Claremont School Board — June 3, 2025

Regular meeting summary generated from the meeting dialogue transcript, the posted packet, and the approved minutes. Two halves: an hour on grade 3–8 NH SAS and grade 11 School Day SAT results read off a screen whose slide deck is not in the public packet, and a run of six policy actions — five adopted at a single read. Timestamps link to the same moment in the Cablecast recording.

Body
Claremont School Board (SAU 6)
Date
Tuesday, June 3, 2025 — moved off the board's usual Wednesday so as not to conflict with Stevens High School class night (announced at the May 21 meeting)
Start time
6:30 p.m. per the agenda; the recording joins during the roll call. Adjourned by consent at 8:30 p.m. per the minutes.
Location
Sugar River Valley Regional Technical Center, Claremont NH (audio broadcast on CCTV Channel 8), per the minutes' header
Recording
Cablecast: School Board Meeting - 6/3/25 (2:00:02 — begins mid-roll-call; the call to order and Pledge are not captured)
Minutes
25. Approved CSB Meeting Minutes 6.3.25 (approved; submitted by clerk Noelle Kronberg)

Participants

Board, administration and staff. Attendance follows the approved minutes' roll call. No citizens' comments were offered at this meeting (minutes: "none"), so there are no public speakers to list. Name spellings follow the minutes where the automatic transcript differs.
NameRoleParticipation
Heather WhitneyChairPresent; presided. 173 of 623 dialogue segments — moved policies GBEF, JICK, IHBA and ADC, and the motion sending CHCA to a second read
Michael PetrinVice ChairPresent; pressed for required professional development for underperforming teachers; seconded the CHCA second-read motion; agreed to serve as the board's representative on the Superintendent's Advisory Committee
Arlene HawkinsBoard member; Policy Subcommittee chair; Curriculum chairPresent; presented the whole policy run (108 segments); moved JICL and the CHCA revisions
William "Bill" MaddenBoard memberPresent; seconded GBEF, JICK, IHBA and ADC; argued the presentation set the state average as a ceiling and that opting out of testing should be made harder
Loren HowardBoard memberPresent; seconded JICL; led the public-engagement / NH Listens discussion; read the CHCA revision wording into the record for the minutes
Candace CrawfordBoard member; SRVRTC Subcommittee chairAbsent (minutes roll call). Her SRVRTC vision/purpose statement (Exhibit I) was nonetheless in the packet and reported by the chair
Frank SpragueBoard member; Finance Subcommittee chairAbsent (minutes roll call). The Finance Subcommittee report was given by the chair in his place
Noelle KronbergSchool Board ClerkSignatory of the approved minutes; no remarks attributed in the dialogue file
Miles SheehanStudent Board MemberListed on the minutes' masthead; no remarks attributed in the dialogue file
Lilly ClarkStudent Board MemberListed on the minutes' masthead; no remarks attributed in the dialogue file
Christopher PrattSuperintendent, SAU 6Present; 139 segments — presented "Program Effectiveness & Impact on the Budget" (instructional coaches moving to the elementary schools, social workers, classroom management)
Michael KoskiAsst. Superintendent, Curriculum, Instruction, Innovation & AssessmentPresent; 100 segments — presented the NH SAS grade 3–8, iReady and grade 11 SAT results. Introduced on the record by the chair as "Assistant Superintendent and current curriculum director"
Mary HenryBusiness Administrator, SAU 6Present but with no segments attributed to her in the dialogue file. The minutes credit her with reporting the two Plymouth State psychology interns, which the dialogue file attributes to Superintendent Pratt; the chair thanks her by name at 1:51:00 see method note
Jeff SmallDirector of TechnologyNamed in the minutes as having reviewed and recommended policy GBEF at the policy subcommittee meeting and attended it; no remarks attributed in the dialogue file
Michael McCosker · Patrick O'HearnDirector of Student Services · HR DirectorListed on the minutes' masthead; McCosker is referenced on the record as having initiated the Plymouth State internship contact; no remarks attributed to either
Citizens' commentsPolicy BEDH itemNo speakers. Chair at 0:00:54: "I see no citizens interested in commenting, so I will close that." Minutes: "none"

Agenda

Agenda text quoted from the approved minutes, which reproduce the posted agenda in full; the posted PDF (CSB Agenda 6.3.25 (3).pdf) is in the packet. Hover over (or Tab to) a clipped entry for full text.

