LSAT Minutes: 2023-2024

Murch Elementary School LSAT Meeting
Date | time 5/29/2024 5:45-7:00 PM | Meeting called by LSAT Chairs

Meeting began at 5:50pm.
Attendance: Emily B., Allison F., Marine K., Nikki F., Allen T., Daniel M., Jenn A., Natalie T., Principal Mr. C

First topic was the LSAT elections. Parent co-chair Emily B. shared that we have 6 candidate applications. The LSAT requirements state that the LSAT is to have no more than 15 LSAT participants and asked for a vote on approving 6 parents and 5 staff members in addition to WTU rep and the HSA rep for the 2024-2025 SY slate. Parents will represent students in grades K,1,2,4,5 and 2 of the parents have children who receive special needs services. All were in favor of the motion to extend the number of LSAT participants. In addition the LSAT members discussed the addition of a community partner. Emily B. asked teachers whether any after school programming coordinators should be considered. Principal C. said he could come with a list of former parents and share with Emily B. Teacher Representative elections for the 24-25 SY slate will take place this Monday, June 3rd 2024. Formal election for parents is the June 11 at the HSA meeting, along with the HSA slate and HSA budget. New LSAT members will join the June 12th LSAT meeting for a welcome and onboarding.

The second topic on the agenda was the review of the 23-24 SY CSP (Comprehensive School Plan) to date and year-end preliminary student proficiency data (IReady, Dibbels,PARCC). The CSP results will be posted on the website. Regarding the goal of engagement (increasing the number of opportunities to build connections with parents of special ed and African American students), Teacher co-chair Jenn A, shared that the summer program helped engage the families of students who participated in the program. Mr. C shared that both EL and Special Ed held events for families of students. Another goal was to increase the % of African American and Hispanic students who feel loved by 20%. Additionally, by the end of SY 23-24 100% of math classrooms will have observable elements of culturally relevant affirming classroom culture. LSAT teacher rep. Allen T. shared that getting to know the students and using their names in math exercises drove engagement. Mr C. explained that the achievement is based on observation of the classroom and data collection. The 4th goal was academic achievement with a goal for Math iready and DIBELS. The goal was for DIBELS to have 85% of students in grade K-1 and 75% of 2 on or above grade levels and African American students in grade K-2 to increase from 49% to 75%. For iready Math, the goal was to have at EOY an increase in African American Students in 2-5 to increase from 53% to 75%. Teacher rep. Jenn A. and WTU rep. Natalie T. shared that the EOY results are not finished but the trend is positive. Mr C. shared that K-2 goals for Dibbels are preliminary as 2/3 are completed but the trend is looking like we will meet the goal.

Finally, Mr C. provided a brief overview of the new CSP guidelines. The current LSAT will need to review data compiled by the school administrative team of the Comprehensive Needs Assessment, in order to complete the first phase of the new CSP protocols. The 24-25 SY LSAT will then move forward with phase two and the completion of the 24-25 SY CSP.

The LSAT welcomed two parents from the community who joined the call. No questions or comments were raised during the Q&A session.

All members of the LSAT were asked to review documents in Basecamp. The next meeting of the LSAT will be on Wednesday, June 12th, 2024.

The meeting adjourned at 650pm.

The meeting opened at 545pm. Present were all LSAT co-chairs, Principal C, Parent representative Marine K. and teachers representatives Daniel M. and Allen T, as well as HSA rep Nathan S.

The first topic discussed was the LSAT elections. LSAT Parent Co-Chair Emily B. shared that she created a candidate submission form that was posted on the website/sent by emails with initial responses coming. LSAT members agreed on also doing a flyer in Friday folders (to be created and printed by LSAT Parent Co-chairs) and on organizing 1-2 short virtual info sessions to reach those who could not make it the 830am coffees (doodle for possible times to be created by LSAT Parent Co-Chair). Emily B. started a motion to get the LSAT support any current teacher or parent rep to run for a second term if they wish to do so. The motion was accepted.

Teacher co-chair Jenn A asked when the staff election has to be done, Principal C. noted by end of school year and to coordinate with the WTU rep.

