STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION – TOPIC SUMMARYTopic: June 2008 MinutesDate: August 22, 2008Staff/Office: Jan McComb, Board AdministratorAction Requested: Information only Policy Adoption Policy Adoption/Consent Calendar

ISSUE BEFORE THE BOARD: Adoption of June 2008 minutes

BACKGROUND: The State Board of Education is a public governing body, and as such, its meetings must comply with the provisions of ORS chapter 192, Records, Public Reports, Public Meetings.

Minutes of the State Board meetings shall be written in compliance with Oregon Revised Statutes and give a true reflection on the matters discussed at the meeting. They shall contain brief statements on important points made by Board members and participants and include all motions, proposals, resolutions, orders, ordinances and measures proposed and actions taken.

Past practice has been to send the minutes to board members for review and correction prior to the next board meeting and placed on the consent calendar.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adoption of the June minutes.

1

STATE BOARD OF EDUCATIONThursday June 19, 2008

Public Service Building, Room 251-A/B255 Capitol St. NE, Salem, OR 97310

Members Present:

2

Jerry Berger ChairDuncan Wyse Vice-ChairBrenda Frank Second Vice-ChairSteve Bogart Board MemberLew Frederick Board MemberArt Paz Board MemberNikki Squire Board Member

Allan Bruner Advisor, K-12 Teacher Rep.Jenna Chiono Advisor, K-12 Student Rep.Terry Kneisler Advisor, K-12 Admin. Rep.Michael DembrowAdvisor, CC Faculty Rep.Greg Hamann Advisor, CC President Rep.

3

Other Participants:Susan Castillo Superintendent of Public InstructionCamille Preus Community College CommissionerKrissa Caldwell Deputy CommissionerEd Dennis Deputy Superintendent, ODE Doug Kosty ODE, Asst. Supt., AssessmentDebby Ryan Executive Specialist, ODEJan McComb Board AdministratorSalam Noor Asst. Superintendent, ODEJoni Gilles Learning Ops Director, ODETony Alpert Assessment Director, ODEHelen Maguire Teaching & Learning Director, ODEColleen Mileham Secondary Trans. Director, ODE

Eric Richards Special Education Director, ODEPat Burk Chief Policy Officer, ODESue MacGlashan Asst. Supt., Finance, ODENancy Latini Asst. Supt., Student Learning, ODEGene Evans Director of Communications, ODESteve Nelson Chief IT Strategist, ODETim King Sisters/Marcola Web AcademiesJessica Barr Scoring & Reporting Mgr, ODEDianna Carrizales Monitoring Systems Dir., ODEMargaret Bates PE/Charter Ed. Specialist, ODE

____________________________________________________________________________________

Preliminary BusinessCall to Order/Roll Call/Flag Salute/IntroductionsChair Jerry Berger called the meeting to order at 9:00 a.m., led the room in the flag salute and asked that roll be called; excused was Michael Dembrow. He asked the audience to introduce themselves.

Chair CommentsChair Berger briefly reviewed the agenda. The proposed fingerprinting OAR had been removed from the agenda and the

Commissioner’s report had been postponed until tomorrow. English Language Learner rule was on consent calendar for tomorrow—it had been

distributed to members. The Division 22 rules re-write had been pulled from the agenda. Revised board policy on charter schools had been distributed to members. The diploma rule had been moved from Friday to Thursday—the materials were in the

Friday packet. Leslie Shepherd had been nominated to replace Director Bogart. Her confirmation was

scheduled for next week. She would join the board in August. Director Bogart would be missed but his efforts would live on.

Chair Berger stated he would leave early tomorrow for funeral. Vice-Chair Wyse would take his place when he left.

Committee UpdatesNo committee updates.

Member ReportsAdvisor Chiono –Chiono thanked the board and expressed her appreciation for all the opportunities and experiences the board gave her. Berger thanked Jenna on behalf of the board; who was extremely pleased with her involvement.

Director Paz – Paz recognized the Springfield district representatives that were present. He noted a recent literacy event where every student received a book. Representative Beyer put on an educational workshop that he participated in, which was very interesting. He attended a high school graduation at University of Washington. There was a local board member that talked about community involvement in rounding out a student. They did not talk about future threats such as diversity challenges, global warming and global economies, but the school’s web page contained that information. It could have been 1950, given the comments. He would like to address that disconnect to critical issues in society. The

4

University of Washington was starting an environmental college, so that is hopeful for the future. Students have overwhelmingly supported the college. Paz stated that the question of our time was “environment.”

Advisor Kneisler – Terry Kneisler recounted recent high school graduations with their remarkable tapestry of student diversity. Students recognized their responsibility to the community and environment.

Public Comment

Ann Schuster – Schuster spoke on behalf of the Sustainable Oregon Schools Initiative (SOSI). SOSI addressed many areas of school sustainability, including facilities and operations; systems and services; community and culture and education. She stated that she thought the state needed a comprehensive plan. SOSI had created a “how to” manual for schools interested in sustainability. SOSI was a multi-stakeholder effort. The resources were being created by teams that include school districts, non-profit and for-profit organizations, government agencies and parents. They were building on existing knowledge and already established examples.

Francis Charbonnier – Charbonnier spoke of assessment concerns. Assessments needed to assess the student’s overall future potential. Grades and GPAs was a fair system. He described the problems associated with conjunctive models of assessment. It was not a fair assessment of individual students. The proposed new diploma was a conjunctive model.

Nancy Golden, Superintendent of Springfield School District - Golden spoke in favor of the assessment of Essential Skills. Students did not take the state test seriously; they said it didn’t count toward graduation. State testing made us focus on state standards; this would increase teachers working together for student achievement and also increase student accountability. Students needed to be accountable and educators needed to be accountable to get the students to the standards. She stated that she liked the multiple options and the proficiency element. There would need to be clear communication with parents about the requirements. The schools belonged to the community. Springfield would help the state get there.

