College & Career Readiness Task Force (2015-17)

The College and Career Readiness Task Force will study, analyze and make recommendations regarding options for grades 9-12.

Task Force updates

September 7, 2017 - Seven-period high school schedule

For the past two years, the College and Career Readiness Task force reviewed the impacts of the state 24-credit graduation requirement for high school students in the Class of 2019 and beyond. Our purpose, “why” we are doing this, is to provide more opportunity, access, and equity for every student. Currently, our high schools have a 6-period schedule. In a 6-period schedule, students can earn 6 credits per year for a total of 24 credits over 4 years. That doesn’t leave much flexibility in a student’s schedule for taking courses to explore interests or passions. In a 7-period schedule, students can earn 7 credits per year, for a total of 28 credits over 4 years. That’s 4 more opportunities for taking classes of interest to the student.

The Task force reviewed several scheduling options and models, including: 4x4, 4x8, trimester, and 7-period schedule. All with the aim of increasing flexibility for every student. In April 2017, having taken staff, student, and parent survey feedback into consideration, the Task force recommended adding time to the high school day to create a seventh period. Any change would not take place any earlier than the 2018-19 school year.

We believe a 7^th period high school schedule will provide:

• More opportunity to explore through elective courses
• More opportunity to focus through elective courses
• More opportunity for credit retrieval
• More options and fewer conflicts – for example, the ability to take 4 years of band/orchestra and World language
• More opportunity for intervention and support
• More opportunity for access to rigorous coursework (AP, College in the High School, CTE Dual Credit, CTE)
• More opportunity to prepare for college, career, future.

This school year, 2017-18, district and high school administrators are working together to plan for the implementation of a 7-period high school schedule. Any change would not take place any earlier than the 2018-19 school year. Throughout the year, you will hear more about our progress along the way.

August 25, 2017

For the past two years, the College and Career Readiness Task Force has been studying the impacts of the new state 24-credit graduation requirements and the potential for a seven-period day for grades 9-12 and other creative ways to expand options for students in grades 9-12. In April 2017, the Task force recommended adding time to the high school day to create a seventh period in each of our high schools. This change would not take place any earlier than the 2018-19 school year. So, for the 2017-18 school year, high schools continue with six periods.

This Task Force has also been studying school start times. The research literature describes the benefits of a later start time for high school students, including improvements in memory and learning, mental health and well-being, and overall academic achievement. In June 2017, we surveyed K-12 staff, parents, and high school students to gather feedback on four start/dismissal time options currently under consideration. The survey feedback is currently being analyzed for themes and patterns.

In September 2017, the School Start Time Advisory will convene and review the results of the June survey and determine additional information needed to make a recommendation for any change to current school start and dismissal times. Any proposed school start changes would not take place any earlier than 2018-19.

The School Start Time Advisory is made up of administrators, teachers, and parents and includes some members who also served on the College & Career Readiness Task Force.

April 13, 2017

At this meeting, the task force worked toward a recommendation of a preferred high school schedule. The group continued its review of survey results and analysis begun at the March meeting. They discussed any additional evidence supporting the three options under consideration in the results and analysis.

Matt Manobianco asked the task force to consider in small groups if the benefits of options 1 or 2, both of which involve adding a seventh period, outweigh the benefits of option 3, a trimester schedule. The full task force then discussed that question.

Following the discussion, Matt took a preliminary vote on adding a seventh period versus a trimester system. The task force came to near consensus in support of recommending the addition of one more period to the high school day.

Given support for an additional period, the next discussion concerned how many minutes should be added to the high school day. The group discussed benefits for the addition of 15 minutes or of 25 minutes.

A vote following this discussion reflected a preference for recommending the addition of 25 minutes to the school day. Matt noted that the exact number could change as the group works through implementation planning.