The second topic discussed was engagement and advocacy. Parent co-chair Allison F shared that following an LSAT/HSA email to the Chancellor Chief of Staff, a meeting will be scheduled with IS Caruthers to discuss goals and vision for Murch with questions asked 48 hours ahead of
time. Allison F. proposed to post some data and thoughts before we have the meeting on Basecamp, for LSAT members to share input.

The third topic was the CSP. Principal C shared highlights from DCPS 5-year strategic plan, including the 3 priorities of 1) Equity imperative (ensuring that teachers have the tools they need to address equity, i.e. addressing different needs of kids), 2) Valuing employees at DCPS and 3)
Academic success of students. Regarding the last goal, Principal C. shared that it breaks down into 4 sub-goals (full plan available here: A Capital Commitment: 2023-2028 Strategic Plan - DCPS Strong) with the following data shared by Principal C:

Goal #1: DCPS students are mathematically strong (Goal is to reach 80% in math, right now the District is at 45% - this is a 35% increase in 5 years. Murch is at 72% grades 3-5).

Goal #2: Implementing Reading and Writing across the curriculum (across all topics, art etc). (Goal is also to reach 80% district wide, Murch is also ~70%)

Goal #3: Students need to feel safe and have a sense of belonging. Murch is currently at 73% vs. 72% in the Fall on sense of belonging (source: Panorama Survey). The District average is ~51%.

Goal #4: students have equitable access to opportunities.

Principal C shared that our 24-25 CSP will need to help us meet those 4 goals, that the CSP is due June 9 and that he recommends setting less goals to ensure we meet them. Principal C. suggested a working team meeting for those interested the week of May 13, which Emily B. proposed to send a doodle on.

Parent Co-chair Emily B. asked whether there have been talks of modifying Murch Plus at the HSA. HSA rep Nathan S. shared that no change has been discussed yet, and that the HSA will be meeting to address the 24-25 budget soon.

Principal asked if we can get help to onboard new members – i.e. would be ideal if one teacher and one parent to the LSAT + creating a document with all information to have handy.

LSAT meeting 3/6

The meeting opened at 545pm. All LSAT members were in attendance, with the exception of Nathan S. and WTU Representative to LSAT Natalie T.  AP Hawkins and a number of community members also attended.

The first agenda item was the submitted budget. LSAT teacher co-chair Jenn A. shared that the final budget had Murch remove the positions of 1 ASL, 1 Math specialist, and 1 W3 Custodian (to meet a balance budget and fund an additional 2^nd grade teacher), that the LSAT had met over several meetings to discuss and guide the decisions and that one of the LSAT recommendation was to remove 1 Instructional Coach to fund but DCPS requires Murch to keep 2 instructional coaches, hence the final submitted budget did not meet the LSAT recommendation. Jenn A. shared that the budget also did not include the additional 1 time funded teacher position and that we are now in the next step in the process, i.e. advocacy. Principal C. shared that the DCPS has a program called LEAP and 2 instructional coaches are needed to meet the requirements of this LEAP program based on student numbers. LSAT parents Allison F. and Marine K. shared that for the future, it would be helpful for DCPS to clarify which positions are truly discretionary given the time and energy spent during discussions. Mr C shared that Level 2 positions, which include that of the Instructional coaches, were previously discussed at an LSAT budget meeting. What was shared is that L2 positions are flexible as long as you can create a rationale for how the services and responsibilities of the position being reprogrammed (in this case an instructional coach) will be executed and taken on by other positions and that currently, we can’t place the responsibilities of LEAP in another position.

Principal C then shared his final budget report, including the following: the budget initially submitted included the removal of 1 instructional coach and 1 math specialist, to retain 1 grade 2 teacher. DCPS came back and clarified that it is a district mandate to fund LEAP and this would require to maintain 2 Instructional Coaches positions. Mr C shared that the next step in the budget process is to go to the City Council. Should we not get additional funds, we will need to think about reallocating work from eliminated positions. Mr C shared that there is a Budget assistance program petition – mr C requested 2 full time teaching positions but that request was denied. Finally, Mr C. shared that when looking at the final budget, the recommendation was made to move the Kindergarten aide to an instructional aide to provide coverage across the school.

