Vermont Legislature SmartTranscripts:

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Welcome to House Education on February 10. We are discussing proposed language from the AOE addressing chronic absenteeism. For the committee, just want a little update on our miscellaneous Ed bill, which is evolving in different ways. What was in it is now being pulled out for a couple of reasons. Representative Long's bill about later in Act 173, since it has money attached to it, they to tie the miscellaneous ed bill down with that, so that'll be pulled out and just dealt separately. And chronic absenteeism is now living at Vidyville because it seemed kind of big to put into a miscellaneous Ed bill. So that's why you see different things assigned to it. We had testimony last week, week before from AOE concerning this. We had them come in again with follow-up questions and now it's time to get some reaction from the field. And so with that, we have the Vermont Principal Association in this afternoon. And Jay, the floor is yours. Thank you for coming.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Well, my pleasure. Thank you. And we do agree that it should be a separate bill. It's nothing that merits that. So for the record, Jay Nichols, Senior Executive Director of the Vermont Principals Association. The VPA agrees with the Agency of Education that chronic absenteeism is an issue nationally and in the state. We also agree that the tools we have used need to be updated, including statute of twenty sixteen. In Vermont, as long as I can remember, we've had more of a legal context where we've approached this with truancy as a superintendent, different counties would try to tackle the wrong way. I brought the Frank County superintendents together. We came up with a rule about on X day of being absent, you'd have a letter, on the tenth day, be another letter, the twentieth day, and then the state's attorney would get involved and trying to have a statewide response makes sense to us. Five points that we wanted to talk about here related to early intervention and prevention approach, which we believe is the way to go. Researchers consistently find chronic absenteeism strongly linked to lower standardized test scores and learning loss. Obviously, you can't show a correlation there, but certainly causation. There's a reduced likelihood of grade level reading proficiency in early grades that's shown nationally as well as in Vermont. There's increased risk of long term negative outcomes like dropout in economic inactivity in adulthood. So principals can share examples of students who struggle with issues of absenteeism that lead to behavior problems. This is pretty consistent. All of this is connected. Students who are at school regularly and participating in the fabric of the school and involved in programs and after school programs and school on a daily basis are much more likely to be successful. And they're a lot less likely to be regularly absent regardless of the reason. So absenteeism hurts no matter what. So whatever we can do to have kids be in school, we should be looking to do. It's particularly important for students of low income backgrounds, historically marginalized groups and disadvantaged communities. They tend to have a higher chronic absentee rates, suggesting that absenteeism exasperates longstanding educational inequities. For example, kids that are struggling with issues of homelessness or housing insecurity. There's a huge impact there and those kids tend to be more likely to be absent. Early grades, especially kindergarten, often show the highest chronic absence, underscoring the importance of early intervention. I should mention that a number of states, I think it's 20, it might be 21 or 22, require kindergarten for students and families. I know we don't do that in Vermont. I personally think we should be giving that some consideration. The earlier we have students in the system, the sooner we can provide necessary support for them. It's much harder to improve attendance patterns for a middle school student or a high school student than it is for an early child student. So ultimately early intervention, especially in elementary grades, we believe shows better results than waiting until late. We would expect that chronic absenteeism would be reducing since the end of the pandemic. And I think the AOE spoke to this a little bit that it is reducing some since the pandemic. Statistically, we're seeing that trend across the nation. However, all of the research that we've looked at so far has shown that chronic absenteeism nationally and in Vermont is still higher than it was prior to the pandemic. So it's certainly a problem that we should be looking at trying to tackle. Additionally, we've seen some data, I actually testified in Senate Judiciary the other day about this, that indicates in places in which there have been major chaotic immigration and customs enforcement actions that those communities are really struggling. Talk to a person, won't mention the school, but it won't be too hard for you to figure out this weekend, where they have some kids that are kind of afraid to leave basketball practice because they walk home and they're worried about being picked up. And whether we think that would happen or not, it has happened in other places and our kids are concerned about it. And they're seeing some of these kids not coming to school or parents choosing at the younger grades just to keep the kids home and kids at the older grade, going to school with a bunch of other kids, but not staying around for after school program because they're afraid to walk at home by themselves at 08:00 at night. So that is a legitimate concern. So, again, chronic absurdism is a complex persistent issue. We think that current research talks about family engagement, early intervention, whole family support systems. We think those are the most highly evidence methods for trying to improve the issue. We think strong proactive communication between schools and families, positive outreach rather than punitive is one of the most effective strategies. I tried to find research on this from two years ago and I couldn't find it. I don't know where I put it, but there was research about texting and schools actually texting parents and kids that were being absent a lot. And just that alone by sending them a message, text messages, Hey, we missed you yesterday. Really wanna see you in school tomorrow, Freddie. That right there reduced it by itself by like 10%. So just trying to say, We miss you, we want you here, makes a difference.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: Are we taking questions at the end