Paula Praus Williamson, HomeSource – Preus Williamson commented on proposed rules for alternative education programs. She asked the board to not require an interdistrict transfer for students who did not attend HomeSource prior to 2008. She testified that she did not believe this was the intent of the legislation. Prior rule interpretation did not require interdistrict transfer. This requirement would cause problems. HomeSource asked that the board make one change to OAR 581-021-0019, related to interdistrict transfer agreements. Section 2 (b) read, “This section does not apply to qualified homeschooled children described in Section 4, Chapter 846, Oregon laws 2007.” She asked that the board change this provision to read, “Section 2” of the same chapter. Without the change, a child who did not attend HomeSource prior to July 31, 2007 could attend only with an interdistrict transfer agreement.

Chip Bower – Bower urged statewide reforms to reduce the human impact on the environment. Schools and universities were not addressing the cultural roots of environmental crisis. As more and more scientists were warning about the urgency of addressing the environmental crises, public school teachers and faculty in colleges of education need to be motivated to introduce reforms in pedagogy and curriculum that will contribute to slowing the rate of environmental change. Educational reform must go beyond that of encouraging students to recycle and toward thinking of themselves as stewards of the earth. Professors of education and classroom teachers must be able to recognize how

5

the language in the curriculum and in other learning situations carried forward the misconceptions and biases of earlier thinkers who were unaware of environmental limits.

Action Items

Diploma - Action

Director Frank joined the meeting via phone at 9:45 a.m. Superintendent Castillo reviewed the work that has taken place to date. She thanked ODE staff for their incredible work getting the board and the system to this point. She also thanked all the volunteers and task forces for their contribution. Thousands of people participated in this effort.

James Sager, Office of the Governor, presented a letter from Governor supporting the new diploma efforts. He read the letter for the record.

Chair Berger stated that the board had received a number of letters of support, including one from Chancellor Pernsteiner. Commissioner Preus had also worked closely with the board on the diploma.

Director Bogart observed that the new diploma was built on prior board work. The new diploma reflected the most meaningful aspects of the school reform that was geared toward workforce and societal needs. The interaction the board has had with the public had increased substantially over past boards. Citizens were more attuned to board actions and rationale and that would help support success of this effort.

Chair Wyse thanked Superintendent Castillo, staff, and the field. They had gotten a lot of advice. He had been inspired by the teachers who had participated. He appreciated the governor’s support and the legislature’s support. He stated he was very focused on next year’s 8th graders. He wanted to inspire those students to gain the skills they needed to be successful. By giving students many options to show their mastery, they would be better prepared for their future.

Director Paz agreed with Bogart and Wyse. The transparent process had been important. Multiple options for assessment had alleviated many concerns. Applied context was added—this was important because it supported equity for all students. The balance that Oregon was striking was very important. The board needed to clarify that this was not an exit exam; it was stronger than that. The board needed to clarify the strengths of Oregon’s new requirements and how we were rolling that out for all students.

Director Frederick stated that he was pleased to see change in the social contract with the community. He was pleased to see that we were finally moving away from a “reject pile” mentality. The board was talking about options—saying to students this was where we wanted you to go and this was what we would do to help you. This was different from the past when it was okay for some kids to just not make it. Those unskilled jobs were just not available now. This was really encouraging—there was a sense of future and how we planned to get to that future.

Director Squire thanked Superintendent Castillo for her leadership in this effort.

Director Berger thanked the board members for their attendance and involvement. He thanked them for listening to feedback and for looking at statewide policy that met most students’ needs. He also asked the department to look at K-12 standards. Transparency of student success in elementary schools would lead to high school success. The board looked at what it takes to get students to this level of achievement. The board wanted the high school diploma to be meaningful and prepare students for the future.

6

Advisor Kneisler stated that he appreciated the degree of district engagement. The Essential Skills were foundational, visionary and comprehensive. There were thoughtful options for students to demonstrate these skills and a deliberative phase-in.

Director Frank commented on the diploma work that has been done. Adopting assessments for Essential Skills was a big step; it had been a tremendous effort over the years.

Advisor Alan Bruner noted that every finish line was the starting line of the next race. The next real challenge would be implementation. He was glad to see the governor’s comments on resources. It will be a challenge of capacity and resources.

Donna Foxley, US Dept. of Education, stated that was an exciting time for education. The goal was to prepare students for a successful future. She had been monitoring board meetings and materials—it was challenging to sort through so much input. The board had never lost sight of the children they were serving. She commended the board for listening to all those involved. The state has had many challenges, but the board never stopped moving forward. The new diploma work had been done with integrity and transparency.

Diploma Requirements OAR 581-022-1130 - ActionChair Berger briefly described the rule. The board has seen it last month, as well.

MOTION: Director Wyse moved to adopt OAR 581-022-1130; Director Paz seconded the motion.

Discussion: Director Bogart voiced support that board continue to work toward credit by proficiency. Director Paz noted the work done to align the diploma with higher education and

recognized that the local school boards would be the entities, with the communities, to make this work—that was where the heavy lifting would be done.

VOTE: The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.

Assessment of Essential Skills 581-022-0615 - ActionDoug Kosty, Tony Alpert, Salam Noor, Pat Burk; ODE

Kosty summarized the public input on the rule. The board first saw the proposed rule language in April. A public hearing was held on May 28, and the rule was amended in response. Among the changes was to allow IEP teams to allow options for individuals with disabilities. There was additional work to be done, but the rule was a solid foundation. For instance, ODE will develop a monitoring process, contact ACT and SAT to explore making that an option.

Discussion: Director Paz noted how important this work was. He was pleased with assessment

options. Districts would be looking for tangible descriptions of the options. Clarifications would be helpful to the district.

Director Squire asked if there was a quality assurance for the IEP option—it was extremely important to have accommodations for students who needed them.

Chair Berger clarified that accommodations were not an “out” for students to get out of getting a standard diploma.

Director Squire asked about the wording in subsection 2. Would that wording prevent students from using multiple options? Kosty and Alpert clarified that this was the floor, not the ceiling, to insure that each student has the opportunity to leverage the

7

assessment option. Squire noted the importance of careful wording. She expressed that students should have unlimited opportunities to demonstrate their proficiency.

Burk clarified that this wording required local assessments. Director Wyse stated that districts would have to develop local assessments. It was not

enough to rely on the Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS). Communication with the district would be important.

Director Squire didn’t want the language in subsection 2 to limit opportunities to students.