Then, parent co-chair Allison F. shared that she testified in front of Council to share the positions eliminated, and that she also attended the DCPS hearing when other schools shared their cuts. LSAT parent co-chair Emily B. also shared that HSA Co-President Kimi W. submitted a letter from the HSA. The LSAT then discussed advocacy strategies, including showing the effective budget cuts. LSAT parent Marine K. shared that it would help to gather specific examples of what will be lost from the elimination of the ASL and Custodian, and asked if teachers could help with this, as well as the number of students well below grade level that will now be need to be seen by a single math specialist. A community parent shared the Key DC budget dates

March 20 – Full budget for DC will be released

April 3 – Public Hearing Testimony on DC Public Schools Budget

Late Spring – Final budget is voted on by the DC Council

Mr. C shared that there is a window to reprogram funds at the beginning of Summer.

LSAT parents Marine K. and Niki F. shared that many parents who attended the past meetings shared their concerns about class size in rising grade 3. AP Hawkins also shared that the number of special ed (not self contained) rising 1 is higher (~11) than rising 3^rd grade (~5), which LSAT teacher Allen T. noted was impactful.

For next steps, LSAT co-chair Emily B. shared that we will use Basecamp to gather the data for our letter, and that the LSAT will partner with the HSA for next steps.

Then, the LSAT discussed how to best share the survey data. Marine K. will share a proposed website posting to LSAT parents and the HSA, for posting as soon as possible.

Parent co-chair Emily B. shared that the remind notifications seemed to not work for many parents, and that the HSA and LSAT parents are working on a website announcement and will look for the best date to host a forum in March.

Finally, LSAT teacher Daniel M. noted that Murch plus is Wednesday but Track is also on Wednesday, while in the past track practices were always on Tuesdays and Thursdays. A community parent noted this may be due tracks availability. Mr C. shared that we can ask for the future. LSAT parent Jenn A. noted that hard copy flyers were shared wit info on Murch + in Friday Folders. Emily B. noted that the same could be done for the online forum.

Mr C asked LSAT co-chairs Jenn A. and Emily B. to meet remotely before the next March 27^th LSAT meeting to prepare for the equity discussion that could not take place tonight.

Meeting adjourned at 720pm.

LSAT meeting 2.22

Attendees: All LSAT members except for HSA rep Nathan S. Also present: AP Hawkins and community members.

LSAT Parent co-chair Emily B. opened the meeting at 550pm, informing participants that the meeting would move to a closed meeting following the open portion as the budget was due the following day.