Implementation planning: next steps
Changing to a seven-period day in high school would require significant planning to ensure success. The earliest a change could take place would be the 2018-19 school year. Among the items the task force discussed regarding implementation were:

• Establish the number of credits required for graduation
• Review established district process for developing and adding courses per state guidelines
• Provide support and resources for planning and development of new elective courses
• Provide professional learning to support effective instructional strategies for 7 period schedules
• Develop communication strategy to ensure all those involved have the information they need

Meeting materials

• April 13, 2017 Task Force Meeting Presentation
• School Start Times - parent and student start time survey results
• School Start Times - staff open-ended survey results
• School Start Times - parent open-ended survey results

March 30, 2017

Task force members spent the meeting doing an initial analysis and discussion of survey results concerning three different schedule options. At this meeting, the group concentrated on the staff survey results. There were high levels of participation in the survey by staff.

High school participants prioritized the two options that added a 7th period to the high school day. The difference between preferences for adding 15 minutes or 25 minutes with the 7th period option was small. High school staff did not show interest in moving to a trimester schedule.

The group also reviewed comments from staff members as well as an analysis that developed themes from the comments on each option.

Task force members looked for data that would support a recommendation for each option. The task force broke up into small groups to share their data to support each option. The groups found similar themes for both options involving the addition of a seventh period. They included:

• 1st choice of high school staff
• Less impactful as a change
• More class options with 7 periods
• Simple transition re curriculum
• More course continuity possible than a trimester model

Data supporting the trimester option included:

• Less stress for students with 5 courses.
• Mimics college model

The task force also reviewed survey data concerning start time options for each of the three schedule possibilities.

• March 30, 2017 Task Force Meeting Presentation

January 26, 2017

Matt Manobianco reviewed the process and timeline going forward, which has been revised. The discussion now involves both schedule and start times. Some options would involve a change in the length of the high school day. Extending the high school day and shifting it to a later start time would both affect bus transportation and school start times for all three levels.

Matt reviewed the options with the committee. Three of those options are not viable and are no longer under consideration. The issues with these three options include high cost, a need to hire more bus drivers and/or to eliminate homeroom.

The task force discussed the pros and cons of the viable options in small groups. Task force members ranked the five options in order of preference. This rank ordering will help determine which options are presented to parents and community members for feedback.

• January 26, 2017 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• January 26, 2017 Task Force Meeting Presentation
• Options Evaluated - Pros and Cons
• Options Evaluated for Viability

December 8, 2016

The task force reviewed the Hanover Research analysis of the online survey. Some of the feedback items on the trimesters were also concerns with other models. The number of instructional hours and lack of continuity between semesters are two interests that came through clearly in the listening sessions that apply to more than one model.

The task force broke up into small groups to discuss the interests that came through in the Hanover report.

Process and Timeline Moving Forward

Matt Manobianco handed out and reviewed a copy of the process and timeline, with a flowchart.

The task force goal for this meeting is to discuss and prioritize viable schedule options. District staff members will then research the prioritized options for transportation viability, impact on start times, and other operations.

At the January meeting, the task force will discuss and identify three schedule options. Students and parents will be asked for input on the three options. In early February, task force members will present the three options to all high school staff in staff meetings. Staff will prioritize the three options through a survey. On Feb. 23, the task force will decide on a recommendation.

Making options more viable

Schedule models should be viable and based on similar criteria. Several changes have been made to the models to make them more viable.

The current range for credit hours in our high schools is 143-150. To meet constituent interests, keep courses to at least 130 hours, about a 10% reduction.

Built in time for homeroom/tutorial. Current range is 105-140 (except TESLA - 0) minutes. Use 100 min./week for discussion purposes.

Sustainable budget cost – not to exceed $7 million.

Matt provided a copy of option refinement and prioritization with all the original options showing where they are outside of the parameters and would have to be adjusted. A second sheet shows how, with adjustments, seven different schedule options could meet the criteria. The group asked questions about the specifics of these adjusted options.

Discuss & prioritize viable options

Task force members reviewed and reflected on the options, then engaged in discussions with others at their table using the rubric. Tables shared out with the larger group. Task force members prioritized the options using an online survey.