Advisor Knisler stated that he didn’t think the OAKS would be the default. Wyse said that there needed to be flexibility for the districts, but some standardization to provide multiple options.

Director Wyse introduced Superintendent Deborah Sommer, who had served on the Quality Education Commission for the diploma workgroup. They had been working with educators as to what changes needed to be made to the model in order for all students to achieve the new diploma. They were hopeful that their recommendations would have an impact. There needed to be an alignment of messages and practices—there was a perception that things were firmly set, then they change. Panel members were supportive of the diploma. The panel surveyed school administrators and that information would be included in the final report. Additional resources would be needed. There needed to be flexibility and time to phase-in the new diploma. They hoped that the diploma work was tied to a school improvement fund. Schools needed additional math elementary teachers, staff training, and time to develop interventions throughout the system. She noted that ODE needed additional resources as well.

Advisor Kneisler expressed that the rule should be as accurate as possible; if the board had to delay two months to get it right, it was not too long to wait. To revise so soon would create discomfort in the field. It would be better to wait until September to make changes to the rules to ensure correctness.

Director Wyse expressed a process concern. He thought it was important that the board adopt the assessment rule, however he would be asking to modify the rule such that the board had the assessment approval responsibility, not the superintendent. He stated that the board needed to give clear direction to the districts, today. He would move that the board have responsibility to approve state assessments. For local assessments, the board should review criteria recommended by the Assessment of Essential Skills Review Panel (AESRP).

Motion: Wyse moved to modify OAR 581-022-0615 such that the board approved Essential Skill assessment options, not the superintendent. Squire seconded the motion.

Discussion: Supt. Castillo asked if the proposal was manageable. Director Squire stated that there has to be a quality assurance process. Burk noted that this was a Division 22 rule, so it was a compliance standard and

superintendents would need to attest that they were in compliance with the rule. He would look at data to see if local assessments were being misused and would investigate complaints.

Director Paz stated that having multiple opportunities was important. He would have liked to see math flexibility verbiage in rules, such as Career and Technical Education (CTE) applications.

Director Berger re-explained the intent of his motion. The board would approve state approved tests and performance levels. Districts would use state criteria to develop local assessments. The department would monitor data to ensure that local assessments were rigorous.

8

Director Squire noted that work samples were included.

Vote: The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.

Board members directed staff to make additional changes to the rule over the lunch hour and return with a modified rule later that day.

Essential Skills Implementation DiscussionEd Dennis, Doug Kosty, Salam Noor, Gene Evans; ODE

Chair Berger asked the board to review the handout, Assessment of Essential Skills, A User’s Guide for the Class of 2112. The handout defined Essential Skills and multiple options and opportunities. It provided sample test questions and scoring guides.

Attendance for Online Charter Schools OAR 581-020-0339Joni Gilles, Brian Reeder; ODE

Gilles reviewed the proposed rules. There was no definition of the word, “attend” in statute or rule. In February, the board directed staff to develop a rule regarding how districts with virtual charter schools counted students for purposes of the 50% resident student requirement. Last month, the board directed staff to return with three different versions of the rule. Under version one, the calculations were based on the number of hours a student attended a charter school—this could be simplified to credits from hours. Under version two, if a student took less than half-time, they counted as half-time; more than half-time counted as full-time. Reeder explained the benefits of using credits rather than hours.

Discussion: Why aggregating students to total one Full Time Equivalent was complicated. How an online environment was more complicated to calculate student hours; did being

logged on count? On task? Might a student do something away from the computer? The lack of a perfect solution and the need to strike a balance. The challenges of keeping track of students under version one.

Motion: Director Wyse moved to adopt version three of the proposed rule; Director Squire seconded the motion.

Discussion: Rule renumbering would take place.

Vote: The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.

Board Sponsorship Request: Children’s Choice Montessori Charter SchoolJoni Gilles, ODE

Gilles reviewed the history of Children’s Choice Montessori Charter School. There were concerns raised regarding the conflicting information on the school’s status. Following the last board meeting, staff reviewed the information again, clarified the building status with the city, and now recommended denial. The review did not meet the criteria established by the board for sponsorship in the following areas: Demonstrated financial stability; and, The extent to which the proposal addresses ORS 338.045 (Governance, Facility, Budget

and Financing, Standards of Behavior and Program Review).

Discussion: Whether board had to sponsor a school if it met the criteria (no). Options for the school to appeal.

9

Motion: Director Paz moved to deny board sponsorship to the school. Director Bogart seconded the motion.

Vote: The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.

Oregon Virtual Academy Waiver RequestJoni Gilles, ODE

Gilles reviewed the waiver request history. In April, the request was revised following recommendations from the board’s subcommittee. Subcommittee recommendations:1. The school would serve only grades K – 8.2. The school would serve only 100 students per grade level.3. Students falling outside of the 50% rule must receive written approval of their resident

district in order to enroll in the school.4. The waiver sunset on July 1, 2010 unless extended by the State Board of Education.5. The school agreed to work with ODE staff to support ODE’s efforts to collect additional

data on the overall operation of the school and support ODE’s effort to make regular reports to the State Board of Education including the Database Initiative.

6. The school would agree to a third-party performance evaluation commissioned by ODE and/or the State Board of Education of its entire academic, programmatic, and operational programs. The school will cover these costs if required by ODE.

7. For the purposes of interpreting the 50% rule, ORVA would not count part-time resident students when determining how many students the school can accept from outside the district. Furthermore, should the State Board of Education pass a clarification on the enrollment language in the 50% rule, the school agrees to abide by it.

8. That the Oregon Virtual Academy/North Bend School District charter application meet applicable Oregon standards.

Discussion: Whether the school should be limited to 600 total students.

Motion: Director Paz moved to approve application as laid out, but with a limit of 600 students. Director Wyse seconded the motion.

Discussion: Whether the student would be counted as a resident of the North Bend district. Limitations of approval. That instruction and teachers were included in the school. The value of online learning, particularly for rural areas. Whether a district should operate a statewide school. The existence of ORCA and lack of competition. Benefits of a work group. Unknown costs of online learning. Unknown budget impact of bringing in home schooled students within existing budget. The process used in setting up these schools, bypassing the public contracting laws. Use of computers and impact on brain development with young children. How this option might or might not help disadvantaged students. Desire to not outsource instruction to India. That some risk is outweighed by potential benefit to students. That non-English speaking student will not be able to take advantage of this option. Limitations of computer instruction. Lack of structure to provide online learning.

