teacher standards and practices commission€¦ · web viewthe intent was to have a minimum of...

Teacher Standards and Practices Commission465 Commercial Street NESalem OR 97301

August 3-5, 2005

MINUTES - TSPC MEETINGOregon State University-Cascades, Cascades Hall

2600 NW College Way, Bend, Oregon 97701

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 3, 2005

Call to OrderOn Tuesday, August 2nd, the Executive Committee met at Sully’s Italian Restaurant, 314 SW 5th Street, Redmond, Oregon from 6:00 to 8:30 p.m. On Wednesday, August 3rd, the full Commission met at Oregon State University, Cascades, 2600 NW College Way, Bend OR to conduct their Cultural Competency Workshop. From 3:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m. that afternoon, the Discipline Committee met in Executive Session before the full Commission. From 5:30 to 5:55 p.m., the full Commission met to consider discipline issues in Public Session. On Thursday, August 4th, the full Commission considered Preliminary Business; Program Approval Issues, Commission Business, and Licensure Issues. On Friday, August 5, the Commission considered Disciplinary Hearings and Investigation Reports in Executive Session, Consideration of Discipline Issues (Public Session) Administrative Rule Adoption, Cafeteria Topics and the remaining agenda items.

Commission Members PresentAurora Cedillo Pat Evenson-Brady Charleen HoilandAnne Jones Carol L. MackKatrina Myers Debra RobinsonGary PetersonMary Lou PickardMarit PierceMario Alba (Wednesday only)Leslie WalbornNancy WattGreg Bell Francis CharbonnierKaren WeisethSusan DeMarsh

Commission Staff PresentVickie ChamberlainKeith MenkPam LaFreniere (Friday only)Melody HansonJoe McKeever (Thursday only)Susan Nisbet (Thursday only)Cameron Lane (Thursday am only)

ObserversVanessa Gaston, SBEMeredith Mason, OSU CascadesDavid Mowry, State Legislator Brenda Frat, BOENikki Squire, State Board of EducationEmilio Hernandez, ODEKaren McGowan, The Register-GuardJohn Lenssen, ODEHolly Lekas, Beaverton SD, OSPAHeather Stanhope, Eastern Oregon UniversityTeresa Ferrer, Oregon Education AssociationTom Greene, University of PortlandKip Gladder, University of PhoenixJim Worthington, George Fox UniversityJonathan Leonard, Concordia UniversityFarah Ibrahim, OSUBrenda Simpson, Umatilla-Morrow ESDNancy Nagel, Lewis & Clark CollegePeter Cookson, Lewis & Clark CollegeMargaret Mahoney, U of O / OACTESue Thompson, WOU / OACTEHilda Rosselli, WOUNancy Wolfe, Lesley UniversityShelly Smolnisky, Pacific UniversityThomas Greene, U of PYvette Webber-Davis, OUSColleen Hill, OSU-CascadesBob Hamm, University of PhoenixJim Howard, NW Christian CollegeLinda Samek, Corban College

10.1

TSPC MINUTESAugust 3-5, 2005

Sam Stern, OSUDean Johnson, OSCAJohn Diehl, OEA/Beaverton SDJE DeMarsh, Retired Superintendent

1.0 CULTURAL COMPETENCY WORKSHOPGreg Bell and John Lenssen presented a workshop to explore Cultural Competency. The strategies and issues discussed were meant to increase participant’s understanding and effectiveness with respect to personal and organization cultural issues.

2.0 DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATION REPORTS (EXECUTIVE SESSION)The Commission held an executive (non-public) session on the following matters: 1) receiving and discussing preliminary investigation reports on complaints and charges against certified educators; 2) taking action to dismiss the complaint or to charge the educator; 3) deliberating the hearing record in disciplinary proceedings; 4) consulting with counsel with regard to current litigation under ORS 192.660(1)(h); and 5) considering records that are exempt by law from public inspection under ORS 192.660(1)(f). Adoption of an order resulting from a hearing must be done in public session. See ORS 192.660(1)(b) and ORS 342.175 to 342.190.

2.1 Proposed Orders/ActionsSeventeen stipulated orders, five default orders and two final orders were considered in non-public session.

2.2 Preliminary Investigation Reports and Action to Charge or DismissFollowing discussion and deliberation on eleven preliminary investigation reports in non-public session, the Commission directed the Executive Director to charge four educators with violation of standards and dismissed complaints against seven educators.

2.3 Reports Requiring No Further Action Under OAR 584-020-0041(2)The Commission considered fourteen reports requiring no further action.

Discussion: A report on Item 2.3b (Karin Bergerson) was appealed to the Court of Appeals and a favorable decision was made. The court did not issue an opinion. She has an option to file to the Supreme Court for review. When the Court of Appeals issues a judgment stating the Order is valid, that is when the suspension becomes valid.

2.4 Applications for ReinstatementOne application for reinstatement was considered.

2.5 Report of Cases Pending Before the CommissionMarit Pierce reported in non-public session there are 90 cases pending before the Commission. Of those, fifteen are cases requesting a hearing and seventeen are pending disposition in another venue.

2.6 New Cases Since Last MeetingMarit Pierce reported in non-public session that the Commission received new complaints against seventy-four educators. District Superintendents, under OAR 584-020-0041, submitted fifty-six of those reports.

