At its meeting on Tuesday evening, the Archuleta School District (ASD) Board of Education approved an old version of a policy it updated in January relating to instructional time.
In January, the board adopted a new version of policy IC/ICA, which, in part defines instructional time and the times during the school day that students are “actively engaged in the educational process.”
The change removed passing periods between classes and response-to-intervention (RTI) time, which the high school has at the beginning of the day to allow students extra time to get support, from instructional time.
Then, in March, Superintendent Rick Holt told the board he wanted to make them aware of recent policy changes that impacted the way the district calculates instructional time.
The policy change, he explained, started a process of exploring how to adjust instructional minutes.
He led the board through the basics of the policy and the process staff was taking, and explained that, under the old policy, the district was comfortably meeting the state’s required instructional hours and days.
Holt also admitted “last year’s superintendent” called too many snow days, which caused a loss of 36 hours of instructional time, but that the high school still met its requirement.
The middle school, he noted, has a “much smaller buffer” and was 10 hours under the minimum after he called that number of snow days, but that the district was able to obtain a waiver due to it being unusual to have that many snow days.
Under the new policy, he told the board, the high school would be about 31 hours short next year and the middle school would be about 45 hours short.
“That’s a pretty good chunk,” he said, adding he’s talked with the schools’ administrations about it.
Holt added the 1,080 hours in the state’s guidelines would allow for about 3.5 snow days.
Holt suggested as food for thought that calendar days could be added or the school day could be extended, but that the current professional development time for staff on Friday afternoons is important.
Holt noted he reached out to the schools for feedback, with that feedback being conflicting and having strong opinions on both sides.
The administrators, he noted, suggested that all the schools need to go the same amount of time, starting and ending the school year and school days around the same time for ease with families and bus routes.
He also spoke about feedback about when sports and concurrent enrollment begin and end, as well as when semesters begin and end and the benefits of aligning with other area schools.
“We have a later start than many,” Holt said.
He then asked for board feedback that could be taken to the district’s calendar committee to inform the district calendar brought before the board in April.
“What else should we be considering before we bring options to the board?” he asked.
During board discussion on the matter, Holt explained the district ran the numbers and extending the school year by five days would cost $350,000 to $360,000 in salaries and benefits.
That would likely not be the case if the days were adjusted in length by about 15 minutes since teachers would be contracted for the same number of days.
Board member Tim Taylor asked about the average number of instructional days in the state compared to ASD’s 167.
Holt noted he didn’t have that information with him, but that he believes ASD is a bit lower than the average.
“We’re not over the average,” he said.
Lynch commented that Fridays are built into the culture of the school and benefit the staff, and adding time to the school year, such as one week at the beginning of the school year, may solve the problem.
Holt responded that would solve for the high school, but that there would have to be further changes at the middle school.
Board member Dana Guinn noted that ending the first semester before winter break would mean adding two weeks at the beginning of the year and ending the year a week early.
She also asked which of the other things brought up in feedback are the most important to staff and administrators.
“Do we need to go over that 1,080? I don’t think so, personally,” she said.
She added that starting the school year earlier would also trigger a discussion about facilities, calling Holt’s mentions of hot classrooms on the south sides of buildings “no joke.”
Lynch asked when a solution needs to be in place, with Holt responding that April would be late notice for families that their summer break would be changed.
He added that the board could go back to its old policy for another year to better prepare.
Guinn asked if going back to the old policy would cause compliance issues with the state, with Holt responding that local control means the district would be fine in terms of compliance.
Board member Amanda Schick asked what led to the oversight and if there just wasn’t enough conversation before the policy change.
“That was me,” Holt said, noting he didn’t do the homework to inform the board of potential outcomes.
He added that this changed the way the district looks through policies.
Guinn suggested that was also on the board for not looking at the impact on the district more.
Lynch expressed agreement that it wouldn’t be wise to make big changes at the end of the school year.