10

Vote: The motion passed 4 – 3. Voting yes: Berger, Wyse, Paz, and Bogart. Voting no: Frank, Squire, Frederick.

Chair Berger thanked Gilles for her service; she was leaving the department. Gilles thanked the board for its work on charter schools and the 12,000 students enrolled in them.

Proposed Stakeholder Work Group on Virtual LearningSteve Nelson, Ed Dennis; ODE

Dennis explained that a proposal was before the board to create a work group for online schools. Director Wyse explained his counter proposal of having the existing subcommittee meet first to develop recommendations; stakeholders could then weigh in on those recommendations. Chair Berger voiced support for Director Wyse’s recommendation.

Discussion: Whether the subcommittee should meet and develop a policy structure first, then ask for

input. Whether a statewide structure was needed for statewide school operation. The desire to have an affordable, equitable school system so all students and teachers

had access to online options. The fast-moving technology. The desire to hear from those who can identify hurdles, including Teacher Standards and

Practices Commission. Involvement of other states, other districts with the work group.

Motion: Director Wyse moved to have the Virtual Charter School Subcommittee meet and make recommendations. The motion was seconded by Director Bogart.

Vote: The motion passed unanimously 6-0; Frank excused.

Assessment of Essential Skills 581-022-0615; continuedChair Berger reopened the Essential Skills assessment discussion. Kosty reviewed the rule changes made over the lunch hour. In response to questions, Noor clarified that speaking and listening had been on the list of Essential Skills all along.

Motion: Director Squire moved to adopt the rule as amended. Director Paz seconded the motion.

Discussion: Whether it should be subject to another public hearing.

Vote: The motion passed unanimously, 6-0; Frank excused.

Essential Skills Implementation Discussion, continued

Motion: Director Wyse moved to adopt substantively the user’s guide in order to give the field guidance (minor edits could still be made). Director Squire seconded the motion.

Discussion: Content of the User’s Guide Whether to add demonstrated in an applied setting to math section; example that is less

theoretical to represent that setting.

VOTE: The motion passed unanimously, 6-0; Frank excused.

11

Information Items

Sisters and Marcola Web Academy Waiver RequestJoni Gilles, ODE; Tim King – Sisters and Marcola Web Academy

Gilles reviewed the request. King stated that this request was close to the waiver request just approved for ORVA, except the cap was smaller (400 for each school vs. 600). Chair Berger requested that the subcommittee review this request.

Discussion: There was no Education Management Organization—schools were not wedded to a

particular vendor. Whether student enrollment would be limited by geography. What portion of enrollment would be resident district students. How many home schooled students would enroll. Whether the subcommittee should review the request. Whether board needs to see the charter agreements. Precedent set by approving ORVA. Whether board needed to know more about school board members. Whether board needed more information about governance structure. Whether school had a relationship to its community. That a third academy would be requesting a waiver soon. Desire to replicate Clackamas Web Academy. That the board had 120 days to decide the waiver. Whether to require requestor to submit a video using technology to sell the idea.

Interdistrict Transfer Agreement OAR 581-021-0019Jessica Barr, Drew Hinds; ODE

Barr reviewed the rule history. The Secretary of State’s audit recommended clarifying the meaning of adequate written consent. The rule also implemented 2007 legislation. Barr reviewed key provisions. All must sign agreements and agreements must be reviewed annually. The resident district retained responsibility over special education students, although the funding would go to the new district through agreements and be specified that the sending district retain some funds. A public hearing was scheduled for June 26, 2008.

Discussion: Whether to add student attendance records to the information that a sending district

must sent to the other district. That districts can add to the proposed requirements. That interdistrict transfer is clearer than the referral form. Why the sending districts retained responsibility of special education. How districts manage the requests. Workgroup created for this rule and alternate education rule.

Alternative Education and ADM Reporting – OARs 581-023-0006,- 0008, -0012Drew Hinds, ODE

Hinds stated that the changes were based on recommendations by the Secretary of State’s audit. Rules were intended to clarify accountable activities and the use of instructional assistant and teachers. The third rule laid out how funding would be done for HomeSource in the Bethel School District. HB 2040 (2007) grandfathered those students who were enrolled at the time in HomeSource. The law was clear that the laws did not apply to future students.

12

Discussion: How small group settings were formed; whether students are screened before placement

(no). Effect of rule on prior board action. That rules could be backdated to earlier effective date.

Extended Assessment StandardsTony Alpert, Dianna Carrizales; ODE

Alpert reviewed that alternate assessments were used for those students with significant cognitive disabilities. Standard settings were done for the first time last year. The federal government asked for different standards for elementary, middle and high school. The department did that. ODE did not get the data until May 15. Once staff received the data they could do standard setting. Districts know virtually all the information they need for their August AYP ratings. Because of the compressed timeline, staff has asked the board to adopt these standards tomorrow. He referred the members to the tables in the docket. In addition to the descriptions of the standards, actual impacts on students were shown in the table. Staff was requesting that both the achievement standards and the achievement descriptors be adopted on tomorrow’s consent agenda.

Discussion: Description of students who take these assessments (IEP team determines assessment;

federal law allows up to 1% to take alternative assessments and still meet AYP). Whether a single set of standards can apply to all students with different handicaps.

Anabolic Steroids OAR 581-022-0416Salam Noor, Margaret Bates; ODE

Bates reviewed the rule. The proposed rule ensured the use of evidence-based programs to reduce anabolic steroids and performance-enhancing substance abuse by high school athletes. It also ensured that school district employees who were coaches or athletic directors received training once every four years on the prevention and identification of such abuse.

Discussion: These programs were more than about steroids. The program included helping kids make healthy choices. What “evidence-based” program meant. This was a prevention program.