• December 8, 2016 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• December 8, 2016 Task Force Meeting Presentation
• Feedback from Community Meetings and Online Survey
• Option Refinement & Prioritization - adjusted for viability
• Prioritization Form for Viable Options
• High School Trimester Schedule Survey Analysis
• College & Career Readiness Task Force Timeline and Next Steps

November 10, 2016
Report on community meetings

Task force members who attended one or more of the four community meetings reported on what they heard. The group identified the interests behind those statements.

Interests included:

• More options for students
• Continuity of coursework across the year
• Ability to continue with music, languages
• Staying on top of homework
• Being able to continue the philosophy/pedagogy of specific programs
• More specificity, details on the model
• Less complexity, more simplicity
• Preparation for spring testing
• Other ways to meet credits
• Sufficient time to learn the content
• Making sure the value of the new schedule is enough to warrant change
• Practical, feasible model
• Making sure kids can get the classes they want when they need/want.
• Providing balance for students
• Desire for acceleration and AP classes
• Interoperability with other programs (community colleges/WANIC)
• Smooth transition from one schedule to another
• Keeping students in school through four years
• Ensuring credits work for sports eligibility purposes
• Ensuring credits are applicable for college application process
• Support for alternative programs for graduation
• Opportunities for kids to find their passions
• Ability to try/explore new interests
• Fewer classes at a time to reduce burnout/overload
• Modelling a college schedule
• Reduction in anxiety
• Appropriate time for attention span
• Ensure parent feedback from all demographics

Hanover Research is analyzing the survey results. Over 2000 individuals took the survey. They are analyzing themes/comments. Their report will be presented at the December meeting.

The process moving forward will be to identify constituent common interests and develop a rubric of common interests across constituent groups. That rubric will be applied to evaluate schedule options. The task force will revisit all variations so far, as well as any others.

The goal is to develop a schedule option that has a high degree of likelihood of being supported by all constituent groups because the option incorporates the common interests across all constituent groups.

• November 10, 2016 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• November 10, 2016 Task Force Meeting Presentation

October 13, 2016

The task force revisited the high school scheduling model discussion. Since June, high school principals have been learning more, consulting with peers around the state who use these models. These models include 4x4, 4x8, and trimester. In reviewing all three models against the task force’s rubric, the trimester model was proposed as one which seems to best meet our Task Force interests, while addressing a number of concerns raised about the other two schedule models.

Principals presented why they are drawn to the model of five classes per trimester. Among the aspects of the trimester schedule:

• The number of classes a student takes at one time and amount of time they meet each week
• More credit retrieval opportunities
• More opportunities to earn credits
• Opportunities for students to take more time in a subject if needed
• Opportunity for more electives/more challenge

Three possible variations of a trimester model were presented. Task force members asked the principals a number of questions, learning more about this model. Tables held discussions on how the trimester schedule would help reach the task force’s interests.

Using their decision making model, the task force members reached consensus that they were ready for this trimester proposal to go to students, staff, and community for feedback.

• October 13, 2016 Task Force Agenda
• October 13, 2016 Task Force Presentation
• Rubric for High School Schedule Options

September 22, 2016

Task Force Chair Matt Manobianco shared a timeline of the work and activities for 2016-17. Stakeholder engagement via Community Information meetings in the high schools will take place in October. High school principals are working now to analyze the information/recommendations from the task force on potential schedules.

The task force reviewed the Hanover Report concerning changes in high school start times.

Each table discussed the benefits and challenges of changing school start times. They also developed shared interests concerning a change in start time.

Some of the Interests expressed included:

• Improving health of students,
• Enhancing engagement in learning,
• Engaging community to mitigate any potential impacts,
• Improving student academic performance;
• Ensuring community buy-in;
• Creating opportunities for increased performance

Matt reviewed current and planned starting times in neighboring districts as well as the current start times in Lake Washington high schools. (See the PowerPoint for this meeting for the list.)

Janene Fogard provided the task force the transportation implications of any change in start time. The district has a tiered system of transportation: buses do more than one run. Changes in start times at one level such as high school have implications for the transportation and thus start times for the other levels.

