Stow‑Munroe Falls board reviews draft five‑year strategic plan, outlines next steps

Impact Group consultants Doreen Osmond and Phil Herman presented a high‑level draft of a five‑year strategic plan to the Stow‑Munroe Falls City School District Board of Education during the March regular meeting at Fish Creek Elementary.

The consultants said the plan grew from extensive outreach: a SWOT analysis with the board and leadership team, 17 focus groups, 6 one‑on‑one interviews with community leaders, a staff survey with 243 respondents, and a community/parent survey with about 1,086 responses (roughly 635 fully completed). From that feedback, they distilled six draft goal areas: student learning experiences; student expectations, culture and supports; staff well‑being and professional empowerment; business affairs and operations (including a long‑range facility plan); communication; and financial stewardship and community partnerships.

"We want to hear from our community, our staff, and our students," Phil Herman said in the presentation, summarizing the engagement process and the themes that emerged. Doreen Osmond read the draft wording for the first goal, which aims to "advance academic excellence by ensuring every student has access to engaging, purposeful and inclusive learning experiences," and described supporting objectives such as stronger vertical alignment, refined assessment practices, and expanded advanced‑learning opportunities.

Board members and staff used the presentation to probe next steps rather than to debate specific action items. The consultants emphasized the difference between adopting goals and adopting action steps: the board typically approves goals and objectives at the plan level and allows administrators to develop prioritized, time‑bound action steps and implementation plans later. The consultants said they expect the district to be considering adoption in April or May and to have a workable plan ready for the start of the school year.

At least one trustee urged clearer, plainer language in the final draft. The board chair noted concerns about the district’s stated objective to "leverage technology and artificial intelligence to deepen learning," citing a recent news story and asking the team to ensure the plan spells out ethical and responsible use so classrooms do not default to device‑led instruction. "Leverage technology is fine, but we don’t want our children to be... sticking their faces in there," the chair said, expressing a desire for clearer guardrails around classroom technology use.

Consultants said the next steps include a work session with the superintendent and administrative team to perform baseline assessments, prioritize objectives, and develop measurable implementation steps. They stressed that some objectives will require board approval for purchases or contracts when action steps are brought forward. No formal vote or adoption occurred at the meeting.

The board scheduled follow‑up work sessions to refine language, prioritize goals, and identify who will lead each objective; consultants and district administrators said they will return to the board with recommended action steps later this spring and summer.

The full presentation and supporting materials (survey summaries, focus‑group notes, and draft objectives) will be provided to board members for review before the next consideration of the plan.