• A parent asked what the budget mean for class sizes noting prior year discipline problems. Parent co-chair Emily B. shared that we sent a survey to both parents and staff, and that following the parent survey one of the goals is to keep class sizes as close as possible to the WTU ratio (K-2: 20:1 and 3-5: 25 student to teacher ratio). The parent asked whether this would mean maintaining the same number of classes as this year. LSAT co-chair parent Emily B. clarified that the ratio does change between 2^nd (20:1) and 3^rd grade (25:1). Based on enrollment projections, the projection is about 27 students per class, only 2 over the WTU recommendation. The parent noted that this meant going back to class sizes from last year’s 1^st grade with behavior issues. Mr C. noted that the class size would be unknown until we have the final budget based on available funding, and that re: discipline for next year, Murch will maintain what has been done to keep every child safe and trying to ensure every child has access to learning and suggested to discuss specific cases offline. AP Hawkins noted that Murch will continue to enforce discipline following DCPS best practices, that we are not able to expel students and that he had not spoken to the parent about his specific case. Another parent asked for more concrete or specific answers, and that as a parent of rising 3^rd grade, she wanted to know what specific actions would be taken to make parents feel comfortable if we are to go back to larger classes so that that prior experiences would not be repeated again, noting the feeling of lack of safety and that while there are confidentiality issues at the end of the day, what is most important is to be comfortable sending kids to school. Principal C noted that he would be open to do an open forum with parents k-5 about safety for next year.
• Another parent of a 2^nd grade also on the HSA had a question about whether the survey results would be shared with parents, and that maybe a follow up email would be helpful. The same parent noted the survey good participation (>40%) and acknowledged that not every family could respond, which could have been self-selective of who took the survey, but shared both that overwhelmingly class size being the main priority in the parent survey and also her own positive experience this year of smaller class sizes of ~22 vs. ~28 kids in 1^st She shared those points and highlighted that rising 2^nd grade would have 28 kids in a class with 4 teachers and with 5 it would be ~22, and highlighted that the LSAT should look hard at positions interacting with students every day and that their academic experience is as best as possible. She shared that in her mind, the way to do this is to retain the 2^nd grade additional teacher and to increase specialist and/or counselors to support social and emotional needs of students. LSAT parent Marine K. also reminded new parents on the call that even before looking at reducing class sizes, the budget Murch received was 150k in the red, so Murch will have to make some calls even before thinking about the extra teachers.
• Another parent from 2^nd grade and K echoed comments about the experience of the smaller classes this year making an incredible difference in her children’s experience, and asked if there are other ways to be creative to keep class room sizes small.
• Another parent echoed many of the concerns raised by parents and underscored the challenges faced by the LSAT but asked whether the surveys (parents and staff) would be made available, and whether the school would be petitioning for anything and the importance of that, and also wanted to note that last year parents had a concerted effort to help raise funds and that he would be more than happy to make an effort again but was looking for guidance and partnership with the school administration. Parent LSAT co-chair Emily B. noted that we will do our best to work within the budget we were given to meet the needs of the school and that our next step would be advocacy and that following tonight we would reach out to the community to ask for help. The parent asked whether we would be petitioning, Principal C. noted that It was an LSAT decision.
• LSAT parent Allison F. noted that even if a decision would be made to keep class sizes small, it would most likely be for the rising 2^nd grade given the age and help needed vs. 3^rd graders and the lower WTU recommendation (25 for 3^rd grade vs. 2^nd grade), and that the LSAT needs to prioritize the entire school.
• AP Hawkins raised that there are a lot of conversations around diversity at Murch and in his opinion, those families are not as represented in parent forums and proactive parent outreach is a strategy to understand the needs of the students. Co-chair parent LSAT Emily B. noted that the equity piece will be a next step for the LSAT after the budget work is done.
• Last, a teacher of 3^rd grade mentioned that her view is the most important position to safeguard are the math and reading specialists as they provide academic intervention that go beyond reading and math but also mental health, and that she did not think adding a 3^rd grade teacher if it meant losing specialists would be the right trade, as in prior years grade 5 dealt well with classes with 27 students and given Murch’s CSP goals.

LSAT parent co-chair Emily B. motioned to move to a closed meeting. LSAT parent Marine K seconded and all LSAT members approved.

Attendees: All LSAT members except HSA Rep who was represented by HSA Co-President Kimi W., Principal C, AP Hawkins, Community Members.

The meeting opened at 545pm.

LSAT Parent Co-Chair Emily B. shared that with the increased costs of positions, Murch has a budget deficit of 150k from current staffing model to cover, that the LSAT wants to make sure to listen to voices of teacher and parent community. LSAT teacher Co-Chair Jenn A. shared the difficult of the decisions that need to be made, that both teachers and parents did a survey and that priorities aligned. LSAT Parent Co-Chair Emily B. shared that the HSA chairs were attending the meeting and had been brought in on ways the HSA can help. HSA Co-President Kimi W. shared that the HSA wants to support as much as possible.

Principal C. shared that DCPS does not allow Murch to do anything but part or full time positions (i.e. not 0.25 or 0.75).

LSAT Parent Co-Chair Emily B. asked AP Hawkins to review the different functions of the AP role. AP Hawkins shared that the AP is the main point of contact for all students with IEPs and coordinator with 504, the AP manages the discipline and recess structure, is the testing coordinator – including PARCC assessment, that the AP is also an administrator of medicine, for example during field trip, that he can at times sub in classes and manages transportation for students who take buses.

LSAT Parent Co-Chair Emily B. asked AP Hawkins his view on the impact of large classes. AP Hawkins shared that it depends.