Taken upItemAgenda text / disposition
0:00:09I–II. Call to Order & Pledge; roll callNot captured — the recording joins mid-roll-call ("Attendance are here for."). Minutes: "Present: Arlene Hawkins, Loren Howard, William Madden, Michael Petrin, Heather Whitney ● Absent: Candace Crawford, Frank Sprague." Five of seven members present; every vote this night was taken by that five. See flag 7.
0:00:17II.a. Consent agenda"1. Amendments and Final Approval of board agenda ● Heather Whitney requested an item added to number 5 to review/discuss the handbooks 2. Minutes Approval- 5.21.25 ● Consent approval of all consent agenda items." On the recording the chair notes the 5/21 minutes "were sent out by Chelsea today or yesterday" and that the added handbook item carries no vote — "There'll be no vote, but it just allows us to have an opportunity for discussion."
0:00:54II.b. Citizens' comments (Policy BEDH)"I see no citizens interested in commenting, so I will close that." Minutes: "none".
0:01:25III.1. Grade 3–8 NH SAS results, grade 11 School Day SAT and internal benchmarks"Presentation of Grade 3-8 NHSAS results and Grade 11 School Day SAT results and other internal benchmarks (Discussion) (Exhibit A) Mike Koski, Assistant Superintendent & Curriculum Director." Discussion only, no vote. Roughly 49 minutes of the meeting. Exhibit A is not in the posted packet folder — see flag 1.
0:50:52III.2. Program Effectiveness & Impact on the Budget"Chris Pratt, Superintendent — Instructional Coaches, Social Workers & policies that impact school culture, social health, and behavior." Discussion only, no vote: next year is the final year of middle- and high-school instructional coaches, with the three budgeted coaching positions moving to the three elementary schools; social-worker capacity, contracting and an "extender" role; classroom management as the next professional-development focus. See flag 6.
1:13:29III.3. Development of Public Forum Ad Hoc Committee"Loren Howard, Lead — Discussion and Approval by Board." No committee was formed. Outcome per the minutes: "The Board decided it would be beneficial to have a Board member attend the advisory committee meetings; Michael Petrin will be the representative." Howard: "I'm really 50/50 with going forwar[d]" on a formal committee.
1:32:32III.4.a–b, d–e. Subcommittee reportsFinance (chair reporting in Sprague's absence): working with the policy committee on finance policies; next meeting June 13 at the Dow building, 9–11. Capital Improvement (Petrin): "Statement will be available at next meeting" — he adds he will not be at that meeting. Curriculum: no report. SRVRTC: vision/purpose statement (Exhibit I) in the packet, to be posted to the website; a planned meeting was postponed.
1:35:14III.4.c.1–2. First read — GBEF and GBEF-R(1)"GBEF- Internet Access for Staff (Exhibit B)" with its procedural attachment GBEF-R(1) (Exhibit C). New policy for Claremont. "Heather Whitney made a motion to adopt policy GBEF as presented, William Madden seconded the motion ○ Voice vote taken, all present voting in favor; policy is adopted." The R-attachment is procedure and was not separately adopted.
1:35:58III.4.c.3–4. First read — JICL and JICL-R(1)"JICL- School District Internet Access for Students (Exhibit D)" with JICL-R(1) (Exhibit E). "Arlene Hawkins made a motion to adopt policy JICL as presented, Loren Howard seconded the motion ○ Voice vote taken, all present voting in favor; the policy is adopted." Minutes on the R-attachment: "Procedural attachment, parents will be able to sign online."
1:37:23III.4.c.5. First read — JICK"JICK- Pupil Safety and Violence Prevention (Exhibit F) ● Refers primarily to bullying and cyberbullying ● This policy takes two separate policies and consolidates them (the two separate policies will be rescinded at next meeting). Heather Whitney made a motion to adopt policy JICK as presented, William Madden seconded the motion ○ Voice vote taken, all present voting in favor; the policy is adopted ○ Will be included in student handbooks." Hawkins on the recording: seven days' notice is required to withdraw the superseded policies, so the rescissions wait for the next meeting.
1:39:57III.4.c.6. First read — IHBA"IHBA- Programs for Pupils with Disabilities (Exhibit G) ● Confirms the safeguards for students with disabilities. Heather Whitney made a motion to adopt policy IHBA as presented, William Madden seconded the motion ○ Voice vote taken, all present voting in favor; the policy is adopted." The chair pronounced the code letter by letter on the record ("I h be a").
1:40:25III.4.c.7. First read — CHCA"CHCA- Approval of Handbooks & Directives (Exhibit H) ● Revision of current policy to include specific month deadlines." The revised version was missing from the packet ("This is not the revised one"), so instead of adopting, "Heather Whitney made a motion to move policy CHCA to a second read, including the revisions presented and agreed upon at this meeting, Michael Petrin seconded the motion ○ Voice vote taken, all present voting in favor; policy moved to second read." See flag 9.
1:48:13III.4.c.8. ADC revision"ADC- revision to include e-cigarettes. Heather Whitney made a motion to adopt policy ADC as revised, William Madden seconded the motion ○ Voice vote taken, all present voting in favor; the policy is dopted [sic]." Hawkins on the record: the policy in force dates from 2004; the revision is the 2024 model. No exhibit for ADC appears in the packet folder. The chair's first attempt at the code — "a c d" — is corrected to "a d c" in the same breath.
1:56:24III.5. Handbook discussion (added item)Handbooks distributed to members electronically as a Google Doc for comment; the newly adopted policies will change them; Hawkins wants them "consistent across all three levels" with the strategic plan, values and core mission at the front and a code of conduct built on a multi-tiered system of support. Madden asked to submit paper comments instead; Pratt: "Yeah, I can make it work." Whitney circulated exemplar handbooks from higher-performing districts.
1:57:41IV. Other BusinessMadden asked that the approved honor-roll process be applied to the senior class before graduation; Pratt: "we can look at it for as moving forward. But but having it for the day after tomorrow would be a tough sell." Minutes: "Mr. Pratt stated that it is not realistic for this year since graduation is Thursday."
1:59:12V–VI. Future dates; adjournmentFinance Subcommittee June 13 at the Dow building 9–11; next board meeting June 18 at 6:30 p.m.; graduation Thursday. "Consent adjournment at 8:30pm." The recording ends 50 seconds later at its 2:00:02 runtime.