He indicated that the board concurred that making a change for the fall of 2025 would be better.
Lynch suggested the policy should come back to the board in April.
The matter was also discussed by the Pagosa Peak Open School Board of Directors in March, with that board opting to postpone adoption of its calendar for next school year until ASD determined how it would move forward.
PPOS board president Lawrence Rugar pointed out that, per its charter, PPOS must have more days than the district-operated schools.
Discussion the policy on Tuesday began with public comment from high school teacher Darcy DeGuise, who suggested the district go back to its old policy.
DeGuise told the board passing periods are instructional time, though not in a typical sense, with students working on social skills and talking to teachers.
She also noted the Colorado Department of Education guidelines include both passing periods and RTI time as instructional time.
The policy was then discussed by Holt and the board later in the meeting.
“I pushed that policy before the board to be approved without consulting the board about what kind of impact that would have,” Holt told the board.
He added that it seemed appropriate, now that the district has realized that changing the policy to not count passing periods and RTI would shorten the high school by 31 hours and the middle school by 45 hours, to reconsider it.
“I agree that now may not be the best time to address that policy change,” Holt said, adding it may be in the best interest to continue with the old policy.
Holt noted that would give the district more time to consult with the community and, with the U.S. 160 construction set for downtown, now would not be the best time to lengthen the school year.
The superintendent continued that he still feels the board could and should be doing more for its students, suggesting that while passing periods are beneficial, it is not high-quality instruction, and the district is still lagging in performance.
He suggested going back to the older policy for the time being and addressing the matter at some point in the future.
“Where does the guidance come from? Who has any teeth doing that?” board president Bob Lynch asked
Holt explained the state and, more specifically, the Colorado Department of Education, has very specific guidelines about the hours of instructional time (1,080 at the middle and high schools) and days of contact required (160).
He noted the required instructional time for elementary schools is “considerably less.”
He also added there is a provision to dip down to 1,056 for things like weather delays and emergencies, with Holt reiterating last year’s snow days were above that buffer.
“The year … when your brand-new superintendent called five snow days … we were behind in the middle school,” Holt said, referring to himself, adding the district obtained a waiver from the state since the dip from 1,080 hours to 1,056 hours allows for about 3.5 snow days. “That’s cutting it a bit close.”
Schick asked Holt how his strategic plan is going into ensuring the district is better using instructional time and — if the district needs more time — better structure of time or more cushioning.
Holt suggested the district needs to be more efficient and practical with its instructional time so it is creating learning opportunities that are engaging and that students are actively engaged in.
He added the district also needs more of that time.
He added the district has, through its strategic plan, been providing high-quality curriculum and coaching for its teachers to help ensure high-quality and meaningful instruction, but students also need more of that time.
He further noted he didn’t feel the weather argument is enough to add more days.
The board then unanimously adopted a previous version of policy IC/ICA.
In other business at the meeting, the board:
• Approved the 2024-2025 district calendar, with Administrative Assistant Heather Schultz noting the calendar is more balanced between the four quarters, though the start and end dates for the year are similar to other years.
• Heard a presentation from Gifted and Talented Coordinator Carrie Steadman about the district’s gifted education identification and monitoring program.
Holt noted Steadman’s presentation was the first of the presentations to the board on school programs required by the state or federal government.
• Discussed publicly reviewing the district’s threat assessment policy to increase transparency and understanding.
The topic was discussed after parents of an elementary school student suggested the district update its notification policy after they were not formally notified by the district about a threat involving their student for 24 hours.
The parents indicated they were pleased with the teacher’s and superintendent’s response to the incident and were reassurred by the assessment.
Holt noted that schools have learned a lot in recent decades, citing that a threat assessment likely wouldn’t have taken place 20 years ago, and the bar for a threat assessment is pretty low.
Holt also acknowledged the district has no notification policy related to threats, but there is an opportunity for the district to come to an agreement about how to move forward in a “typical” situation.
randi@pagosasun.com