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: or fast?

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: For me, it never matters.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Go ahead.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: In that idea that you're talking about right there, I'm just wondering, do you think that that rubs up against the law that we passed last year with not using texts for like practices and both.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Great question. I it's before school, it's at night. It is a text. Yeah.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: But it covered texting as well. Could use it.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: It's one of the reasons when we testify, we said be careful about going overboard. We want to be able to communicate to our kids. Yeah. Just a general message from the classroom teacher saying, you know, Leanne really missed having you in class yesterday. Or if you're a kid to Leanne's parents, oh, we really miss having Leanne yesterday. The research seems to show that that does make I a

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: totally believe you and understand that concept. It seems like we said in that law, right? There was a part about needing to have records and use specific apps communicate. And maybe it's different if we're communicating with parents. I just was curious of opinion if that seems I like

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: think we want to be able to communicate with parents any way that we can. Again,

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: there's no police out there policing our policy. It's about using common sense.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: And then, so I gave you a couple of key themes from the research. So chronic absenteeism remains higher. The new normal tennis crisis needs sustained attention. Causes are multilayered. I gave examples of health engagements, systems, external shock. And when I say external shock, I mean things like situation with ICE and those types of things. So solutions must be holistic, not only punitive or administrative. I grew up in the punitive system. I was the principal in the school where the mother went all the way to the Supreme Court. Now I just got there and they weren't sending their kid to school and all the to the Supreme Court and the parent was exonerated. She had a baby, she was nursing the baby in jail. It was a heck of a mess. I was a principal at school the next year. So I walked right into a landmine as a principal addressing this issue. And it was all punitive. It was not really the positive outreach type things as schools are trying to do a lot more now. And I do there's, I do think you have to have a stick, but I think we've got to use the carrot a lot more. Family engagement, early interventions, I mentioned that already, and schools should prioritize those strong partnerships and then programs addressing students' basic needs, improve attendance. We know that research is clear. That's why community schools model works. So we need wraparound services for families. And that means we need to have partnership with agency human services, mental health providers. We need to make sure that kids' basic needs, we've all probably heard of Maslow, We've got take care of their basic needs before they can be functional in school. I'm so worried about when I'm going to sleep at night or getting the next meal, it's hard for the school to be a priority for me. In terms of the proposed bill, we have one area of change that we are concerned about that is under the area of suspension or expulsion of students. Section E is proposed language that says, a public or an approved independent school shall provide access to alternative education such as tutoring, instructional materials, and assignments to a student during any period of suspension of three or more days, we would respectfully request that the word shall be replaced with may. We are very concerned about unfunded mandates always. Schools often do not have the resources to really provide alternative education tutoring. On a drop in call with elementary principals this week and high school principals last week, we've brought up this language and people were like, parents are gonna come to us and say we have to provide tutoring. Can't even get substitute teachers. How are we gonna provide tutoring? What if our teachers refuse to do tutoring outside of school? What if the kid's so violent that we can't even tutor the kid in the local library? These are real issues that schools come up with. So they would really request that shall be replaced with may. A lot of schools already provide work and stuff like that, but we want to be clear. The real learning, the magic in the classroom happens when Leanne and Erin and used to be Beth are in the classroom working directly with kids. That can't be replaced with a worksheet or some module like that has to be that actual relationship in person. So we would ask you to give that some thought. When students are suspended out of school, it's almost always for a safety reason. Yeah. Occasionally, it's a policy reason. We've tried hard to BPA. I think BSA and BSPA have to get rid of stupid policies. We used to have a policy across the state, if you guys remember, where if you were caught smoking, it was an automatic five day suspension with no other consequence. And so if you remember that was the situation at Mount Abe, like 100 kids put up cigarettes, they could go deer hunting for the whole week. So we've tried to get rid of policies like that. Think that, yeah, they're pretty smart. I think we're in pretty good shape overall policy, but that's something we would ask you to take a look at. And that's my prepared testimony.