Discussion timeline — assessment results and the policy run

Times are from the dialogue transcript (Output/Dialogue/16580 SchoolBoard060325.mp4.CSV), which is speaker-attributed. Quotations reproduce the automatic transcript verbatim, including its garbles; corrections drawn from the approved minutes are shown in square brackets. Every figure in the assessment section was read aloud from slides that are not in the public packet — treat the numbers as spoken words, not as verified data.

TimeTopicWhat was said (leading text; hover/focus for more)Flags
0:00:06The recording joins in progressThe first two rows of the dialogue file are unattributed fragments — "Next year." and "Attendance are here for." — and the chair's own first line at 0:00:17 opens "Here are spread. Heather Whitney here." The call to order, the Pledge and the first names of the roll are not on the recording. Attendance for this page is therefore taken from the minutes, not the video.OBSERVATION
0:02:21How to read the chartsKoski: "Be go with science scores. And we couple pieces of information. Blue below. Proficiency red. Getting there. Yellow is at or above proficient. The solid line is the state average for New Hampshire of last year. They haven't published their state average for this year. And the dotted line is our scores from the year prior. Oh okay. The bright spot here is that high school scored by the state average." The colour key and both reference lines exist only in this spoken description; the slides are not published.MEDIUM
0:02:52Science: "our score from last year, which was 39%"Koski, verbatim: "If you look at our score from last year, which was 39% huge improvement due to move up, and so really proud of that. And we are close to getting close to the state average in eighth grade, still pretty far behind in fifth grade elementary school." The 39% is the only science figure spoken with a number attached, and the sentence around it is garbled enough that this page will not say which grade or which year it belongs to. The minutes' version of the same point: "Mr. Koski noted that the 11th grade strongly outperformed previous years in science."OBSERVATION MEDIUM
0:03:18Science statewide contextKoski: "these these large blue buyers [bars] are concerned, but for whatever reason, state the science schools across the state. And probably because of the gaps in between those tests tend to score very low statewide. So the statewide average in the 40s or the high 30s is, is is kind of rough. But our, our 11th grade students really did themselves compared to years past." At 0:03:52 he credited "Doctor Harrington" — Stevens principal Michael Herrington — with "pretty impassioned speech to the junior class prior to the test", plus science teachers' work with the state's practice sets, and noted there was "much less of that at the, elementary level".OBSERVATION
0:04:58ELA: a cohort followed grade to gradeKoski: "here are Ela scores… Some of the bright spots. Fifth grade almost get to the state. Average dotted line scores from last year… if we look at fourth grade Ela scores, the dotted line would have been this year's fifth grade class." At 0:05:36: "you can see a big improvement through for those students via their fifth grade teachers… Likewise, we see some areas where scores of fallen from from year to year… from sixth grade last year to seventh grade. This year we see pretty big drop in those scores." At 0:06:07: "we're not quite there yet with proficiency. But we are seeing some I guess, for lack of a better term, green spro[uts]". No ELA percentages are spoken.OBSERVATION
0:08:02iReady against NH SAS — the numbers do not line upKoski: "The sass test, certainly for third grade. For fifth grade, they scored much higher on the Sass test than they did on the I ready on the I ready test. Whoops. So fifth grade proficiency on IRA [iReady] was only 36%." Then at 0:08:22, complete: "Fifth grade on the Sass test was 48%." Those two figures make iReady the lower measure — but the approved minutes record the opposite conclusion: "there is higher proficiency demonstrated by iReady than SAS, particularly in reading, so it may not be as valid." His own caution at 0:08:26: "be cautious with the irony [iReady] reading scores because they look a little aggressive for the younger kids." Without Exhibit A a reader cannot settle which way round the comparison runs.OBSERVATION MEDIUM
0:09:52Turnover and leadership, not free-and-reduced lunchAnswering the chair's question about differences between schools and any correlation with free-and-reduced-lunch rates, Koski: "This year we had some schools, struggled with, leadership situations and teacher turnover and that seemed to very much impact their scores. Other schools have little more study [steady] situation and those students perform better. In terms of direct correlation between kind of socioeconomic status or free and reduced lunch. No, we we really have such a large population." At 0:10:42: "Yeah, I would move more towards instructional practice… we've got the right programs in place. We've got the right curriculum in place. We've just got to get the instructional practice elevated across the district to to really see the scores come up."
0:11:21Petrin: "kids are doing poorly because adults are doing poorly"Petrin: "So this is what frustrates me is that kids are doing poorly because adults are doing poorly. Is what I'm hearing as well, which is part of it. Yeah. But we have we have instructional coaches, which is optional, is encouraged, but it's not. But if we know we have adults that are not teaching to the level they should be, they should." At 0:11:46: "My opinion, there should be some required professional development or you will do this. You will have this coaching."OBSERVATION
0:18:04Madden: the state average as a ceilingMadden: "The way it's presented. You have it looks like a ceiling with the average state score." At 0:18:14: "That's a failure. Now, it would be an achievement for our situation right now." And at 0:18:25: "We got to raise the bar dramatically… But even the way we're presenting it, okay, we're presenting very low expectations. Well, I would disagree, I don't think. But if that's the way it's received, that's not well, that's the way I would see it. I'm a hard ass." Koski's reply is merged into the same diarized segment.OBSERVATION
0:19:13Test opt-outs and the participation rateMadden: "All the all the students, the parents that are allowing the students to opt out, get a zero." At 0:19:21: "I think we should make it uncomfortable to opt out… Why don't we make them sign a form and they got to come into the school and sign the form?" And at 0:20:11: "No, but that's that's our required participation rate." The administration declined: minutes, "Mr. Koski explained they cannot put barriers in place for a state rule, but that the district had above 95% participations which is the requirement."OBSERVATION
0:23:36Math: fourth grade "below 20%… up near 40%"Koski: "here are the math SAT [SAS] scores again. Yellow proficient. You see fourth grade making a big improvement. This is their score in third grade below 20%. Now they're up near 40%. So that group has made a big improvement in their math scores." On the new math programme, at 0:24:09: "this is when they didn't have it. This is when they did… this this this year's was the first year after that program is instituted. State math average, not a ceiling… So we are again all over the place with growth or loss. But some signs of, of improvement." The minutes record a correction the chair drew out on the record: the prior-year data predates the new math programme, this year's does not.OBSERVATION