LSAT Parent Co-Chair Allison F. shared that in FY23-24, there were behavioral issues and a big part of the advocacy done came out of frustration of not knowing where to go for behavior and that if we go back to larger classes, parents would like to hear how those behaviors will not happen again. LSAT parents Niki F. and Marine K. shared that last year’s issues leading to advocacy also included academic concerns in addition to behavioral. LSAT Parent Co-Chair Emily B. shared that the class sizes for FY24-25 based on current enrollment projections are expected to be 22 for grade 1 and 27 for grade 2 (assuming we do not add a 5^th teacher). HSA Co-President Kimi W. asked whether smaller classes in 1-2 made a difference in achievement. LSAT Teacher Co-Chair Jenn A. shared that while it helped it is hard to isolate. WTU LSAT Rep. Natalie T. shared that the same applies to specialist as they work over several years and it is hard to isolate results. A current 3^rd grade teacher shared that in her experience, it is possible to do her teacher job well with well over 20 student, that interventionists specialized support is critical, and that reduction in class size has a huge impact when numbers are below 20, however, this year had 26 and is seeing strong gains in achievement, that it is important that teachers can still meet the needs of all students at such large class sizes when interventionists are able to spend time with the students who have the lowest achievement, and that an additional 3^rd grade teacher would also shift the entire make up of the schedule and could result in a self contained classroom which would be difficult to manage. LSAT Parent Co-Chair Allison F. asked whether should we get additional funding to retain the 2 5^th teachers, would having an additional specialist be impactful if focused on 3^rd grade only. The teacher shared that this might be inequitable. WTU Rep Natalie T. shared that when adding 2 additional classes in 1-2 we had to remove specials from pre-K as specials teachers could not take on the additional classes. LSAT parent co-chair Niki F. shared that the observed how teachers had to divide attention in large classrooms and is unsure how large classes would not impact attention and learning.

Then, LSAT Parent co-chair Emily B. asked about the role of instructional coaches. WTU Rep Natalie T, who is an instructional coach, shared that instructional coaches get training from DCPS to coach teachers, diving into data so teachers don’t have to, also spend time teaching math or subbing on an as-needed basis. LSAT Parent Co-chair Emily B. asked whether it is a true statement that because of the DCPS asks for testing and administration, instructional coaches take some of this load? WTU Rep. Natalie T. confirmed and added that a lot of time ICs will provide different analysis and reteaching and that Coaches are in every building in DC.

HSA Co-President Kimi W. shared that the HSA has not funded any personal positions and cannot do this but has taken on a lot of non personal items away from school, and ask if there is anything else the HSA can do to help? Principal C. responded that this would be great, and can be discussed during the HSA budget season later.

With no further questions, the meeting moved to a closed meeting to discuss the budget.

Present: all LSAT teachers and parent representatives (Niki Far present for a portion of the meeting), Ms. Troadec, Principal C. Also present for a portion of the open meeting was Elias Bender, legislative assistant for Council man Matt Frumin.

The meeting opened at 545pm.

Principal C. confirmed that the meeting would be open, then closed when discussing confidential items.

First, LSAT parent co-chair Emily B. shared the results of the family survey. The survey’s deadline was 2/12 and it was left open a little longer. 178 families participated, with families across the board from a teacher’s perspective and the biggest participation in 2^nd grade. 67% of responded said they did not receive any specialized services or did not know, the majority of those who did were for IEP or friendship/guidance. The most important budgetary priority for those who responded was teacher to student ratio. This was followed by student access to specialist services (reading and math). From there, specials (art and then, music), then a world language teacher, and finally, an additional science teacher. For HSA budget, the priorities were, in order, teachers grants and school supplies, followed by access to field trips, Murch Plus, scholarships and at the tail end, whole wide school events like coffee on playground. There were comments about guidance counselor services. 89% of respondents responded yes to the question of whether parents felt their children adequately supported. LSAT Parent Marine K. noted that while only 178 parents took the survey, they represented 269 students once multiplying by the number of students, so about 40% of the school participated, and closer to 50% when considering the absence of Prek4 and some Kindergarten students. LSAT parent Allison F. noted the numerous comments around the guidance services and that this can help with disruptions in the classroom from students who may be struggling and don’t feel completely supported in the classroom. LSAT Parent M. Korin shared that the parents’ survey had a disproportionate number of comments mentioning the class size. Emily B. shared that the portion on the HSA will be shared by Allison F. and Emily B. The results will also be shared on the website.