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: Okay, thank you.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Any other questions? Thank you. Well, I was gonna ask, what particular to the bill do you have concerns with? And is there anything here that you would consider to be an unfunded mandate? You sort of answered both. Yeah.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Like the bill. Not, I mean, I was part of the, they brought a big convening, they brought people together. And I don't also agree with the AOE on this. I think they've really done some good work. I think they're headed in the right direction. They work the state's attorney. They hurt the state's attorney's office. Was a real problem for a while where some counties were really aggressive because they had judges and state's attorneys that were aggressive. And again, I put together the group in Franklin County, it's probably twelve to fifteen years ago now. And we met with state's attorney who was there a long time, can't even think of his name right now. Anyway, nice guy. And he said to us in a meeting, five superintendent Grand Isle was with us, five superintendents sitting in a meeting, he said, I cannot bring these to a judge. The judges will not bring these cases. They tell me not to bring these unless it's a CHINS petition. And we actually have an example on a superintendent, that's a kid's a crime or something, some big safety issue. So we had a kid, child that needed to So be in we had a kid broke into the Franklin Memorial Bank. He was a sixth grader, he argued in seventy days. I reported all kinds of stuff. I was the superintendent, principal did everything we could. We went to famous house, kid never would come to school. He finally broke into the bank and got caught by the police. And then the judge did get involved. And as a condition of his not going to juvenile detention center, he had to come to school for a day. And if he got kicked out of school for behavior or whatever, then it went back to the judge and that kid came, obviously, I shouldn't say parents moved to another town, but that kid did come back to school for a week or two before they moved. So I do think you do need some teeth too.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: So when I was on the school board, had to deal with expulsion hearings usually, again, hunting season kids come to school with a gun in their car. And there was always a discussion about providing alternative education during expulsion period. And it seemed like it was the law already. Special ed.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: Special ed.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Okay. So I've got specialized services where I get thirty minutes of extra reading instruction a day, the school district legally has to provide me that. Other than that, if it's an expulsion hearing, they do not have to provide me that. What is suspension or is there? Suspension, same thing. They don't have to provide me anything with suspension unless I'm special ed. Now most schools will, and the kids are gonna come back there and they should. And as a superintendent, would also recommend that they would in certain cases. If a kid was in the building threatening people all the time, and we didn't wanna have that kid be back in the building or expose our staff to that, but we might support an online school or something along those lines. But currently there's no legal obligation to provide at a minimum homework that the student might be missing or? No. Okay.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: It may have been a policy, not a

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: It couldn't be a policy. I think a lot of times superintendents will recommend that, always did, and boards, they wanna see the kids succeed. So we try to buy ways for them. Just so you understand, a suspension works in Vermont expulsion means, we know what expulsion means?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: You're having

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: school forever. No. Until the end of the year, right?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: To the end of the

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: year or ninety days, whichever is great. When we first pass a law, you first pass a law, it said to the end of the school year. And then we had a kid actually attack a teacher and a principal, June. Yeah, it was like June 7 or something. And he had to miss three more days of school and he had come back the next day. So the legislature fixed it then. So now it's ninety days or the end of the school year, whichever is greater with one exception, and that's the gun free school site. And that is three sixty five calendar days. So if a kid brought a gun to school and was actually threatening people, a board could put the kid out of school by federal law for three sixty five days, one county.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: Would that also count? And I know they're not supposed to do this, but it does happen. Would it count if it was like locked in the gun rack of their truck in the parking lot?

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Yes, but under the Gun Free Schools Act, section D says if they didn't intend, the board has flexibility, some language like that. The kid brings a pocket knife. One year I had five kids that brought knives to the tech center because the teacher didn't have enough knives and kids brought them to school to give to the teacher. We ended up having to have a hearing over that. But it was no intent, they were trying to be helpful.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: I'm gonna read. This is definitely beyond just like, you're here, help us answer questions. If a kid is expelled, what does the school or the LEA still responsible for?