0:25:10iReady math figures, spoken onceKoski: "the irony [iReady], math scores. So third, fourth and fifth, right around 40% low 30s for, for fifth grade if we flip back fifth grades 28, fourth grades 39, 27." Quoted exactly as spoken; the run of numbers at the end is not resolvable from audio alone and the minutes carry no iReady math figures at all. At 0:25:50: "the early grades show higher on the irony scores. We get lower as we go higher in the grade."OBSERVATION MEDIUM
0:29:52The chair: "is there a reason that we are not mandating test prep universally?"Whitney: "When I went on the New Hampshire Doe website to kind of get a better understanding of what the Sass was about, sure. They had a bunch of test prep resources for schools. I guess the question that I have is, is there a reason that we are not mandating test prep universally?" Koski at 0:30:16: "I don't know if mandate is probably we're just shy of mandating it," describing modular sample questions and an interim practice test run at all schools this year, time-bounded although "The Sass test has no time limit". At 0:31:16: "We could certainly spend more time on test prep, get into that debate about, you know, how much is too much… we can be happy to take direction from the board."OBSERVATION
0:32:40The teacher evaluation tool is bargained, not board-setKoski: "teacher evaluation tool is part of the negotiated contract. Correct. And so when when that comes up for negotiation, that'll be part of the negotiations I believe I'm not putting words in your mouth, Mr. Pratt. No, we." Pratt at 0:32:55 described trying "to tackle it under the… collective bargaining agreement", and at 0:33:20: "we weren't able to use Esser [ESSER] funds. So now we're just trying to find something that's affordable. And they're really expensive right now." This is the statutory answer to the board's interest in mandating professional development for particular teachers.OBSERVATION
0:40:17Howard's caution against pointing at teachersHoward: "Maybe they're seen as some sort of way. So before too quickly jumping into pointing fingers at an individual teacher, I…" and at 0:40:42: "there might be cases where teachers feel that way, but their students excel. So it could go either way." Hawkins added at 0:43:32: "I just want to clarify, I was in no way suggesting publicly no, no, that I was not know. Believe me, I would never do th[at]". No teacher was named in public session at any point in the recording.OBSERVATION
0:42:39How teacher-level data actually circulatesAsked whether a teacher can see how they compare with peers "blind", Koski: "that is actually happening at all the schools. They each have the data teams, these have leadership teams." At 0:43:04: "they do so in grade level meetings. The triangles come out and and they look at their data, and so they can see and[…]" — teachers are not named, though per the minutes they "know who they are". At 0:44:29 he described the disaggregations available: "All of the math is broken down into numbers and operations, algebraic thinking, geometry graphs and Ela into…"OBSERVATION
0:44:47Where the chair asked the resources to goWhitney: "if you were going to say the top three…" and at 0:45:03: "If we have resources that must be mustered, where should they be mustered?" Koski's answer, at 0:45:24: professional development first, "partly because, you know, I think we're reducing our turnover"; then physical instructional materials — at 0:46:34: "we're we're sorely lacking science materials at the elementary leve[l]"; then consistency of building-level leadership and staff retention. Hawkins added time at 0:49:13: "Time is is a resource that I think we're short of."
0:49:30Grade 11 School Day SATKoski: "This is the SAT scores. A little bit awkward of a graph I apologize. Students who are scoring below expectation here. The national averages for SAT scores. We have 50% ish of our students there. We have a little over 10% scoring above that, but still a good chunk below in both math and in English." At 0:50:05: "we are a state that tests everybody. Not all states do that. So you'll see states like Alabama and Nebraska and their in their 1200s for a combined score. Where we're in the 1050 range. But a lot of that is selection of who gets to take the test." Conclusion at 0:50:29: "we nationally score as a state above the national average, but, we as a district are a little bit below that right now."OBSERVATION
0:51:54Instructional coaches move to the elementary schoolsPratt: "you have to take consideration the skill set, the population of kids that they're working with. And so the plan moving forward enough next to the year after that is that we want each school to have their own elementary coach. We have three elementary schools. We have three budgeted positions for elementary coaches. So all our resources for elementary coaches will go at the early, early years." At 0:52:45: "next year would be the, you know, the final year that we will, you know, for coaches for the middle school and high school, we are going to move them one to each elementary school." Confirmed for school year 2026-27. No vote was taken.OBSERVATION
0:54:05Social workers: needed, unavailable, spread thinPratt: "we've been down social workers over the years. The need for social workers, have grown tremendously. But we're finding is that we need them, but they're just not out there… social workers address student attendance behaviors, mental health issues." At 0:55:00: "The ones that we have now, I think, spread very thin." Petrin and Whitney proposed an assistant or "Social worker extender" role; Pratt said "just to be an assistant social worker, you have to have you have" qualifications the district cannot readily meet, and that the district contracts with outside agencies where it can.OBSERVATION
1:04:57Two Plymouth State interns — attribution differsThe segment opens with a board member's question merged into the speaker's cluster: "What is that program, Mr. Pratt? That's Plymouth State and that's our psychologist, because we've been having a hard time finding psychologists that, Mike McCusker [McCosker] had come to me and said, hey, can I reach out to the schools and see if this is something we can do? And, we found two people". The dialogue file attributes this to Superintendent Pratt; the approved minutes attribute the same report to Business Administrator Mary Henry — "Mary Henry shared that the district has two psychology interns through a partnership with Plymouth State starting next year." Both cannot be right; this page reports the conflict rather than choosing.OBSERVATION
1:13:29The public-forum committee that wasn't formedHoward: "I'm very open to suggestion on who membership should be, how we should state the purpose, I think timeline maybe 12 to 18 months, ideally a budget implication of $0." He cited Portsmouth's practice, floated building public engagement into regular meetings instead, and at 1:15:49: "I'm really 50/50 with going forwar[d]". At 1:19:23 he named the origin — "the awkwardness" of not being able to answer public comment. Petrin's caution at 1:24:40: "my only caution is going out as individuals is, like you said, it's going to hear and listen. It's you're not able" to answer for the board. Resolved by naming Petrin the board's representative to the Superintendent's Advisory Committee — no committee formed, no vote recorded in the minutes.