ODE Budget RequestEd Dennis, Sue MacGlashan; ODE

MacGlashan stated that ODE did not yet know its essential bottom line. It was about $8.13 billion, prior to any enhancements through policy option packages. Dennis stated that there were rumors that the governor may increase education budget by 10%; the economic forecast suggested that revenue may be up 20%. It was likely the increase would fall between those two numbers. Staff would return to each meeting to update the board until the end of the 2009 legislative session. Policy Option Packages number one through number five may need additional advocates. Dennis asked the board if they would help with those.

Discussion: Accuracy of economic forecast. Effect of ballot measure on state revenue and State School Fund. Effect of fuel price increases and whether that will affect Essential Budget Level for

transportation reimbursement.

13

Whether budget addresses need to increase teacher professional development, increase number of math and science teachers as well as student supplemental services (not directly).

The fiscal analysis done by the Quality Education Commission for new diploma work. The work, generally, of the Quality Education Commission. That the Governor’s Office is taking the lead on Oregon Pre-Kindergarten. The high cost of the few autistic students vs. needs of many high achieving students. Use of early intervention to reduce the number of special education designations.

Meeting recessed 5:00 p.m.

5:30 p.m. Board Retreat Planning

Present: Directors Berger, Paz, Wyse, Squire, Frederick and Advisor Hamann, Dembrow.Excused: Frank, Bogart, Kniesler, Bruner

Chair Berger reconvened at 6:10 pm at 6615 Spring Valley Rd. for the purpose of planning the board’s August retreat. Berger turned the discussion over to Connie Green, the retreat facilitator.

Green reviewed the five proposed outcomes of the retreat:1. Identify successes, needs, and critical policy conversations.2. Learn from national trends and solutions for success that can be replicated in Oregon.3. Clearly see the students of Oregon Department of Education. 4. Identify the most critical gaps/issues in serving the students of Oregon.5. Identify and prioritize the most important policy and resource issues to address over the

next two to six years.

Other questions: How does the new diploma fit within the larger system? What has the board accomplished? What is the message of hope for students? What are national issues that are also true of Oregon? What’s needed to meet the 40-40-20 Goal? What are the next steps for the community college student success plan? Is the board focusing on the right things?

Other potential topics: Diploma Acceleration/transition options Distance Learning Professional Development Board Self-evaluation

Discussion: Wednesday could be very broad topics, Thursday more strategic, and Friday more

tactical via the work plan. A desire to focus more on larger themes than discrete subjects that come up. Need to prioritize in recognition of limited resources. The observation that there were two types of education formats: “mall” and “boutique”

and that students’ unique needs would be better via a boutique format. Desire to have some unstructured time for discussion. Benefit of having more grounding in data for a solid foundation; data would shine a light

on problem areas. Desire to recognize and leverage other entities, like community partnerships.

14

The importance of implementing the diploma; need for legislative strategy for funding; importance of planning for when students fail to get a diploma.

The benefit of identify upcoming issues and using retreat to get more background on those topics.

Whether the 40-40-20 Goal really included 100% of Oregon citizens. Desire to discuss health education/HIV-AIDS education. Online learning and the digital divide. That people understand grades, but don’t understand all the new measurements. Importance of a consistent state policy for credit by proficiency. The value of reading Sixteen Trends, Their Profound Impact on Our Future: Implications

for Students, Education, Communities, Countries, and the Whole of Society by Gary Marx. The benefit of including an update on the work of the Board of Higher Education’s

Student Participation and Completion Committee. Quality Education Commission work, and emphasis on what happens in the classroom. Key Performance Measures, KIDS. Need to link diploma with the ultimate goal of increasing education attainment in the

state; was it time to require everyone to take 14 years of school? The need to think long-term, and determine what policies need to be in place now to get

where we want to be later. The “Montreal Process” (developing criteria and performance indicators) and how the

Board of Forestry used that method to work at a higher policy level. The benefit of inviting legislators, school boards, and other partners to the retreat.

Chair Berger adjourned the meeting at 7:25 pm.

15

STATE BOARD OF EDUCATIONFriday June 20, 2008

Public Service Building, Room 251-A/B255 Capitol St. NE, Salem, OR 97310

Members Present:

State Board of Education June 2008 Minutes 16

Jerry Berger ChairDuncan Wyse Vice-ChairSteve Bogart Board MemberLew Frederick Board MemberArt Paz Board Member

Nikki Squire Board Member Allan Bruner Advisor, K-12 Teacher Rep.Jenna Chiono Advisor, K-12 Student Rep.Michael DembrowAdvisor, CC Faculty Rep.Greg Hamann Advisor, CC President Rep.

State Board of Education June 2008 Minutes 17

Members Excused:

18

Brenda Frank Second Vice-Chair

19

Other Participants:Susan Castillo Superintendent of Public InstructionCamille Preus Community College CommissionerKrissa Caldwell Deputy CommissionerPam Teschner Director of Operations, CCWDDennis Jones Nat’l Ctr. For Higher Education

Management Systems

Andrea Henderson OR Community College Assn.

Connie Lee OR Community College Assn.Debby Ryan Executive Specialist, ODEJan McComb Board Administrator

____________________________________________________________________________________

Preliminary BusinessCall to Order/Roll Call/Flag Salute/IntroductionsChair Jerry Berger called the meeting to order at 8:35 a.m. and called the roll. Excused were Director Frederick, Advisor Kneisler, and Advisor Bruner. He asked for audience introductions.

Introductions, Comments, Agenda ReviewChair Berger explained that he had to leave early. Bogart had to leave early, too.

Commissioner Report Commissioner Preus updated the members on her activities of the last month. The NW Area Foundation, which covered eight states from Minnesota to the west, had a

meeting where they discussed efforts to bring under-skilled workers into community colleges. Washington had combined applied technical skills courses with adult basic skills. They paid 1.75 FTE for individuals who were in that co-enrolled program. How could we make that work in Oregon? Discussed the opportunity for a grant/scholarship for workers that less-than-ready for college. The Washington Opportunity Grant involved support services that wrap around these low-skill workers. It came as a scholarship for them. There is much to consider as how Oregon might want to consider this kind of support for workers who aren’t prepared for college.

