Collaborative School Committee

The Collaborative School Committee

The Collaborative School Committee (CSC) is an elected advisory board at GW. Presently we have 14 active members: four students, four parents, four teachers, one community representative, and the principal.

The primary focus of the CSC is the development and implementation of the Unified Improvement Plan (UIP). To this end we help guide the school budget, staffing allocations, and school design, always with the goal of furthering the UIP.


CSC Members

The members of the CSC for the 2017-2018 school year are:

Scott Lessard Principal
Jay Clapper Parent  June 2018
Kittie Hooke Parent June 2018
Adam Haynes Parent June 2018
Ron Sherman Parent June 2018
Mary Jo Minogue Community Member June 2018
Jennifer Harkness-Quintana Teacher June 2019
Kevin Vicente Teacher June 2018
Juliana Evans Teacher June 2019
Michael Wylde Teacher June 2019
Jake Fisher Student June 2018
Isabelle Maestas Student June 2018
Shahad Mohieldin Student June 2018 (
Lucca Raabe Student June 2019


  • CSC Minutes – 3/5/2018


    Scott Lessard, Jay Clapper, Kittie Hooke, Adam Haynes, Jennifer Harkness-Quintana, Kevin Vicente, Michael Wylde, Isabelle Maestas, Shahad Mohieldin, Lucca Raabe, Eric Sherman, Andrew Schwartz, Ron Sherman, Kristin Waters






    • Boys basketball making it to the Final Four!
    • Robotics took first at the Utah regionals
    • JROTC


    SPF Presentation (4:45)

    SPF Overview

    • Purpose: to drive improvement across type of school (charters, etc.)
      • Accountability tool
      • Prioritize resources + support from the district
      • Communicate to the community on the school progress
      • Drives school improvement
      • Establishing performance targets our schools in
    • There is tension between the desire to have a static tool that is the same from year to year and the need to make updates and changes to reflect developing expectations
    • There are 3 frameworks
      • GW is a traditional framework
      • Emphasizes growth
      • Prepared to address submitted questions
      • “Dynamic” system – consistent measures but also changing
      • Traditional Framework – applies to GW
      • Alternative Framework – for “highly at risk” schools
      • Emphasis on growth – measures on growth are weighted 2:1 (growth : status)


    Similar Schools

    • What are the measures for similar schools?
      • How are these determined?
      • “Based on demographics at the schools”
    • Hook: this isn’t comparing anything based on the FRL– see East HS
    • “Designed to provide more nuanced information” to the schools
    • Status measures
      • Student progress- Growth Indicator measures whether students are making progress academically over a period of time
      • Similar Schools Calculation Methodology
      • Only look at active ELLs
    • List of schools
    • Why would we compare a public school to a charter school
    • Focused on student outcomes
    • Comparing GALS and GW
      • One school is coed and has 1300 students while the other is an all female school with 168 students
      • How are you talking about apples to apples when we aren’t even comparing boys to girls
    • The SPF tool is not designed to look at governance
      • Want to see how charters compare to public schools
    • What was the basis of reasoning behind determining the rating of a school based on how they compare to other schools?
      • “Shouldn’t comparable schools be of equal – comparable – levels rather than made to compete against each other?”

    Relative measure

    Similar students vs relative every student in the district


    Academic Gaps (5:30)

    • What measures are included in academic gaps
      • What focus groups are identified
      • What is the difference between the two types of disaggregated measures
      • What rules are in place for disaggregated group measures (safe harbors)?
      • What are consolidated measures and how are they scored?
    • The bottom group is going to learn at the same rate as the high group
    • University prep (charter school) and Asbury are schools that are green on the equity indicator
    • GW has listened to the students
      • Systemic racism
    • The gap will close if we continue our great work
      • Giving all kids the same expectation of excellence
      • George is the most amazing environment
    • Are we calculating students twice? If they are on FRL and are an ELL student
    • Make kids reach a benchmark
    • What are the key areas that we can improve in to be blue at GW
      • Outgrowth
      • Compare kids with similar test history
      • SAT growth
      • Continue of college remedy change
      • Remediation free
      • PSAT 9 growth
      • More priority on growth


    We received points for increasing enrollment but lost points due to reduced pass rates. What is the district’s value statement regarding rigorous course work? Would DPS rather have student reach up to take classes that are a stretch with the understanding that the assessment may not meet the standards, or would it be better to limit the student in these classes to just those that demonstrate a strong capacity for passing the assessment?

    • College + Career Readiness
    • Validation for Data
    • SPF and Budgeting
    • Changes from assessments
    • Responses to requests from schools
    • e. tests from ELA
    • Feedback from principals i.e. ignoring concurrent enrollment
    • Focus groups for input
    • Opportunities for feedback
    • We try to give that info to leaders before the school year
    • Changes during the year – only for major concerns




    4/9/2018 – 4:30pm