1:33:16Policy subcommittee: working one meeting aheadHawkins: "we met this afternoon, and what we're doing is we are looking at policies that will be presented at the following meeting so that we are one step ahead. And I do receive recommendations from the food service coordinator and from the finance subcommittee and from the administration. And I did receive some procedures right before the meeting." At 1:33:51: "Our goal is to get through the priorities so that we are in line with statutes that are currently in place." The subcommittee met the afternoon of the board meeting — a pattern she describes again at 1:50:25: "we do meet every the day of every board meeting before the board meeting."POSITIVE
1:34:56The question that set the night's patternWhitney: "Do you think we'll need a second read for this or would you like to try to adopt it?" Hawkins: "I don't think we need a second read. I think that I don't know, we didn't talk about that at our meeting today." No rules-suspension motion was made, and none is recorded in the minutes — in contrast to the May 21 meeting, where the same subcommittee chair said explicitly on the record, "We are suspending our rules for tonight." Four more policies were then adopted the same way.MEDIUM
1:35:14GBEF adoptedWhitney: "I'd like to make a motion to adopt policy GBEF as presented by the policy subcommittee." Madden: "Second." Vote at 1:35:44: "Do we have any discussion about policy GDEF [GBEF]? Seeing none all in favor of adopting the policy as presented by the Policy Committee, say a policy is unanimously adopted." Hawkins had introduced it at 1:33:51 as "the first policy BBF [GBEF] internet access for staff", with Director of Technology Jeff Small's recommendation "to go forward with the with the policy as presented here." The transcript renders the code three different ways in five minutes; the minutes settle it as GBEF.MEDIUM
1:36:55JICL adopted — and the seconder the transcript losesHawkins: "So I will move to adopt JICL school district internet access for students. I'll second." The diarizer merged the second into the mover's segment; the chair resolves it immediately at 1:37:02 — "Mr. Howard seconds" — and the minutes agree: "Arlene Hawkins made a motion to adopt policy JICL as presented, Loren Howard seconded the motion." Vote at 1:37:07: "All in favor of adopting policy J. I see l as presented by the policy subcommittee. Say a a saying no opposition policy is adopted. First reading." The chair's own words — "adopted. First reading" — are the clearest statement on the record of what happened five times this night.MEDIUM
1:37:23JICK adopted; two superseded policies await a rescission noticeHawkins: "The next policy is JICK pupil safety and violence prevention. We actually right now have two separate policies. And this is consolidated into one. It's the New Hampshire School Board Association sample and refers primarily to bullying bullying and cyberbullying. It includes consequences of false reporting for retaliation and to protect students from retaliation." Asked whether the old policies must be rescinded, she answered at 1:38:08: "that's next after we adopt? But what we're doing because we have to have seven days notice for withdrawing, that'll be at our next meeting." The consolidating policy therefore takes effect while the two policies it replaces remain formally in force. Motion and vote at 1:38:23, Madden seconding.MEDIUM
1:39:03IHBA adopted — special-education safeguardsHawkins: "The next one is I h be a [IHBA] programs for students with disabilities. This is a revision. The one that we currently have is…" and at 1:39:37: "this just confirms that in a policy and people can parents can get the safeguards either through the building level a[nd]…". Motion, second and vote at 1:39:57, all in one segment: "I'd like to make a motion that the board adopts as presented by the policy subcommittee policy. I h be a second, Mr. Madden, in seconds… all in favor of adopting policy? I h be a as presented by the policy subcommittee say I seeing it on oppose policies adopted."MEDIUM
1:40:50CHCA: the wrong version in the packetHawkins: "This is not the revised one. So I'm going to defer. I guess that's going to hold up a process." At 1:41:22: "those revisions should be in here and they're not. So I apologize for that." Pratt urged proceeding anyway — "You can adopt it based on those revisions. I'm sorry. You can adopt it" — and Whitney asked her to "verbalize what those revisions are." Hawkins moved adoption with revisions at 1:41:35, and Howard then read the actual wording into the record at 1:43:21: "The principals and other administrators will prepare the updated copy ready for publication by mid-July for final approval at the August board meeting… But to verbalize it for the public in the minutes, that's[…]".POSITIVE
1:46:49CHCA held for a second read insteadAfter working out that the board has no July meeting, Whitney at 1:46:37: "So I want to just do this a first read and[…]"; Hawkins: "Let's make this a first read." The motion, at 1:46:49: "move policy CACA [CHCA] to second read with amendments and additions that were made in this meeting, including the date in which the board will approve." Petrin seconded; carried at 1:47:07. The board also wrote its own approval deadline into the policy — Whitney at 1:45:26: "Should we include that, it would be voted on, approved by the board in the first meeting in August."POSITIVE
1:48:13ADC revised and adopted — a 2004 policy replacedHawkins: "the one that we have is from 2004. There's this revised 2024 to include these e-cigarettes. And we're going to do the same thing." Whitney at 1:48:23: "is the board comfortable adopting this without a second read? If I make a motion to that effect okay. I'd like to make a motion to adopt the revised policy a c d," corrected in the next breath at 1:48:36 to "a d c" with Madden seconding, and closing "And we're now compliant there." No ADC exhibit is in the packet folder, and the record does not identify the statute or rule the board is now "compliant" with.MEDIUM
1:48:57Seven more policies queued, and fiscal procedures promisedHawkins: "for our next meeting we will be bringing forward seven additional. Most of them are priorities. We have the ones from the finance subcommittee. We have one from the food services director. We have several that deal with attendance to consolidate the numbers of policies we have from 3 to 1." At 1:49:34: "Procedural safeguards for special education, security and alternative learning plans and conduct discipline and due proc[ess]". Whitney at 1:51:00: "Mary, thank you for getting those procedures… Miss Henry is going to be working on those procedures to make sure that we have links to those procedures and that we are we are battening down the hatches, making sure that, any financial management irregularities are going to be ameliorated." Hawkins at 1:51:29: "the procedures will be on the website".POSITIVE
1:57:48Honor-roll process and graduationMadden: "I sent you an email, but maybe it didn't get conveyed, but I was hoping that we could follow the approved honorable [honor roll] process for Stevens, especially for the senior class before graduation." At 1:58:22: "I know that we have at least one very high performing student who wasn't accepted to their first choice college. And who knows if, you know, putting one more line on their resume, saying high honors every year, maybe it would have tipped the scales. So this is just another thing we have to clean up." Pratt: "having it for the day after tomorrow would be a tough sell." No vote; the meeting adjourned by consent.

