As part of its transition to Student Outcomes Focused Governance (SOFG), the Albuquerque Public Schools (APS) Board of Education recently began a structured evaluation of its meeting dynamics and governance practices.
The APS Board of Trustees has adopted a systematic approach to evaluating how board meeting time is used, with a focus on student outcomes and the extent to which they are addressed. At the April 3 board meeting, the board evaluated time and focus on the district's goal of improving student outcomes.
“Our board is monitoring and evaluating how we spend our time as a board,” said Board President Danielle Gonzales, explaining that this new monitoring system allows us to focus on improving the academic performance of our students.
In September, APS launched its new strategic plan, Emerging Stronger. The plan includes goals and guardrails, goals that seek to improve literacy, math, postsecondary success, and student well-being, and guardrails to keep the district on the right track. Guardrail 2 states, “The board shall not spend less than 50% of its public meeting time monitoring student performance.”
How much time does APS spend discussing student results?
Board Secretary Janelle Astorga is leading the effort to track the board's use of time. Her report found that only a small portion of the board's time over the past few months has been spent on progress monitoring and monitoring student outcomes.
The APS Board of Trustees agreed that no time was spent focused on student outcomes during the 150-minute board meeting in November and the 380-minute meeting in December.
When new board leadership was elected in January, the board spent time dealing with the procedural votes required by New Mexico law and legislative procedures. This legally required meeting lasted 23 minutes during which the board was not allowed to talk about student results, and the length of this meeting was still recorded in the report. Astorga reported a total of 360 minutes of meetings and community engagement in January, with 78 minutes spent discussing student outcomes. The APS board spent 22% of its time this month focusing on student outcomes. Astorga noted a significant increase in time from 0% to 22%.
In February, Astorga reported 501 minutes of APS meetings and community engagement, where 118 minutes were spent discussing student outcomes. During February, the board spent 24% of its time focusing on student outcomes, and Astorga noted that much of the board's time was spent in executive meetings to hire Gabriella Duran Blakey as the next superintendent.
“We are moving forward together. [percentage of time spent on student outcomes] “It continues to increase,” he said.
In March, the board had 263 minutes of meetings and engagement, with 88 minutes spent focusing on student outcomes throughout the month. Astorga said the APS board was praised for holding the “best” and most productive board meeting of the year this month.
Board effectiveness assessment
In addition to the time use analysis, the Board also engaged in a self-assessment of its governance practices using a detailed rubric to evaluate the effectiveness of adapting APS to improve student outcomes. The Board's work to improve outcomes is assessed using four SOFG designations:
- No focus on student outcomes
- Approach Focus on Student Outcomes
- Focus on Student Outcomes
- Focus on student outcomes.
Gonzales explained that the board's goal is to keep its meetings and work focused on student outcomes and that the board should strive to master student outcomes focused on each of the six pillars.
1. Vision and Goals: Approach Focus on Student Outcomes
Board of Directors evaluation score: 10/30 points
Working with the Superintendent, the Board discussed how they achieved the 10 points by adopting SMART goals that are Specific, Measurable, Attainable, Relevant, and Time-Bound. Each goal has clear measurements and timelines to ensure focus and accountability. However, the board has not yet fully integrated community members into the goal-setting process needed to achieve the “Meets Student Outcomes Focus” scores.
To take the next step, the board plans to more comprehensively engage students, parents, staff and community members to develop future goals.
2. Values and guardrails
Focus on Student Outcomes
Board Evaluation Score: 10/15 points
Boards receiving a score of 10 stated that they have established clear guardrails that reflect the values of the community and that they set guardrails to ensure that the Superintendent's work is aligned with SOFG goals. According to Gonzales, these guardrails are SMART and are updated several times a year.
The board plans to deepen community involvement in the guardrail development process and improve the predictive quality of temporary guardrails in order to move forward with a “focus on student outcomes.”
3. Monitoring and Accountability: Approach Focus on Student Outcomes
Board Evaluation Score: 10/30 points
We found that boards spend a lot of time monitoring district goals, devoting more than 10% of their meeting time to this activity. The board scored itself a 10 because it established a monitoring schedule and based the superintendent's performance evaluation on progress toward these goals.
Gonzales said the board is working to increase the time spent on monitoring by 25 percent to better achieve student outcomes and ensure each goal and guardrail is monitored as often as necessary.
4. Communication and collaboration: Approach Focus on Student Outcomes
Board of Directors evaluation score: 1/10 points
The board earned 1 point because it made progress using consent agendas to streamline the meeting process and sort out the use of time in public meetings. However, the frequency and duration of meetings often exceed established standards, affecting the focus and effectiveness of discussions.
To improve, the Board will reduce the number of topics discussed at meetings and ensure that all meeting materials are finalized and shared a few days prior to the meeting. Astorga proposed time limits for individuals and groups attending board meetings without a focus on student outcomes.
5. Unity and Trust: Focus on Achieving Student Outcomes
Board of Directors Evaluation Score: 3/5 points
The Board operates with high attendance and ethical standards, and all members support the Board's Ethics and Conflicts of Interest Statement. However, board members agreed that there was room to further strengthen unity by ensuring that all members refrain from providing operational advice and fully withdraw from matters where conflicts of interest may arise.
To build on this competency, the Board of Directors has agreed to review all policies at least once per Board member's term of office and to align them more closely with the Board's operating procedures.
6. Continuous Improvement: Focus on Approaching Student Outcomes
Board of Directors evaluation score: 1/5 points
The Board strives for continuous improvement by tracking time spent on governance and the costs associated with it. But the board has not yet participated in governance team training sessions, which Gonzales said would be important to strengthen focus on goals.
The Board agreed to organize and participate in governance training sessions and to conduct more frequent self-assessments to better monitor and improve practices.
What's next?
Based on the results of the evaluation, the Board of Directors unanimously agreed to implement several strategic changes. The board decided to reorganize the meeting agenda to prioritize items that directly impact student outcomes. This new format prominently displays student-related discussions at the beginning of each meeting, ensuring students receive the attention and deliberation they need.
The Board discussed strengthening monitoring practices by adopting more rigorous methods to track the implementation and effectiveness of educational strategies. This includes setting clear goals for student achievement and regularly reviewing progress against these goals.
Much of the meeting was devoted to discussing ways board members could improve their questioning skills during presentations and reports. Gonzales said the goal is to encourage more strategic, results-focused questions that spark detailed discussions about student progress and program effectiveness. The board plans to receive training on effective questioning to better scrutinize and support administrative actions and proposals.