Commissioner Preus reported on her trip to Columbia Gorge Community College where she met with President Frank Toda and discussed their workforce center and Wind Turbine Certification program. Columbia Gorge Community College needed a butler building to hold the turbine for the wind turbine program. Over the summer, CCWD will review the request for an allocation out of the strategic fund to Columbia Gorge. Next week, there was a nationwide summit at Columbia Gorge. They had invited three other schools that had trained wind turbine technicians across the nation. They would advance a national standardized curriculum. There would be five Oregon Community Colleges there.

Last week, the Commissioner traveled to Lake Tahoe for the Western Summit for worker certification in higher education; which was sponsored by WICHE and ACT. Director Wyse also attended. WICHE and its 15 member states work to improve access to higher education and ensure student success. Their student exchange programs, regional initiatives, and their research and policy work allowed it to assist students, policymakers, educators, and institutional, business and community leaders throughout the West and beyond. Oregon was the only state that had launched a career readiness certificate that was as developed as it was. There was a successful pilot at Lebanon High School. Preus reported Oregon had a great team there: Senator Devlin and Representative Flores– are also members of the legislative advisory committee for WICHE for Oregon.

Director Wyse reflected on the seminar and the extensive use of Work Keys (ACT product). There was a huge opportunity to connect K-12 and community colleges. The South was way ahead on this. The board needed to bring this in as an Essential Skill by September. Two different curriculums were set up to adopt these Essential Skills.

Commissioner Preus reported that the Governor may put together a budget package that brings together industries using sustainable practices

20

Preus also reported on a recent visit to Rogue Valley Community College and met with the Rogue board. She also met with the legislative delegation from Jackson/Josephine to discuss Rogue’s unhappiness with distribution formula. Preus shared a letter from the Rogue Community College Board expressing their appreciation for the recent allocation from the strategic fund.

Discussion Whether Work Keys could be available at high schools (yes – online test). Desire to compare Work Keys, with Compass, with Essential Skills. Costs of tests. Use to develop skills in the workforce. Use of strategic plan funds for the building. Consideration of the life cycle of the turbine when considering butler building

construction decisions. A lot of transfer technology from Columbia Gorge regarding wind technology.

Public CommentNo public comment.

Board ManagementBoard sponsorship of Charter Schools Policy – Adoption Jan McComb, Board Staff

McComb highlighted four minor changes to the proposed policy since the May meeting: Under “Review of School District Decision,” addition of the sentence, “ODE staff will

notify the district of the request for review and possible sponsorship and will request the full record of board (including subcommittees) discussions of the proposal.”

Under “Sponsorship Review Process” addition of “in ORS 338.055” following “Staff shall evaluate the proposal using the following criteria.”

Under “Sponsorship Review Process” replacing “by law” with “in ORS 338.045” following “The extent to which the proposal addresses the information required.”

Under “Sponsorship Review Process” addition of “pursuant to ORS 338.165” following “Whether there are arrangements for any necessary special education and related services for children with disabilities.”

Motion: Director Squire moved adoption of the policy as amended. The motion was seconded by Director Wyse

Discussion: Whether the criteria included the adequate staff to administer/teach at the school. Need to reference the handbook and ORS. Whether the language needed fine-tuning to ensure those criteria were included.

Vote: The motion passed 6-0; Frank excused

Board Election/Advisor Selection ProcessBerger reviewed the proposed slate of officers: Chair: Wyse; Vice Chair: Frank; Second Vice Chair: Paz. He also reviewed the selection process for advisors, that would be voted on in August. He noted that there were no term limits on advisors.

Motion: Director Bogart moved to approve the slate of officers as presented. Director Squire seconded the motion.

Discussion: Duties of the Executive Committee.

21

Vote: The motion passed 6-0, Frank excused.

Consent Agenda May Minutes Commissioner’s Travel Harm Limit Guidance & Counseling OARs 581-22-0405, 581-22-1510, 581-22-1512 Sisters Charter Academy of Fine Arts Waiver Request Four Rivers Charter School Waiver Request English Language Learners Exiting Criteria OAR 581-023-0100 Community College Program Approvals

Linn Benton CC: Retail Management cert. Treasure Valley CC: Horse Production AAS

Extended Assessment Standards Board Member Liaison

Motion: Director Bogart moved to accept staff recommendations for the items on the consent calendar. Director Squire seconded the motion.

Discussion: The still unknown fiscal impact of the new diploma and whether it may need to be

modified once those costs were known.

Vote: The motion passed 6-0; Frank excused.

INFORMATIONStudent Success Steering CommitteeCommissioner Preus, CCWD

Preus reported that at last year’s retreat, community college stakeholders gathered and talked of the future success of community college students. Also considered were long and short term goals. The department had responded to two legislative budget notes: disaggregate the Key Performance Measures on a college-by-college basis and to share the best practices that emerged from that information among all the colleges. Preus thanked Connie Green, Michael Dembrow and Connie Lee, who worked on the report on student success.

Preus highlighted elements of the executive summary of the Measure What You Treasure report. We needed to benchmark ourselves against the 40-40-20 goal. The plan to get there (bottom of page 3) included enrolling more students in community colleges; more students making progress toward their educational goals (only about half do now); close the achievement gap among students and counties; and graduate more students with degrees and credentials. Some geographic areas had low participation, but high completion rates—we needed to grow participation. The steering committee reviewed a lot of national research. Washington had done a lot of data analysis and piloting practices that tells them what made a student successful and what removed barriers. Oregon has reduced some barriers to financial aid. What do we have in place that helped students re-enter community college after they step out? The legislature was interested in terminal measures, and were less interested in process measures. We need to be interested in process measures. If a school is tracking the list of nine student indicators (page 5), it increased the success rate. We wanted to define those measures in a way that was meaningful to stakeholders. CCWD staff planned to begin collecting this information. Oregon had a robust data system, but did not have robust analysis. Oregon was asked to join other states and has applied to the Gates Foundation to help them do the analysis. Noncredit workforce courses enroll over one-third of the student headcount. Yet, many policymakers knew little about this program area or

22

recognized its value. There was a plan for improving student success in the last section of the report.

Discussion Good document – unflinching look as to where we are successful. Changes would be made to the draft. Page 124 contained recommended actions for the state board. Would like feedback on

whether those recommendations made sense. Good document for the retreat. Report would be improved by student narratives at the top of each chapter. Whether profiling each community college against each of the nine initiatives would be

helpful. The report was available online.