Items flagged for review

Flags are a reviewer's aid generated by comparing the discussion against verified state and federal law. They are not findings of violation, and nothing here is legal advice. Each flag cites the rule it rests on; where no verified rule reaches a concern, it is labelled an observation and says so plainly. Assessment results in particular are observations: no rule on this project's verified citation list requires a district to reach any particular level of achievement.

MEDIUM Exhibit A — the entire assessment presentation — is not in the posted packet, so every figure exists only as spoken audio

The agenda and the minutes both cite "(Exhibit A)" for the grade 3–8 NH SAS, iReady and grade 11 SAT presentation, which consumed roughly the first 49 minutes of the meeting. The posted Drive packet folder holds ten documents — the agenda, the previous meeting's draft minutes, and Exhibits B through I. There is no Exhibit A. The consequence is concrete rather than technical: the presenter worked through charts describing a colour key, a state-average line and a prior-year dotted line (0:02:21), and every percentage in this page's timeline is a machine transcription of a number spoken while pointing at a screen the public cannot see. A resident who wants to check whether fifth-grade proficiency was 36% or 48%, or which grade the "39%" belongs to, has no document to check it against. New Hampshire's Right-to-Know Law makes governmental records available to the public, and a presentation prepared for and used at a public meeting is such a record; nothing in the record suggests it is exempt or was withheld deliberately, which is why this is a documentation gap rather than an asserted violation. The board's own remedy is already visible elsewhere in the meeting: Exhibits B–I for the policy items were posted, and the board treated the one missing revision (CHCA) as a reason to slow down — see flag 9.

Sources: RSA 91-A:4 (availability of governmental records); RSA 91-A:2 (minutes; subject matter of the meeting); packet folder "23. CSB 6.3.25" (10 documents, verified 2026-08-25).