• September 22, 2016 Task Force Agenda
• September 22, 2016 Task Force Presentation
• Benchmarking High School Start Times

June 1, 2016

Task Force Chair Matt Manobianco summarized the work the committee has done over the last year. He reviewed the task force’s purpose as well as the seven parameters for the task force’s options/recommendations.

Discussion of Decision Question #1: How many credits?
Three scheduling options were presented to the community.

• Option 1: same length of school day, expand options for 0 and/or 7 period credits, transportation provided. Six 50-minute classes each day
• Option 2: four 90-minute classes each day and 4 credits per semester. Less instructional hours per credit. Four different 90-minute classes in the second semester.
• Option 3: eight 90-minute classes on alternating days across the year. Still 8 credits/year.

The task force discussed how many credit opportunities kids should have. The majority was interested in 32 opportunities to earn credit over four years. That also agrees with the high school principals, who all agreed that students should have more than 24 credit opportunities. Five of the 7 said students should have 32 opportunities to earn credit.

Listening Session Report: Advice for Task Force
The group summarized individually what they got out of the listening session information presented in the Hanover Report. That report analyzed the data collected in community listening sessions.

Task Force Advice to High School Principals – Schedule Options
A small group of high school principals will meet in August to develop a straw design. Each person provided information on what they got out of the report in terms of advice for principals. Task force members shared their advice to principals.

• June 1, 2016 Task Force Agenda
• June 1, 2016 Task Force Presentation
• Benchmarking High School Start Times

May 18, 2016

Task Force members reviewed the information on the Listening Session Analysis Report. Based on the report, what “on-track” indicators did participants mention that the task force has missed or have not emphasized as much?

• Successful transition from middle school
• Counselors providing support for tracking grad requirements
• Relationships – teacher/students
• Communication to parents (monitoring student progress, engaging family and community)
• Adult involvement
• Preparing students for the culture of college (mentally preparing students)

The task force also reviewed the feedback on the three scheduling options presented, including benefits and challenges for each option.

Listening Session Analysis Report: Section 1 – On-Track Indicators
Based on the report, what “on-track” indicators did participants mention that we have either missed or have not emphasized as much?

• Successful transition from middle school
• Counselors providing support for tracking grad requirements
• Relationships – teacher/students
• Communication to parents (monitoring student progress, engaging family and community)
• Adult involvement
• Preparing students for the culture of college (mentally preparing students)

Listening Session Analysis Report: Section 2 – Scheduling Options
Based on the report, what benefits and challenges did participants perceive for each option?

• May 18, 2016 Task Force Presentation
• Listening Session Analysis - Credit Hour Change

April 13, 2016

Matt provided an update on the listening sessions that have been taking place. Six sessions, two each with students, staff and parents. Students, staff and parents appreciated the opportunity to take part.

Students enumerated a number of things going well at their schools. They showed pride in their schools and what is going on there. Groups were diverse.

Members of the task force reflected on their experience in observing the sessions. No questions were presented by students or staff that were new to the task force. Importance of having teachers in a broad range of subject matter – they all have different concerns Students tried to be representative of people beyond themselves.

During the listening sessions, participants were asked for the benefits and challenges for each of three options. Overall, feedback was there is no single schedule that is perfect: there are pros and cons to each.

Hanover Research will do a more formal analysis of the responses to identify themes, patterns and trends. The report will come back to the task force for May to provide an independent analysis.

The task force did an activity to consider what high school schedules should allow schools to be able to provide. After sorting the items from the groups, six high priority items emerged, that were mentioned by three or more tables. They are:

• Post graduation and/or college and career class options
• Beyond the school day – protection for extracurricular activities
• Adequate time for high quality instruction
• Additional course offerings in interest and passion classes
• Intervention in school day, not just for students who are struggling
• Collaboration and planning time for teachers

The group also discussed the pros and cons of adding a small amount of time to the school day.