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Education.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: Only special education classes. So if the student's not on an IEP, there's no services, no tutoring.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: You can provide them. And we would argue that you should, but you're not required. The next testimony is on the Conlon bill at Senate Ed. You guys haven't been talking about an actual testifier. I agree?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: No, can't edit the video. Gonna throw

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: that in.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Right. Yes, oh yeah, especially on this topic.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: You mentioned the highest grades are among students who are unhoused or homeless, and the part about community schools. Do you that if we move to regional schools or closing small elementary schools in towns, that that will exacerbate chronic absences, especially in those more vulnerable populations?

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I don't know. I think that's a great question. I think a lot has to do with the fabric around the school and the school system. So if you've got a high functioning mental health system, several years before the pandemic, we had a meeting with Agency of Human Services, president was the person who comes out of retirement, takes jobs all the time during the pandemic.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: Oh, Mike Smith.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Mike, Mike. So we had a big meeting with Mike and his group and stuff there. Then the pandemic came out a few weeks later. And we were saying at the time that the North Country area, mental health system, the whole system was like collapsed and they had no hire any employees. And our principal and the superintendent, they were all really worried about getting services to kids. And then we'd be talking to people in Chittenden County and they'd talking about what an unbelievable partnership they had, how well it was going. So I think it does depend on the area. I think the more geographically isolated you are and the less high functioning your local service agency is, the more likely that there is to have those problems. I think it's a legitimate concern.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: So in this proposed bill, one thing that always makes me nervous is we've got a list. A student's absence for all or part of the day may be approved for the following reason, physical or mental illness student, family emergency, quarantine at home, students medical, needs, family observance of religious holidays, legal activities such as a court appearance, driving examinations, college or post secondary program visitations, legal or administrative, proceedings related to the placement of the student by the state, absences due to the transitions of the student's living situation as a result of the student experiencing homelessness, pre enlistment or deployment activities of a student or their parent or legal guardian, or other reasons not specified above with the approval of the secretary. So there's one thing not here that has been discussed, and that is in the case where we have an HHB complaint and sometimes for the student's well-being, I don't know if we could really say mental health, that student may want to not be at school for a couple of days. Do you think that something like that should be added?

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I think you're gonna ever be able to make a list that's gonna cover everything. I think if you leave it up to the superintendent to say that that's fine, and if necessary to get permission from the secretary of education, I think I'd be more comfortable with that.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: This says other reason not specified above with approval of the secretary. But would that mean that every

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I'd rather I'd rather it be permission to superintendent personally.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: That was gonna be my question.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: That's what it is now, basically.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: A little closer.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Yeah. I just think that they're gonna know the situation better and then they don't need to be adding more stuff for the secretary to do. Right. She's got plenty to do.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Oh, when a student turns 18, they can essentially excuse themselves from school. Not essentially, they can't.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: They can't.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Yeah, I'm talking date all the time. Mostly, they wait.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I have a grandson, the same situation. Yeah, once they turn 18, and parents shut off the microphone right now, but if this kid goes to school and says, I don't want to share anything more with my parent, then the parent's gone. Well, they're paper

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: you have to sign, at least at our school.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: There's paperwork you have to sign. The kid can tell you, I'm in charge, and the kid is in charge. Yeah.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: All right, so then I'm gonna- That

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: would be another change.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I've got two recommendations now from you, that Section E that you talked about, and perhaps it was in the list of approved absences at the discretion of the superintendent. I would rather it be the superintendent.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I think that makes more sense.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: It does make more sense. I asked

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: a follow-up question on it. So not approval, I wanna say it's blow down, but principal, you'd want it at the superintendent.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I think it should think it should be at the superintendent. Takes the principal out of the firing line.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: Just wanna make that clear. Would agree Thank with

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: you. Yeah,

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I find myself a little torn about the requirement that the treatment services be provided to a student, not at school, but I'm very sensitive to any unfunded mandates right now. Especially right now.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Those to the greatest extent possible, help fix that?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Or you just leave it May. Frankly, it could be on the AOE when they come up with their model policy, to make that part of the model policy.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: I was gonna say the reason someone would be suspended or expelled is often a safety reason. So they may not be in a place to be willing or able to access the service, but you're requiring you to provide it, whether they can access it or not, is what I have experienced in