Then, LSAT teacher Jenn A. shared again the results of the staff survey (no new responses were received since the last time) and noted that the importance of Guidance Counseling and student facing positions aligned with the parents’ survey. She noted other answers were aligned with the parents’ survey, which has the Gen Ed teachers ranked #1 to reduce class size, additional specials #2 and the AP role #3. There were about 33-35 responses and the whole staff had access. Outside of staff the top priority were technology devices for students, academic support for students (materials that directly impact students), class rom supplies and educational programs not funded by DCPS like Lexia and Raz. Comments had commonalities with the above mentioned trends. LSAT teacher Daniel M. shared that the surveys showed the importance of services that impacted the students the most. LSAT WTU Representative Natalie T. noted the importance of taking into consideration all the kids. LSAT teacher Allen T. also noted the commonalities of the two surveys.

Then, Elias Bender, legislative assistant for Matt Frumin, shared his gratitude for the invitation. He shared that the petition process is an internal DCPS decision and Council Member Matt Frumin has been supporting LSATs despite it being a difficult budget year. Elias B. shared the timeline including the submitted budgets included in the Mayor’s final budget submitted to Council Mar 20^th, and then until the beginning of May the Council moving to vote on the budget. This year, the Mayor’s pandemic supplements and ESSER III funds are drying up and are not covered by the School First Act. LSAT parent Allison F. asked what other ways there are to fund support for the increase in at-risk students. Principal C. shared that the DCPS budget includes funding for at risk enrollment.

Then, principal C shared the results of the MYO (Middle of Year) testing. Mr C. shared that the data shows impressive gains overall, however with pockets for reading and math below level. For Dibbels K-2, principal C shared the 7% decrease in “well below grade level” percentages, and that by grade, Kindergarten saw a strong reduction in “well below benchmark” (21% to 9%), 1^st grade increased the number of students well below benchmark by 2% and 2^nd grade which had the most students below benchmark at the beginning of the year had a 10% decrease. Principal C noted there is still an achievement gap identified between white students and African American students. LSAT parent Marine K. asked whether parents will receive the results. Principal C. shared that teachers will be sharing the results with parents. Principal C. shared that the trend over the past 10 years has been the same: 50-60% at BOY at level, progressing to 70-80% by end of year (typically), that the goal is to get as close to 100% proficiency in math and reading and that Murch is trending in the right direction. LSAT parent Marine K. asked whether the 1^st grade gap to the end of year goal is something that we’ve seen being closed by end of year in prior years. Mr C. shared that the most effective tool in learning in 1^st grade is small groups learnings.

The meeting ended around 640pm and moved to a closed meeting.

LSAT January 31, 2024

Attendees: All LSAT members, Principal C, Assistant Principal Hawkins

The meeting started at 5:45pm.

Mr. C reviewed the following regarding Mid-Year Assessments:

We are well on our way with finalizing them by February 9. For both math and reading, results show improvement across all grades. On DIBELS, early results show growth in reading for grades K-2 vs. Beginning of Year assessments. When looking at the “on or above” results, that percentage increased for those three grades, with the greatest growth in Kindergarten. Also, the % of below level students went down across the 3 grades. For grades 3-5, using the I-ready test, “on or above” achievement also increased as compared to BOY. The grade that has the lowest percentage or “on or above” students is also the grade that started with the highest percentage of students being below levels. As mentioned above, math results increased across all grades. We are also seeing improvements in achievement for African American students in math. Final results will be shared following Feb 9 completion.

Budget timeline Update.

Mr. C reiterated the following:

The steps tend to happen on a quick turnaround, sometimes within a couple days, based on timing of when DCPS releases budget information. We expect to receive allocations by DCPS around ~mid-February. At this point, the comparison from previous and current year’s budget will be presented to the LSAT by the Principal, after it has also been sent to LSAT chairs and can be officially released for review. Final MOY assessment data for math and reading and will include subgroups. Principal C. will offer scenarios of budget outlines based on allocations. An analysis of the staff and parent survey by LSAT members will be performed to prepare for final budget choice. There will be discussions between parents, teachers and the principal about realistic options for budget. LSAT teachers and parents will present scenario of choice to Mr C. The principal will present a final budget and submission and communicate the budget decisions to the school community. Tentative dates for LSAT budget review meetings will be February 15^th, which is a change to a Thursday due to accommodate LSAT members and Valentine’s Day which was discussed, and an additional date of March 6^th was also added.  Both of these meetings will be open at the beginning and may be closed when addressing budget.  Mr. C will be providing those additional calendar dates to the team.