MEDIUM Five policies adopted at a single read, by five of seven members, with no motion to suspend the two-read practice

GBEF, JICL, JICK, IHBA and ADC were each moved, seconded and adopted the night they were first presented; only CHCA went to a second read. The chair's own summary after the JICL vote captures it exactly: "policy is adopted. First reading" (1:37:07). The decision was made once, informally, at the start of the run — chair: "Do you think we'll need a second read for this or would you like to try to adopt it?"; subcommittee chair: "I don't think we need a second read. I think that I don't know, we didn't talk about that at our meeting today" (1:34:56) — and then applied four more times without being revisited. No rule on this page's verified citation list requires a New Hampshire school board to read a policy twice, so this is not a statutory violation; the two-read practice is the board's own, and the flag is raised at MEDIUM as a process gap, not a legal one. What distinguishes it from the May 21 waiver is the absence of any suspension on the record: three weeks earlier the same subcommittee chair said "We are suspending our rules for tonight," with a stated reason. Here no suspension was moved and the minutes record none. Two members — the Finance and SRVRTC subcommittee chairs — were absent for all six actions. One consequence is already visible in the record: JICK consolidates two existing policies, but the seven-day notice needed to rescind them had not been given, so the superseded policies remained formally in force after the consolidating policy took effect (1:38:08).

Sources: approved minutes, item III.4.c (movers, seconders and dispositions); Claremont School Board By-Laws (adopted 5/21/25). No verified rule on this page's citation list sets a policy-reading requirement for a New Hampshire school board.

OBSERVATION Proficiency below state averages across most grades — and no rule that requires otherwise

This is the meeting's biggest story and it is an observation, which is the correct label. The assistant superintendent's account, as spoken: a science figure of "39%" described as the prior year's score against a "huge improvement" (0:02:52); statewide science averages "in the 40s or the high 30s" (0:03:18); fourth-grade math up from "below 20%" in third grade to "up near 40%" (0:23:36); a combined SAT "in the 1050 range" with "50% ish" of students below the national average benchmark and "a little over 10% scoring above" (0:49:30, 0:50:05); and his own conclusion, "we nationally score as a state above the national average, but, we as a district are a little bit below that right now." Board members drew the sharpest characterizations — Petrin, "kids are doing poorly because adults are doing poorly" (0:11:21); Madden, the state average charted "looks like a ceiling" and "That's a failure" (0:18:04) — and those are members' characterizations, quoted as such. No rule on this project's verified citation list requires a district to reach any particular assessment outcome. The only rule that touches minimum standards at all is the state's Ed 306 minimum-standards part, which governs programme requirements and instructional time, not test scores; this page cites the part page only and draws no subsection-level conclusion from it. Achievement findings on this page are therefore observations, not violations, and should be read that way.

Sources: N.H. Code Admin. R. Ed 306 (minimum standards for public school approval — part page); approved minutes, item III.1. No verified rule on this list requires particular achievement outcomes.

OBSERVATION The transcript and the minutes disagree about which assessment reported higher proficiency

On the recording, the assistant superintendent gives two matched figures — "fifth grade proficiency on IRA [iReady] was only 36%" (0:08:02) and "Fifth grade on the Sass test was 48%" (0:08:22) — which make NH SAS the higher measure for that grade. The approved minutes state the reverse as his conclusion: "there is higher proficiency demonstrated by iReady than SAS, particularly in reading, so it may not be as valid." His spoken caution points the same way as the minutes — "be cautious with the irony [iReady] reading scores because they look a little aggressive for the younger kids" (0:08:26) — so the likeliest explanation is that the automatic transcript inverted or mis-heard one of the two numbers. This page does not choose: it quotes both figures as spoken and records the conflict. The same problem affects the run of iReady math figures at 0:25:10 ("fifth grades 28, fourth grades 39, 27"), for which the minutes carry no figures at all. This is precisely what flag 1 costs the public: with Exhibit A posted, none of this would be in doubt.

Sources: approved minutes, item III.1; dialogue transcript rows at 0:08:02 and 0:08:22.

OBSERVATION Individual teacher performance discussed in public session — no one was named, and the administration held two lines

The board came close to territory the Right-to-Know Law and the bargaining statute both govern, and stopped short of it. The assistant superintendent told the board that teacher-level differences were visible in the data and, per the minutes, "when he looks at the breakdown by teachers, it is clear which teachers have embraced changes and professional development"; the vice chair pressed for compulsion — "there should be some required professional development or you will do this. You will have this coaching" (0:11:46). Two constraints were then stated on the record by the administration, both correct: the teacher evaluation tool "is part of the negotiated contract" and changes to it belong in bargaining (0:32:40), and comparative data circulates through school data teams and grade-level meetings (0:42:39) where, per the minutes, "teachers aren't named, but know who they are". Members policed the line themselves — Howard cautioned against "pointing fingers at an individual teacher" (0:40:17) and Hawkins clarified "I was in no way suggesting publicly" (0:43:32). No employee was identified in public session at any point in the recording, and no flag of violation is raised here. The observation is preventive: had a teacher been named, discussion of that person's performance would have belonged in a nonpublic session properly moved under RSA 91-A:3, II(a) or (c). A related exchange sits in the same territory — Madden's proposal to make test opt-outs "uncomfortable" for parents (0:19:21), which the assistant superintendent declined on the ground that the district "cannot put barriers in place for a state rule", noting participation already exceeded the 95% requirement.