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: this That's right.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: Even in May. Yeah, we

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: have cases where people have used the public library and student in question has ripped books off the shelf and the public library said, A kid can't come here anymore.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: And dangerous to the tutor going to their public.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Yeah, we've had tutors attacked. Yeah, that stuff happens. It's not a law, it's not frequent, but I think the May language takes care of that.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Thank you. So I wouldn't mind putting a little bit of closure on this with the committee. If we have legislative council do some tweaking here, everybody comfortable changing the shall to a May? And is everybody comfortable with number 12 in the list for the approval of the LEA superintendent? Yes. We may need to get some counter programming from the AOE on that, but we'll have more city council. And anything else on here that you'd like to bring up otherwise?

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: No, those were, the other one I didn't think it was the second one that you brought up. Wasn't really thinking on that lens. The May show is our biggest concern, but that's a good catch. It should be the super-

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Well, HHP thing has come up a number of times.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: And will continue to.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Yeah, exactly. And then in terms of the punitive angle of this, the goal of this really seems to back away from the fines and court and all of that. And you guys are

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Yeah, I think there's be still a truancy piece to this that will have to be enforced and that the AOE will work with trying to make that stronger, working with law enforcement agencies in the state. And we certainly support that. At some point, there has to be a stick, but wherever possible, we'd like to end. To be honest, if we get a streamline, and now we get calls at our office all the time, but parents that are mad at their principal, so they think the principals work for us. And they'll call and they'll say, My principal sent us this letter, they said, and I'll say, Yep, that's the required letter that was sent because a lawyer wrote it that way. And don't over worry about it. I explained that. If all the letters come out of the process say they're the same, everybody has the same understanding. I just think it's gonna be better for everybody. It's also gonna be better for the family or the kid that moves frequently, which is oftentimes the kids that we're talking about here.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: So just for everybody, I mean, this bill essentially does two things. It tells the AOE to come up with a model policy and then adopts the changes within sort of the truancy law that makes it less punitive and more collaborative. All right. Well, great. Thanks. That was very helpful.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I'll be in centered out if you need me.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: Take care of

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: those pens.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I'm gonna watch it later. I it was not on the agenda. Was gonna say, if I take advantage of it while you're here, you preview your testimony with us if you wanted to.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Your call.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: Is it alright, Ron?

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: We have time to fill, why don't you do that then, Brett, we just update it.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: You want to hear it

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: first. That's just a few of the first. So

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I'm not gonna read for a minute, I'll just talk to it. What we're going to say today in Senate Education, hate to say that, listen here, we're going to thank Representative Conlon for putting out an initial map for people to take a look at it to start from. We're going keep our comments. We're not going to talk at all about the maps. And the reason for that is I saw them the same time that you did. I know you're going to be talking about them. So I'm going to focus instead on the rest of the language in the proposed bill as Beth presented in and as Peter and Beth worked on it. So we're gonna say that we agree with having policies and procedures for delivery instruction be set up by the local school board, knowing that what local school boards is, is gonna be different depending on where you folks end up in May or June or July or whatever. Section 2A, we're gonna talk about how the cleanup language as we move to bigger districts to provide opportunities to designate students where there isn't a local school, public school close by. We're going to support that. Under parameters, we're going to say, you folks need to establish a reasonable means. So we're not taking a stance on that at all in terms of how far away. We are going to mention that the language, fear, fear in current law, we're okay with that language, but we were not if the number three is appropriate or not. We think it depends on how big the districts become.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I'm sorry, kind of rushed through it as I was trying to repeat that again.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: The language three or fewer that's in current law regarding designation. I think you've heard me testify about this in the past. If the districts become very big, we're gonna ask to take a look at that language. And we really believe it should be left with local boards. And my concern is simply if you get a big enough unit and on this side of the unit, there's no schools there serving those grades, but there is a school that's just outside of that unit that's only fifteen minutes away. I don't want those kids driving an hour and a half. So I just think we need to be thoughtful, potentially flexible on that designated three. And I'm not saying your math that doesn't work or not, don't know. Something to think about.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Well, as a preview for the committee, I worked with legislative counsel on some of this language, it actually, without us ever having talked about this, reflects some of that concern. I'll be bringing it to the table later this week.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Great, good, great. Section 2B1 contract, we are 100% in agreement. We absolutely should have a contract that displays the terms and conditions when a child is sent from a school that's responsible for the education of the child to another school that's delivering the education, whatever that looks like. So if they're going to an independent school, if they're going to another public school that because they offer degrees in their town or their district, then we believe there should be a contract. In terms of approved independent schools, we totally agree that they need to provide special education. That's a simple fairness thing. We want attendance reports. That's been an issue that our members have had, not having attendance reports, kids not showing up for school and sending schools, been paying for them for months and haven't been in the school in months. We hear cases of that every year.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Can I stop you right there? Anytime. So that comment you just made, is that covered in the chronic absenteeism bill that we're putting out, do you feel?