Jenn Allen, LSAT Co-Chair reviewed the preliminary results of the staff survey.

LSAT Team reviewed the parent’s budget priority survey and updated language and questions. Survey will be sent to parents via room parent emails and HSA email blast at the end of the week. LSAT discussed, in cases where it might be helpful, teachers will share in Friday folders; Sandra Borak and Jenn Allen volunteered to assist with this. Primary method for collection will be anonymous email. Due date for the survey will be Monday February 12^th in order for LSAT chairs to compile and review with Mr. C, and the LSAT team at the February 15^th meeting.

Emily Blake brought up the need for the LSAT to draft a letter to Ward 3 Councilmember Frumin and our budget petition letter to DCPS. A draft will be created in basecamp for all LSAT members to edit and comment on. This will be further discussed at a future LSAT meeting.

The meeting adjourned shortly before 7pm.

DCPS Murch Elementary LSAT Meeting
12/20/2023 5:45-7:00 PM | Location: Microsoft Teams
LSAT Meeting Minutes

Meeting Attendees: LSAT parent representatives (Niki Far, Emily Blake, Allison Fitzsimmons, Marine Korin); LSAT teacher representatives (Allen Travitz, Jenn Allen, Daniel Markus, Sandra Borak), Principal C. Cebrzynski, HSA representative: Nathan Shanks, WTU Murch Rep. Ms. Troadec.

Meeting called to order at 5:50PM.

Principal C shared final enrollment projections shared back to DCPS. No changes were made as compared to the numbers discussed last LSAT.

The budget timeline is not yet defined by DCPS (no specific dates have been sent). Principal C. and the LSAT should hear back at the same time in regards to the timeline from DCPS. Once this is set, we will set a tentative holds for LSAT meetings (mixed closed and open meetings).

Then, LSAT members went through the parent’s budget priority survey questions; this is planned to out to parents following winter break (January 2024).

Discussion of LSAT petition letter to DCPS, Mayor and Chancellor regarding 2024-2025 budget to be drafted and discussed at January LSAT Meeting.

Meeting Adjourned at 7:15PM.

Murch Elementary School LSAT Meeting
Date | time 11/29/2023 5:45-7:00 PM | Meeting called by LSAT Chairs

Attendees: LSAT parent representatives (Niki Far, Emily Blake, Marine Korin); LSAT teacher representatives (Allen Travitz, Jenn Allen, Daniel Markus, Sandra Borak), Principal Cebrzynski. Community attendees not listed.

Minutes of Meetings: Per DCPS policy, upon secretary sending minutes, members will have 24 hours to review and send comments to the secretary. Principal C. will be sending the minutes to DCPS as well.

Enrollment Projections: Principal C. gave the LSAT a report on draft enrollment projections for 2024-2025 SY provided by DCPS, as pasted below:

*current enrollment stands at 640.

ELL Student Projections:

Special ed – note this includes 2 additional preK students as adjusted by Principal C. The rationale for adjusting provided by the Principal is that the only students in PreK 3 Murch has are those with special needs.

At risk:

Budget Timeline: The timeline has not been communicated by DCPS. LSAT parent members shared that they testified at a budget hearing on Nov 14 (the meeting recording is available here: DCPS Fiscal Year 2025 Public Budget Hearing (School Year 2024-25) (youtube.com) – Murch LSAT parents testifying at 1h14). Principal C will help in asking DCPS Budget team for a meeting with the LSAT before the start of budget season.

School Community Engagement: Teachers and parents will plan on sending a survey before the budget season, aiming to send by winter break, both digital and paper versions.