An ad hoc subcommittee will meet regarding different scheduling options before the May meeting. An additional meeting, on June 1, was added to the schedule.

• April 13, 2016 Task Force Agenda
• April 13, 2016 Task Force Presentation
• Features of a High School Schedule
• Instructional Hours Pro/Con

March 16, 2016

At the March meeting, Task Force Chair Matt Manobianco reported that listening sessions begin next week to hear from stakeholders – students, staff and parents. At the April meeting, the task force will get that feedback.

In February, the task force began to evaluate and prioritize options for high school schedules. In March, several additional options were reviewed as well. These options are variations to options considered last month. Barbara Posthumus provided the estimated costs for each of these options.

The task force broke into small groups to review the options and discuss pros and cons. Task force members presented their insights back to the group.

Among the questions the task force asked were, which designs make it more likely that students will do something, rather than they can do it? What are the conditions that will help students who need the help do better?

The group reflecting on the potential that the list of interests may not be complete. Additional concerns were being raised, so there may be additional interests.

Each task force member ranked the now 11 options using a computerized survey tool.

Option 8 (4 x 4 block schedule, 8 classes) ranked first among the options. Option 6 (six classes during the main school day, expand 0 and 7th period options) came in second. Option 8A was third (four classes worth one full-year credit per semester). Fourth was 5A (maintain the same length school day but shorten classes to have seven periods/day).

Seven task force members have volunteered to be part of the listening sessions.

• March 16, 2016 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• March 16, 2016 Task Force Meeting Presentation
• College and Career Task Force Costs for Schedule Options
• Rank Options
• Revised Timeline

February 17, 2016

At the February meeting, the interests subcommittee brought back the revised wording on the five interests. The revised interests are:

After a short discussion, the group agreed to the five interests.

The task force brainstormed options in January. Since a number of the options were variations of a basic theme, the discussion centered on eight basic options.

There is an impact on the budget for all but one of the possibilities. If an option with a budget impact is ultimately selected, the funds would have to be found through reprioritizing budget items and not funding something else.

Task Force Chair Matt Manobianco reviewed the eight options. Director of Business Services Barbara Posthumus reviewed the potential costs associated with each option as well as the assumptions underlying those estimates. Costs ranged from $500,000 to $25.6 million. There were discussions of ways to lower the costs for some options.

Task Force members were asked to rank the eight options in priority order to get a general sense of the group’s thoughts. There were quite a few questions about the different options raised by the group. Answers will be provided at the next meeting.

Task Force Chair Matt Manobianco reviewed the process for listening sessions with various constituent groups – students, staff, and parents – which will occur in the week of March 21st. Task Force members were asked to volunteer to participate as listeners and recorders in these sessions.

• February 17, 2016 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• February 17, 2016 Task Force Meeting Presentation
• Global Options
• Impact of Later Start Time

There was general agreement with the interests. There was some clarifying discussion of the fourth interest, including a discussion of equitable access and what that means. There was some discussion about the exact wording of the interests and whether they would be understood as written. Six task force members volunteered to meet as a subgroup to refine the wording of the interests and will bring them back to the next meeting.

The group moved on to generating options to provide students with the ability to earn at least 24 credits. Small groups brainstormed possible options and reported them back to the larger task force. The goal was to generate many options without passing judgment on them. The technical support team will confirm the viability of various options before the February meeting and the task force will have further work to determine their recommendation of specific options.

Options included:

The task force will return to evaluate options once the technical team has determined their viability.

The community survey has been delayed until after focus groups are held. Those focus groups will provide initial feedback and allow the task force to refine its ideas before going out to the community for surveys. The Task Force will still work to develop recommendations around the 24 credits by June.

• January 28, 2016 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• January 28, 2016 Task Force Meeting Presentation
• Task Force Timeline
• APA School Start Times
• Benchmarking High School Start Times

December 9, 2015
Task Force Reviews, Analyzes High School Schedule Examples

At the start of the December 9 meeting, task force chair Matt Manobianco reviewed the work to date as well as the work the task force has before it. The focus to date has been the impacts of the new 24 credit graduation requirement, which goes into effect for this year’s ninth grade students. His goal is that by April, the task force will make a recommendation for options concerning the 24-credit requirement, including school schedules. In May, the task force will shift its focus to the school start time issue.