ACTIONTillamook Bay Community College Bond SaleCommissioner Preus, CCWD

Preus explained that SB 5514 authorized issuance of $38,500,000 of Article XI-G bonds in 2005-07 for seven community colleges: Clatsop, Columbia Gorge, Oregon Coast, Rogue, Southwestern, Klamath, and Tillamook Bay. In March, 2007, CCWD issued $25.9 million of the bonds to finance capital construction projects for five of the seven. Klamath and Tillamook Bay were not able to participate in the sale because they did not have the required matching funds. Both colleges were reauthorized for bonding by the 2007 Legislature. Tillamook Bay now had the required $4.9 million match and the sale was scheduled for September 2008. The board must, by formal action, resolve to sell those bonds.

Motion: Director Squire moved to authorize the sale of the bonds. Director Paz seconded the motion.

Vote: The motion passed 4 – 0. Excused: Berger, Frank, Bogart.

Employment Skills Training ApprovalCommissioner Preus, CCWD

Preus reviewed the item. The purpose of the Employment Skills Training (EST) Certificate of Completion program was to expand opportunities for students to enter the job market, advance in a job, or pursue further education to expand their employment opportunities. Personalized EST programs are to be developed based upon the assessed needs of individual students, were not to be pre-packaged programs, and may not pose any adverse impact or detrimental duplication issues for any existing programs. Training plans were developed based upon the assessed goals, needs, interests, abilities, and aptitudes of each student. The Board gave the EST program provisional approval in 2001 and extended approval in 2007. Based on usage and student success, CCWD has concluded that the EST should move past a provisional status and be adopted.

Motion: Director Frederick moved to approve the program. Director Paz seconded the motion.

Vote: The motion passed 4 – 0. Excused: Berger, Frank, Bogart.

CCWD Budget Request/Policy Option PackagesCommissioner Preus, CCWD

23

Preus reviewed the budget and policy option packages that were due on August 1. She reviewed the policy option packages.

POLICY PACKAGE 1: COMMUNITY COLLEGE SUPPORT FUNDState funding to Community Colleges supports a strong, local community college system to meet local, regional, and state economic and workforce development needs. The CCSF assists in sustaining a broad range of education activities, including undergraduate and lower-division education, career and technical education, pre-college and adult basic education, local workforce training, and other educational services necessary at the local and state level.

General Fund RequestFunding above Essential Budget Level: $ 121,983,210Total Support Fund: $ 621,983,210

POLICY PACKAGE 2: CAPITAL CONSTRUCTIONOregon State Statute requires “the state should maintain a policy of substantial state participation in community college building costs” [ORS 341.009 (14)]. Community colleges have submitted due diligence reports rank ordered according to OAR and CCWD criteria from the 2007 Governor’s Recommended Budget. They are rank ordered.

Rank College Project Name Project Type

XI-G Bonds

1 TVCC University Center New Building $2,150,0002 BMCC Hermiston Center New Building $4,000,0003 UCC Health Occupations Training

CenterNew Building $7,500,000

4 Chemeketa McMinnville Campus New Building $6,203,7005 CGCC Workforce Building New Building $7,500,0006 KCC Permanent Campus New Building $7,500,0007 TBA Ranking in progress

The process used for capitol construction was that colleges submitted updated lists, and the projects on the lists were re-ranked blindly by a panel. Three community colleges appeared twice, but because that was not viable, one of their projects was moved to tier two. Inflation had been added to project costs. OCCA staff agreed that they would only advocate for $38-40 million from the legislature in 2009; it’s possible that $95 million won’t be in the governor’s budget, but the commissioner asked for authority to negotiate with the governor on the number.

POLICY PACKAGE 3: CCWD INTEGRATED MANAGEMENT SYSTEM. This package provided for the completion of 2007-09 legislative investment in the CCWD Integrated Management Information System (IMIS) project, development of a Reporting Portal, and expansion of the Oregon Community College Unified Reporting System (OCCURS). They were looking for two employees paid from CCWD federal funds, but would be housed at Employment Division. General Fund Total: $ 1,255,000

POLICY PACKAGE 4: ACCOUNTABILITY AND SUPPORTThis package provided essential staffing capacity for CCWD to perform the critical and time sensitive programmatic and operational functions that the Department must carry out with community colleges, workforce partners, state agency partners, and other public and private partners. The package funded personal services costs and related services and supplies for an internal auditor, operations and policy analyst and administrative support specialist. General Fund Total: $502,406

24

POLICY PACKAGE 5: SPACE AND MOVING EXPENSESCCWD is unable to house all of its employees in the space currently allocated in the Public Service Building. This would allow funding to reconfigure cubicles or move. CCWD needed an additional six cubicles. Staff was looking to find room in this building. DAS has told them to make the cubicles smaller, to 6 X 8, but that gained them only three more cubicles.General Fund Total: $446,400

POLICY PACKAGE 6: CARL PERKINS CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATIONThe Department of Education received federal Carl Perkins Career and Technical Education Act revenue then transferred a portion to CCWD. The Administration portion of Carl Perkins Funds required a state General Fund match with ODE and CCWD each providing a portion of the match. In the 2007-09 biennium, CCWD received two additional positions to increase the departments capacity and responsibilities for administrative and technical assistance to community colleges. As a result, CCWD had the capability to handle more administrative functions and would need to increase the CCWD share of the Carl Perkins match.