Murch Elementary School LSAT Meeting
Date | time 10/25/2023 5:45-7:00 PM | Meeting called by LSAT Chairs

Attendees: All LSAT parent and teacher members present. Also present Luis V. (HSA representative) and N. Troadec (WTU representative). The meeting was open to the public and as such, a number of parents and/or members of the community were present.

Welcome and Approval of Minutes: LSAT members discussed leveraging written minutes for virtual meetings as opposed to posting videos. This to enable parents to more easily access minutes.

Enrollment Discussion
Enrollment Projections for 2024-2025 SY are not yet available. In the past enrollments have both gone up and down, depending on the year. Enrollment figures are currently at 636. Parent LSAT members requested enrollments per grade which will be sent following the meeting.

• LSAT teacher representative requested to know whether the 5 teachers for K-2 would move to Grade 3,4,5 as those cohorts move up. Principal C shared that there is a space constraint – Murch currently cannot accommodate any more classroom in the school. 4 classrooms are used for self contained special education classrooms. However, there could be a switch between grades (i.e. if less K-2, could be more 3-5).
• Capacity for the building is 720, we are at 636.

Budget Timeline Discussion
Timeline not available yet, however, Principal C. encouraged the LSAT parents and teachers to gather input from the parents and teachers and scenario planning.

• LSAT members discussed next steps, such as a live meeting with the staff for teachers and priority surveys for teachers and/or parents to ask about priorities.
• The need to include several languages in the survey was discussed, as well as electronic forms and paper forms.
• The timeline for a survey was discussed – prior to Winter Break was discussed and/or after Thanksgiving break. Both options are possible. Reviewing will be on agenda for next LSAT meeting.

Student and Family Engagement

• Principal C. shared that the school is tracking parent engagement, including parent teacher conferences, in addition to attendance and chronic absenteeism, reaching out to families to determine support needed. Several opportunities are being offered to parents to engage, including weekday and weekend, with breakfast, online, by invitation-only and general forums.
• In addition, in the past, Murch had an equity team to discuss issues around racism and Principal C. shared that this could be an area to explore interest for and defining over the course of the year.
• Panorama data will be shared with LSAT members. The online site (Basecamp) is not yet available to add new LSAT members which has made communications difficult. Parent representatives offered to help with Basecamp outreach.

Teacher Support

• Different levels of prep time: For example, teachers who are ELT and special ed teachers have multiple preps per day based on group they have. Attempting to have a full day of planning on Nov 1-2 with full coverage for the classroom (substitutes or non teaching staff will be with students during that time), for items that take time to plan for. Aiming to repeat if possible.
• A parent attending requested what would be possible for parents interested in supporting enrichment after school. Principal C offered to discuss the school policies, and a session with the LSAT parents.

DCPS Murch Elementary LSAT Meeting
09/27/2023 5:45-7:00 PM | Hybrid (Location: Murch Library and Microsoft Teams)
LSAT Meeting Minutes

Meeting Attendees: LSAT parent representatives (Niki Far, Emily Blake, Allison Fitzsimmons, Marine Korin); LSAT teacher representatives (Allen Travitz, Jenn Allen, Daniel Markus, Sandra Borak), Principal C. Cebrzynski, HSA representative: Nathan Shanks
Community attendees not listed.

Scheduling of meetings: The LSAT members introduced themselves and established meeting norms. Consensus was to meet monthly on the 4th Wednesday of the month (3rd in case of holidays), virtually, at 545pm. In case a meeting needs to be held in person, the decision will be made at the prior meeting.

Election of Chairs and Secretary:
Parents Co-Chairs: Emily Blake and Allison Fitzsimmons
Teacher Chair: Jenn Allen
Secretary: Marine Korin

LSAT website page and communications: Emily Blake will create a draft of edits for the webpage and share with the LSAT team. LSAT members discussed ways to communicate with parents and teachers to ensure all are knowing what the LSAT is and how to engage LSAT reps.

CSP: The CSP was finalized and sent to LSAT members, and will be signed by Friday 9/29 by parents co-chairs.

Miscellaneous: Jenn Allen shared the positive results of the Summer Program, which took place for the first time over the summer. LSAT members discussed the benefits of tracking engagement to measure success of the program. LSAT members also discussed the potential to send Murch Plus info in Friday Folders for the future sessions.