• December 9, 2015 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• December 9, 2015 Task Force Meeting Presentation
• Meeting Notes
• Research Summary
• Innovative Approaches for High School Schedules

November 4, 2015
Task Force reviews data on zero, seventh periods in LWSD schools; schedules in other districts

On November 4, the task force reviewed the course offerings in 0 and 7th period in district high schools that have been provided in first semester last year and this year by subject and period. The number of students enrolled in these courses was provided by school. They also heard from principals on their experiences of offering 0 and 7th period classes.

The task force also reviewed a research document on High School Scheduling models. The research looked at high school schedules nationally, where at least 24 credits are required for graduation.

Small groups reviewed and discussed a research summary document, which covered the research articles the task force has reviewed to date.
 

• November 4, 2015 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• Meeting Notes
• LWSD and Local District High School Scheduling Models
• College and Career Readiness Research Summary
• Benchmarking High School Scheduling Models - Summary Chart
• Benchmarking High School Scheduling Practice - LWSD

October 7, 2015
College & Career Readiness Task Force reviews current schedules

On October 7, the Task Force learned more about the state and district instructional hours requirements. The state requires 180 days of instruction for all grades. It requires 1000 hours of instruction for grades K-8 and 1080 hours for 9-12, or the district can use a K-12 average of 1027. Lake Washington School District has chosen to use the 1027 hours average across all grades. That allows the district to keep all schools on the same calendar and same length school day.

Principals in LWSD high schools went through their school’s schedule. Task Force members learned the variety of schedules that high schools currently use.

• October 7, 2015 Task Force Meeting Agenda
• October 7, 2015 Task Force Meeting PowerPoint
• Meeting Notes
• School District Schedules 2015-16
• State and District Instructional Hours Requirements

June 3, 2015

College & Career Readiness Task Force reviews tasks, interests

On June 3, the task force broke up into smaller groups to answer these two questions -

• What is the task force trying to accomplish?
• What are the questions we are trying to answer?

The group continued its work to uncover the underlying interests the task force shares with regard to this work. They reviewed a list of group interests that was developed at the April 22. Small groups reviewed whether these were the right interests to help with the group’s work. The groups shared which interests should be included going forward and discussed them.

Facilitator Matt Manobianco provided the information asked for at the last meeting concerning Massachusetts schools with an extended school day. In the fall, principals will share what they are doing around credit retrieval.

• June 3, 2015 Meeting Minutes

May 14, 2015
College & Career Readiness Task Force holds third meeting

Research analysisThe task force continued to study and analyze research around extending the school day during its May 14 meeting. Small groups captured key ideas from the first article, “Extending the School Day or School Year.”*

7-period day survey results
The group reviewed the results of a survey of parents and students that was conducted in December, 2013, concerning the possibility of adding a seventh period to the high school day.

• 59% of student respondents show a low to no level of interest in a 7th period
• 71% of student respondents chose to not lengthen the school day, but to shorten periods instead to create a seven period day
• 54 % of parent respondents vs. 41% of student respondents are interested in 7th period

Meeting materials:

• May 14, 2015 Task Force meeting minutes
• May 14, 2015 Task Force meeting presentation
• Seventh Period Day Survey Report

* Patall, E., Cooper, H., and Allen, A.B. (2010). Extending the School Day or School Year: A Systematic Review of Research (1985-2009). Review of Educational Research, Vol. 80, No. 3, pp. 401-436. DOI: 10.3102/0034654310377086.

April 22, 2015
College & Career Readiness Task Force holds second meeting

On April 22, task force members reviewed the interests they had each submitted at the end of the last meeting. Associate Superintendent and Task Force Chair Matt Manobianco distributed the list of interests, divided into student-focused, quality instructional time, and high quality outcomes. The group went through an exercise to narrow down the list of interests.