Sources: RSA 91-A:3, II(a) and (c) (employee discipline/compensation; reputation of a non-member); RSA ch. 273-A (public-employee collective bargaining); Ed 306 (minimum standards — part page).

OBSERVATION Three budgeted coaching positions redirected from the secondary schools to the elementary schools, by report rather than by vote

The superintendent told the board that "next year would be the… final year" for middle- and high-school instructional coaches and that "we have three budgeted positions for elementary coaches. So all our resources for elementary coaches will go at the early, early years", effective school year 2026-27 (0:51:54, 0:52:45). He was explicit that the reason is strategic rather than performance-based — per the minutes, "not due to effectiveness at the middle and high school, but due to the strategic plan of focusing on the elementary schools". The agenda item was styled "(Discussion)", no motion was made, and the minutes record no vote. That is unremarkable as a matter of law: staffing assignments within an adopted budget are administrative, and no rule on this page's verified citation list requires a board vote to move budgeted positions between buildings. It is recorded here because it is a durable programme change made in a meeting where two members were absent, announced as information, with the corresponding elementary positions still unfilled — the superintendent noted the district had been "trying to fill a coaching position for the last year". Certified staff are nominated by the superintendent and elected by the board, so the individual appointments will return to the board even though this reallocation did not.

Sources: RSA 189:39 (superintendents nominate, school boards elect teachers); approved minutes, item III.2. No verified rule on this list requires a board vote to reassign budgeted positions between schools.

OBSERVATION Record gaps: the recording misses the call to order and roll, and the minutes credit a report the transcript gives to someone else

Two absences a reader should know about. First, the Cablecast recording joins the meeting already in progress — the first captured words are a fragment, "Attendance are here for." (0:00:09), and the chair's first full line is mid-roll (0:00:17). The call to order, the Pledge and most of the roll call are not on the video, so attendance on this page rests entirely on the minutes. Second, the approved minutes attribute the report of two Plymouth State psychology interns to Business Administrator Mary Henry, while the speaker-attributed dialogue file places the same passage with Superintendent Pratt (1:04:57) — and no segment anywhere in the 623-row file is attributed to Henry, although the chair thanks her by name at 1:51:00. The minutes are the authoritative record and this page follows them for attendance and for motions, but a reader checking a quotation against the video should expect these two to disagree. Minutes must be recorded promptly and made open to public inspection within five business days; these were approved at the following meeting and are posted, and this observation concerns their content, not their timeliness.

Sources: RSA 91-A:2 (minutes promptly recorded; names of persons appearing before the body); approved minutes; dialogue transcript.

POSITIVE A policy backlog being worked down deliberately, one meeting ahead, with procedures headed for the website

Six policy actions in one evening is unusual, and the structure behind it is visible in the record rather than asserted. The Policy Subcommittee meets the afternoon of every board meeting (1:50:25), works "one step ahead" on the policies for the following meeting (1:33:16), takes recommendations from the food-service coordinator, the finance subcommittee and the administration, and states its aim as getting "through the priorities so that we are in line with statutes that are currently in place" (1:33:51). The Director of Technology reviewed and recommended the two internet-use policies before they reached the floor and attended the subcommittee meeting to answer questions. Seven more policies were queued for the next meeting, including special-education procedural safeguards and consolidation of three attendance policies into one (1:48:57), and the chair committed the district's fiscal-management procedures to the website with links from the policies (1:51:00). Publishing procedures alongside policies is not required by anything on this page's citation list; it is the district doing more than the minimum, and it is the direct answer to the complaint a board member made three weeks earlier that no member had ever seen the district's financial procedures.

Sources: RSA 91-A:1-a, VI(d) (subcommittees are public bodies); RSA 91-A:4 (availability of governmental records); approved minutes, item III.4.c.

POSITIVE CHCA held for a second read when the packet turned out to hold the wrong version — over an invitation to adopt it anyway

Of the six policy items, one broke the pattern for the right reason. The subcommittee chair discovered mid-presentation that the packet contained the superseded text: "This is not the revised one. So I'm going to defer" (1:40:50), and apologised on the record. The superintendent pressed the other way — "You can adopt it based on those revisions. I'm sorry. You can adopt it" — and the board initially moved to do so. What happened next is the part worth noting: Howard read the exact revised wording into the record specifically so the public would have it, saying "to verbalize it for the public in the minutes" (1:43:21); the board then worked out that it has no July meeting, wrote its own approval deadline into the policy — "approved by the board in the first meeting in August" (1:45:26) — and converted the adoption motion into a motion to move CHCA to a second read (1:46:49). A board that declines to adopt a document it cannot see, and that fixes a recurring lapse by writing the deadline into the policy itself, is doing what a governing body is for. The same instinct applied to the missing Exhibit A would have answered flag 1.

Sources: approved minutes, item III.4.c.7; Exhibit H- Policy CHCA_ Approval of Handbooks and Directives.docx (1).pdf.

Appendix — source files

Official and public sources

Packet documents (exact Drive file names)

Project files (relative links work when this page is opened from Output/HTML/)

Laws and rules cited on this page