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I haven't even given us. Because it

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: does talk about approved independent schools providing that. Would you mind when you get a chance? But I just sort of Sure, because that has been an issue for years, and if education transformation stalls, it'd be if the chronic absenteeism bill can address that or if it already does address that.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Okay, I will take a look at that. Academic progress, same thing. If there's test scores and stuff like that, then the academic progress should be shared. That's certainly a flaw of the current system. We say boards simply pay the bill and not privy to how well or not their students are doing academically, we need to fix that. Suspension and expulsion is another area that needs to be adjusted. We have heard of cases where kids have been expelled, kids going to school in another state, public school, and then the school that's sending them not finding out about it, or kids going to approved independent and not finding out about it, that shouldn't happen. The superintendent should be the first person to hear about that. We fully support the Vermont Public Accommodations Act, the Vermont Fair Employment Practices Act, fully support those. This is also I've been saying for fifteen years, it's fairly easy for me. We agree that mission process should be blind. No question about that. We think that knowing how well students do on state or federally mandated assessments is not the most important thing, but it is one critical aspect when you look at how a school is doing in terms of performance. So we think that that should be shared with the public school that's sending the kids. We should not be charging any fees for being a student at any school that receives public funding. That's a very important one for us. And we have no problem with assurances from independent school leaders, signing assurances like superintendents do now. And I'll say we have a great deal of confidence that school leaders of independent and public schools all want to provide the best education they can for their students. We ended by just saying we support statements of non discrimination and assurances that state that schools are following the Vermont Public Accommodations Act. And we finished by saying, BPA doesn't see a path forward in our educational delivery system without partnership with our four historic academies. We need them as part of our system. That's kind of the nutshell what I'm gonna say today.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Yes. All right. Questions? Thanks. Just related to that list that you just do you do you did you think about anything that might be missing also? No. I did not. Okay. I just respond to what they had there. Okay. So it's not that you didn't think something was missing. It's that you didn't you just respond responded.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Just responded to And I did not respond to the maps themselves. And they're probably gonna ask questions about But, that yeah, that's gonna change it. I did hear, why did Barry get lumped with something and not something else? And I just a couple of people sent me emails today and I said, I have no idea. The committee is gonna be talking about that stuff. It's just starting. You. Okay. Well, that's true.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: You got it, Brady?

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: This is not in your written testimony, but I know it's something I've heard you talk about many times and often your explanation is clearer than the way I'm able to articulate it. So I wonder, just having a conversation earlier today with the vice chair about districts versus supervisory unions, and wonder if you could share why you would support one structure over another and what are the real impacts of one versus the other. And I know for some reason you have this beautifully clear way of explaining it, but I've

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: No pressure, no pressure.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I just stumble all over myself right

