees. Gathering broad data is to support the work of all the committees.

The safety question was put out to the focus groups: It was unclear which of the seven focus group models were, so we did not get an appropriate response. (Response: Not a great question.)

As a parent, I received a survey regarding bullying but I wasn’t able to respond well to the survey because I wanted to elaborate on the nature of the response.

I think Bothell High is showing more concern for safety than the other sites - likely because they are concerned about losing their SRO, not because they are concerned about safety in and of itself.

The other schools do not have an SRO, but the Bothell High School students who responded to the survey did not report dramatically different levels of safety than school generally.

Difference between perceived safety and literal safety.

What stood out for you?

When I was facilitating with the student climate board - 4 showed up - all underclassmen - I asked the question (safety question) and they looked at one another and started talking about locks and fences, etc… What I got from it was that not many know about the different forms of models campus supervision can take and that they can have an opinion about it.

Anything that surprised you?
Surprised that we got so many results online. It seems hard to come back in person to visit about things.

I was surprised that Bothell ranked second in perception of safety because of the discussions about safety that have occurred there.

How can this data inform some of the recommendations moving forward?

1. Bullying and how that is defined
2. Disrespect
3. Both together

Clarify the definitions of both before we can understand our results

Understanding how we define bullying and disrespect before we can analyze it.

Focused on bullying and disrespect, then come back and talk about safety. How are we going to intersect the work of parameter 7?

How are people defining bullying? We are worried about bullying, but we are also worried about other issues.

The questions were too scoped and not broad enough for the purpose of our task force.

It is a little bit jarring to hear people wanting to narrow the focus of this task force rather than keeping our work broad enough to encompass all of the work of the task force.

Moving to Goal 4: Operational Considerations: Comprehensive Safety, Security and Supervision

Goal: Comprehensive safety, security, and supervision supports and services (violence prevention and response)
 

Prioritized Strategies (rank ordered):

• Provide clearly defined campus and student safety approaches responsive to community needs and in compliance with state law.
• Identify and consistently implement alternatives to discipline that support student growth, reduce harm, preserve student dignity, and community connection.
• Define an accountability structure for following District safety procedures, operating standards, and implementing training.
• Develop and implement effective, timely, and informative emergency communications

 

See slides from Goal 4:

In general, students feel safe in their schools (supported by the questionnaire data and SEL survey). We are working to solve a systems gap.

When we call from our schools, we cannot guarantee who will come and provide us with support. Can’t guarantee responding law enforcement has had training on working with youth in a K-12 setting. And, we are calling law enforcement as shown in the recent public records reports.

Campus supervisors are not trained for safety. They have an important role, but they are safety personnel. They are hired by school leaders and responsibilities vary across campuses. No required safety training - as outlined by state law.

Without a common organization to manage law enforcement response, we have to get data from multiple jurisdictions  to get data asked about. We can’t actually answer questions about who is getting referred to law enforcement.

Question: I would like to know more about the racial and equity lens and how that fits with the models we are looking at. Response: It is a hard question to answer right now - because we don’t have the ability to track data in this way. We get public records, and then have to ask for case information for each incident - connect to student ID and analyze. If there is an expansion of the SRO program, we would need to design the system so we can  track and make course corrections if needed. This should be a recommendation.

What is missing? What do we need to look at?

Question: Bear Creek Campus: Where do we fall in this picture? Our campus has high school students and elementary. Response: Community Resource Officer is the closest to a K-12 model.

Question: Why do we focus just on High School Safety? What in this helps protect elementary students? Response: We have started where we are at. This is why the Community Resource Officer position is interesting. It is K-12, but likely expensive - as many as 8 officers. We would need to make sure the folks who show up at an elementary school have been trained.

Comment: City of Kenmore and City of Woodinville: Officer reporting to Bear Creek Campus could from South King County. These individuals may not be as familiar with our campuses.

Facilitator comment: Relationships really matter in this work. Knowing who our staff and students are working with in this work matters.

Task Force Request: Need to strengthen our K-12 focus in some of our models. Requested success criteria.

Question: What is the impact these models may have on students receiving special education services as well as students diagnosed with neurodiversity. Response: This is where having an agreement with the responsive agency is important. Accountability, including training. We know we need to work to preserve the dignity of our students during all responses.

Comment: Important for the person serving in these roles to know the students. They also would know what is important for specific students and could learn to respond well.

In our last 10 minutes, of the 8 models, which one or two best satisfies the values we have laid out and the commitments we have made? Task Force member suggested an alternative approach to narrowing the list - approved: Are there models we can get rid of because we don’t think they are viable? Let’s hear from the students first.

• Model 6, I would get rid of. The response time would not be ideal. Also lack of training because represents all campus supervisors. Note: this is model 1 at three of our comprehensive schools right now.
•  Keep Model 4, depending on what the schools want, this may be good for all.
• Model 2: There is no consistency between the agencies - will be challenging. The communication could be an issue. We should consider what each school needs. Note: this refers back to one of the value statements early in the presentation.
• Balance consistency - but allow for local control (keep model 4)
  • District SRO program managed by Bothell and either a campus supervisor (who does NOT need to take the training) OR a campus safety supervisor (who does need to take the training).
• Get rid of the status quo model #1. Note: same reasons for rejecting model 6.
• We need to recommend in our subcommittee as to who should make the call if we land on local control (model 4)
• Must have a K-12 component. Note: this is requested success criteria from the full Task Force.
• Could we combine the community resource officer model and the local determination model? Note: some concern about spreading HS SROs too thin. Dilution of model at high school. Might consider different HS model than K-8 or schools with K-12.

Meeting adjourned at 7:34 p.m.