Manobianco also asked the group to review the first research article* and to pull out specific significant ideas that resonated with them. Each table discussed the first article, focusing on the significant ideas found. The group shared “wonders” they had after discussing the article.

• April 22, 2015 Task Force Meeting Notes
• April 22, 2015 Task Force Meeting Presentation

* Patall, E., Cooper, H., and Allen, A.B. (2010). Extending the School Day or School Year: A Systematic Review of Research (1985-2009). Review of Educational Research, Vol. 80, No. 3, pp. 401-436. DOI: 10.3102/0034654310377086.

March 25, 2015
College and Career Readiness Task Force

Matt Manobianco, associate superintendent, began with introductions. He also reviewed the agenda. Matt presented a set of ground rules for the task force to use in their work. Task force members discussed why they wanted to serve on the group. The technical advisory team introduced themselves and their role on the task force.

Task Force Purpose
Matt reviewed the task force purpose. The task force will study, analyze and make recommendations regarding impacts of the new state 24-credit requirement and the potential for a seven period day for grades 9-12 or other creative ways to expand options for 9-12; study and analyze school schedule and start time implications.

Process and Timeline
Matt reviewed the Task Force process over the next three school years, including what steps of the process will be accomplished each year. This year, the task force will study and analyze research. There will be opportunities for input from the community all along the way. Next year, this work will continue and the task force will begin to work on options and get feedback. The goal is to develop recommendations by January 2017.

Parameters / Options
The committee’s recommendations must meet a set of parameters that includes meeting the minimum basic education requirements for instructional hours/year; increases instructional time/flexibility within the 24-credit College and Career Ready Framework and ensures that students earn credits needed to graduate on time.

Matt provided the information on the legislative change in the minimum instructional program and the 24-credit requirement. The group viewed the district’s video on the graduation requirements for the class of 2019. The task force will work on the issue of flexibility for students who must meet the 24-credit requirement.

• March 25, 2015 Meeting Minutes
• College and Career Readiness Task Force Process
• College and Career Readiness Task Force Presentation

January 23, 2015
Lake Washington School District forms College and Career Readiness Task Force

Lake Washington School District is convening a representative College and Career Readiness Task Force. The task force will include staff and parent members. The overall purpose of the task force is to study, analyze, and make recommendations regarding impacts of the new state 24-credit requirements and the potential for a seven-period day or other ways to expand options for grades 9-12. Additionally the task force will study and analyze school schedule and start time implications.

Specifically, the task force will:

• Review the impacts of the new state 24-credit graduation requirement policies that start with the Class of 2019 and beyond
• Analyze the pros and cons for a seven-period day by researching districts that have implemented a seven-period day
• Review and analyze other ways to expand options for grades 9-12
• Study and analyze school schedule and start time implications
• Conduct community engagement processes to inform the group’s work and to ensure an understanding of the larger community’s desires and priorities
• Develop options, solicit feedback, and refine options
• Develop recommendations

The goal is to have wide representation on the task force. The district seeks staff and parents to apply to serve on the task force. If you are interested in helping with this important effort, please click on the application link and fill in the information requested. Task Force members must be willing to commit to attend monthly meetings during the school year starting in February 2015 and continuing through January 2017. These meetings will occur after school and in the early evenings.

You will be asked to provide a brief statement describing your interest in serving on the College and Career Readiness Task Force, as well as any relevant skills, experiences or unique perspectives that you would bring to the task force. The selection of task force members will be based on achieving representation of a wide range of experiences, perspectives, and geographic location. Statements of interest provided with the task force application along with the following candidate criteria will be used as we considered selection of task force members:

• Provides representation across the district
• Experience considering complex issues and perspectives
• Solution-seeking
• Demonstrated ability to compromise, innovate, and collaborate
• Demonstrated interest in the Lake Washington School District
• Familiarity with group processes
• Ability to commit the requisite time to review and comment on planning documents and participate in meetings

The application deadline was February 20, 2015.