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: now. So

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: to me, the big differences, there are at least three, the three biggest differences are a supervisory union is a loose confederation. And the employees in that confederation have different bosses depending on what school that they actually work for. They may work for the supervisory union, say I'm an art teacher that's shared across buildings, or I'm the superintendent, I work for the Supervisory Union Board. I'm a principal in one of those school districts or a teacher in one of those school districts that works just in that school district, I'm an employee of that school district. And that permeates all across the system. And it's also true with students, which have a major problem. So where it matters is in terms of kids, it matters if a kid moves. The kid moves from one town to another, or if the town next door has a program that this town doesn't have, the kid can't access. The best example I can give is when I was superintendent at Franklin Northeast when it was a full supervisor union. It's still supervisor union, but the two high schools are now their own school district. Back then it wasn't. I had kids at Richford, brilliant kids that were taken, they could get two or three AP classes. Kids at Unisport could get nine or 10. And we had a bus between two schools because we had a shared tech center. And I could not allow those kids to access those classes because they belong to a different district. The second big thing in terms of kids is when kids moved at the change schools. If you have a supervisory district and a kid moves from one town to another in that district, you don't have to have them change schools. You could, but you don't have to. You could say, you've been going to Orchard School in South Burlington, You had a lot of issues before, you've been here three years, we finally get it figured out. Now you're in the Chamberlain catchment area, but we're gonna keep you right here at Orchard because you're doing well, Johnny, and we wanna keep you there. If you were separate districts, can't do that. You can't sit here a kid from Peecham who moves to Barnett, it's okay, you can keep coming to Peecham. Kids are going to have to go to Barnett. Even if Peecham's brought in all the services and is finally having success with his kid, he's still going to have to go to different school. So I give the example of Hannaford's and Price Chopper all the time. Supervisory union is like Hannaford's and Price Chopper. Supervisory district is Hannaford's. We all have the same employer, we all work for the same company, we all follow the same policies. If you're gonna lay me off, it's within this bigger district. And so if I've got seniority and I'm an English teacher and my high school has four English teachers, but they say next year they only need three, but the other high school in the supervisory district or the middle school, if I get the license, needs a teacher. I get a right to that job as long as I'm qualified for. And a supervisory union, I can be the best teacher in America. And if I'm the last one in, even if there's openings in other towns, they don't have to give me that job.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: I'm gonna just follow-up on that, not with a question, but with more of a statement. So when I was part of a supervisory union, our little town of Cornwall had a little school with a small number of staff, and we simply just churned through the last hired teacher. Sometimes they were fabulous, but they had no job security because if we lost five kids, their job was gone and they had no rights to any other job in the SU because it was different contracts, different employers. I've also had a health insurance policy too, by the way. So I had a nurse who was in two different buildings

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: and she was 80%, so she wasn't 50% in either building and she couldn't get health insurance. Now we get around that, but it took us a couple of years. We made her a supervisor union employee. We did it that way, but then you're billing back and you're dealing with all this convoluted stuff that supervisor unions create that you don't need to have. And you don't need to have seven or eight different board meetings. Focus on having one strong board with good policy and you're going end up getting better results. And we don't need 119 superintendents. Right now we've got 51, but maybe we don't need 51. One per district is what the model should be.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: The other place where I watched the switch be highly beneficial was during COVID and being able to move staff around where the greatest need was, and it was really highly effective. There were no contractual issues, nothing like that.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: We don't want COVID back. There are some things we learned from it that we could take advantage.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Any other questions for me? Oh, I'm sorry, you did have to pick up previously.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: I was wondering, talked about the, you support the blind admissions, I do too. Is there an exception if it's a performance based school, like a ski school? I mean, how does that work?

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: They don't give public funding.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: Some have said, some do that. Some of them

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: are not.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Well, my my argument would be if they're getting public funding, then it should be blind admission.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: Even if they're.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: But I'm not going to apply to a ski school.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: Right.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I can't ski and I can't ski.

[Leland Morgan (Member)]: I mean, I agree. I was just curious if in that there was any nuance in there.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: I know, I don't. I think it should be blind on mission and any kid who wants to apply for a cannon, then you figure it out.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: You very much for taking the time. Did you have written testimony on the- Yes,

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: that's good.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: But not on the chronic absence- Oh, have

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: written testimony on chronic absence, I sent it to Matt. Okay, But

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: since we added this on, if you have chronic urticus. I

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: do, and it's Daphne Hazard and I can send it to Matt.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: That would be great. Okay.

[Jay Nichols (Senior Executive Director, Vermont Principals Association)]: Glad to do that.

[Erin Brady (Ranking Member)]: Thank you. Appreciate it.

[Peter Conlon (Chair)]: All thank you. Let's take fifteen, we'll be back at two.