POLICY PACKAGE 7: CAREER READINESS CERTIFICATION, ASSESSMENT AND CURRICULUMCCWD would adopt and implement a career readiness certification process to advance and document the core employability skills required across multiple industries and occupations. The adoption of the career readiness credential by the State of Oregon would give all employers, and education and training providers a means to verify a “readiness for work” based on specific, standardized criteria. The Oregon Career Readiness Certificate (CRC) would be aligned with the Essential Skills of the high school graduation diploma, and also be used with out-of-school youth, adult entrants to the labor pool, incumbent workers, and unemployed or dislocated workers. General Fund Total: $ 5,000,000

POLICY PACKAGE 8: CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION (CTE)Funding would be dedicated to rebuilding Career and Technical Education (CTE) programs statewide, connected with regional economic labor market needs in clean technology, sustainability and other high wage, high skill, or high demand occupations. This was at the request of the Governor’s Office.General Fund Total: $ 15,000,000

POLICY PACKAGE 9: CAREER PATHWAYS IN DEMAND OCCUPATIONSThe Governor’s highest priority was growing Oregon’s economy and ensuring that its citizens had the skills to compete for family wage jobs. Many Oregonians would be left behind in the 21st century economy unless they can gained language, literacy, technology and post-secondary skills. Career Pathways was a systemic fundamental framework for an education and workforce strategy that ensured that all Oregonians can share the benefits of economic growth and contribute to our nation’s economic stability.General Fund Total: $ 4,600,000

POLICY PACKAGE 10: YOUTH TRAINING AND EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIESOregon Youth Conservation Corps (OYCC): OYCC programs provide youth with education, training and employment opportunities, teach teamwork, accountability and work ethics that are required for future success. Additional funding will increase the number of youth hours supported by OYCC from the current 50,314 to 84,210 hours during the summer and support continued growth for the school year programs. Each state dollar for the OYCC Summer Conservation Corps funding was matched by four local dollars in 2007 and each state dollar for the OYCC Community Stewardship Corps funding was matched by eight local dollars in the 2006-2007 school year. These ratios will decrease due to loss of Secure Rural Schools funding.

25

Summer Youth Jobs: Research shows that employment during high school years is the single greatest predictor of increased lifelong earnings. This policy package will establish an annual summer jobs program to provide 3,000 young men and women ages 16 to 20 with opportunities to develop work experience, gain work ethic, and explore career opportunities. This will result in a pipeline of skilled workers for high growth, high demand jobs with a particular focus on sustainable, clean, and green jobs creating a globally competitive talent pool. This program will leverage existing funding and efforts to support the development of essential skills and career related learning.General Fund Total: $ 12,700,000

POLICY PACKAGE 11: HEALTHCARE WORKFORCE INITIATIVEThe Healthcare Workforce Initiative in the 2007-09 biennium emphasized statewide expansion of allied health programs to meet the needs in the local communities through distance delivery. This 2009-11 package addressed the need to:

Increase the number of qualified faculty to increase student access to expanded statewide programs.

Create an information infrastructure for healthcare programs. The community colleges needed to build upon the industry effort of the Telehealth Alliance of Oregon that enables patient information to be shared between doctors, other providers, and clients.

Continue the statewide expansion of allied health programs. The colleges requested 1.3 million to expand programs and courses for statewide deliver in the 2007-09 biennium. Multiple courses and programs were undeveloped due to the limited funds.

Provide baseline research on recruitment and retention of healthcare faculty and students. The emphasis is on nurse educators – that’s where the bottleneck is.

General Fund Total: $ 2,500,000

POLICY PACKAGE 12: DUAL CREDIT/CONCURRENT ENROLLMENTAmong priorities identified by the Joint Boards of Education (State Board of Higher Education and State Board of Education) were strengthening and expanding options for accelerated learning in high schools (particularly the ability to obtain college credit), providing broader access to these programs, and finding ways to deliver seamless education. A Dual Credit Task Force was formed to review one accelerated learning option, Dual Credit, and to advise on the future direction of these programs in Oregon.General Fund Total: $783,466

POLICY PACKAGE 13: COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTANCE LEARNINGThe purpose of this package was to provide for the transition to the next generation of distance delivered courses among Oregon community colleges. The current “Host/Provide” model used over the past 10 years was intended to be a first step in providing a broad spectrum of courses without replication of effort. General Fund Total: $ 2,650,000

Preus noted that if you added up all the packages, without the Community College Support Fund and the Capital Construction items, it’s about $50 million.

Motion: Director Paz moved to adopt the 2009-11 budget and policy option packages as presented. Director Squire seconded the motion.

Discussion: These proposals will go through the governor’s budget work group. Looking at budgets in a different way How the EBL budget is calculated and possibility of other approaches Need to increase productivity of system

26

Vote: The motion passed 4 – 0. Excused were Berger, Frank, Bogart.

Stakeholder ReportsAndrea Henderson, Connie Lee; Oregon Community College Association (OCCA)

Lee stated that this will be her last meeting as OCCA president. She thanked the board for its support, especially for capital construction projects. Henderson echoed Lee’s thanks for the budget. OCCA will take those numbers and turn them into messaging pieces. Education is the key – how to move forward. There’s a campaign to get students to a “middle” skill area – post high school, but short of a college degree. OCCA will be the lead organization, and there will be national resources. A workforce alliance will put together an Oregon report, and those will be released to newspapers. The Washington report was being released today.

Discussion: Importance of sharing a common vision Cuts in Steps to Success program – service delivery model has changed. Greg Hamann’s strong leadership. He’s stepping down as the Community College

President Representative.

Carl Perkins Contract Krissa Caldwell, CCWD

Caldwell explained that usually CCWD contracted with ODE to process the community program and course approvals because staff capacity at CCWD was not available. In the last legislative session, CCWD received two new positions and those responsibilities would shift back to CCWD. Money was shifting between ODE and Federal Funds. ODE would get less funds and CCWD would get more.

Future Workforce Needs ReportGreg White, Oregon Workforce Investment Board (OWIB)

White distributed a report, Priming the Talent Pipeline: Oregon Future Workforce Needs Analysis. The focus of the report was on middle skill jobs. He explained that there was a looming shortage in that area. They looked at concentrations of industries. There was a good set of data and methodology that showed what we need to invest in and confirmed what we have known all along. The data drew a lot of connections. Next meeting was scheduled at Eola and would feature Dennis Jones as a speaker.

Discussion: Desirability to have a single budget package. How to tell a succinct story to legislators.

Board members joined Chair Wyse in thanking Michael Dembrow for his service to the board; this was his last meeting. Dembrow hoped to come to some of the retreat.

Vice Chair Wyse adjourned the meeting at 11:10 a.m.

HANDOUTS & MEETING MATERIALShttp://www.ode.state.or.us/search/page/?=1697

The next board meeting will be held on August 20, 21 & 22.

27

28