TSPC MINUTES August 3-5, 2005

3.0 FULL COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF DISCIPLINE ISSUES (PUBLIC SESSION)

3.1 Stipulated Order—Aley, Samuel Haskins (Portland SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

Approved as part of the Discipline Consent Agenda / CarriedAbsent / Bell

The printed resolutions state:

RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Suspension and Probation for Samuel Haskin Aley. The order imposes a one year revocation of Aley’s right to apply for a license effective January 1, 2005. Upon reinstatement, Aley shall be placed on probation for four years subject to special terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Portland School District of this action.

The adopted order states:

The Commission adopts the above Stipulation of Facts, imposes a one (1) year revocation of Mr. Aley’s right to apply for a license, effective January 1, 2005. Pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(3), Mr. Aley may apply to the Commission for reinstatement of his teaching license on or after January 1, 2006.

Furthermore, if the license is reinstated, the Commission imposes four (4) year probation upon Mr. Aley to commence the date of issuance of said license and subject to the following special terms and conditions of probation:

1. Mr. Aley shall notify the Commission of any discipline imposed upon him by an employing school district for any reason during the term of this probation;

2. Mr. Aley shall report in writing within ten days to the Executive Director of the Commission any arrest or citation for any felony, misdemeanor, or major traffic violation;

3. Mr. Aley shall submit to the Commission the plan of ongoing treatment he will be taking throughout his probation for his chemical dependency condition as recommended by the treating professional he has been using;

4. Mr. Aley shall submit to random urinalysis samples to an approved substance abuse program on monthly basis specific to schedule 2 controlled substances;

5. Mr. Aley shall sign a medical release form and provide a copy of the release form to the substance abuse program manager and to the Commission;

6. Mr. Aley shall report to the Commission every six (6) months during his probation, on or before: (Dates to be determined once license is reinstated); and

7. Mr. Aley shall comply with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, and Division 020.

Violation of any of the terms of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Mr. Aley’s teaching license or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Mr. Aley with notice and opportunity for hearing. It is Mr. Aley’s duty to proactively seek termination of the probation at end of the four years.


3.2 Stipulated Order—Baker, Ronald Ray (Hermiston SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that contingent upon receiving a signed order by August 2, 2005, the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts and Order of Reprimand for Ronald Ray Baker. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Baker.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Hermiston School District of this action.


The Commission imposes a Public Reprimand on Ronald Ray Baker. This Stipulation of Facts and Order constitute the Reprimand.

3.3 Stipulated Order—Bartholomew, Gail Floyd (Central Curry SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Suspension and Probation for Gail Floyd Bartholomew. The order suspends the Transitional Teaching License of Bartholomew for a period of six (6) months. To reinstate, Bartholomew must submit documentation that he has undergone an evaluation by a psychotherapist or medical professional acceptable to the Commission and the evaluator submits a written report attesting Bartholomew is fit to work with children and teenagers and there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Upon reinstatement, Bartholomew shall be placed on probation for three years subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Central Curry School District, Brookings-Harbor School District and the Utah Professional Practices Advisory Commission of this action.


The Commission adopts the foregoing Stipulation of Facts and suspends the Transitional Teaching License of Gail Floyd Bartholomew, for a period of six (6) months effective on August 5, 2005. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Bartholomew’s licensure will be reinstated upon:

1. Submission of a complete application and fees pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(3);2. Submission of documentation that he has undergone an evaluation by a psychotherapist

or medical professional acceptable to the Commission, and the evaluator submits a


written report to the Commission attesting (a) Mr. Bartholomew is fit to work with children and teenagers; and (b) there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Any costs associated with the assessment or treatment will be the responsibility of Mr. Bartholomew.

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Bartholomew shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of three (3) years, subject to the following terms and conditions:

1. Mr. Bartholomew shall substantially comply with any treatment or counseling as recommended by the individual who completed the training and evaluation described above. Upon completion of treatment; the provider shall submit full analysis of Mr. Bartholomew’s treatment compliance and any prospective recommendations.

2. Mr. Bartholomew shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

3. Mr. Bartholomew shall provide information as requested by the Commission to verify that he has complied with the conditions of probation, including a statement from a future employing district that he has complied with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators.

Violation of any term or condition of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Bartholomew’s teaching license subject to Mr. Bartholomew’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

3.4 Stipulated Order—Cantwell, Angela Regina (Centennial SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that contingent upon receiving a signed order by August 2, 2005, the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Reprimand and Probation for Angela Regina Cantwell. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Cantwell and a four-year probation subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Centennial School District of this action.


The Commission imposes a Public Reprimand upon Ms. Cantwell. The Stipulation of Facts, Order and subsequent Probation constitutes the Reprimand.

Furthermore, the Commission imposes a four (4) year probation upon Ms. Cantwell to commence the date of adoption of this order and subject to the following terms and conditions of probation:

1. Ms. Cantwell shall, at her own initiative and expense, continue to obtain treatment for her alcohol dependency as recommended by her alcohol treatment provider and abstain from the consumption of alcohol;


2. During the period of this probation, Ms. Cantwell shall submit to the Executive Director of the Commission reports of her compliance with the aftercare treatment plan. Ms. Cantwell shall provide these reports every six (6) months during her probation, on or before: February 5, 2006; August 5, 2006; February 5, 2007; August 5, 2007; February 5, 2008; August 5, 2008; February 5, 2009; and August 5, 2009;

3. Ms. Cantwell shall report in writing within ten days to the Executive Director of the Commission any arrest or citation for any felony, misdemeanor, major traffic violation or violation of criminal probation; and

4. Ms. Cantwell shall comply with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of any term or condition of probation shall constitute an independent basis for the Commission to revoke Ms. Cantwell’s teaching license or otherwise impose discipline, after first providing Ms. Cantwell with notice and opportunity for hearing.

3.5 Stipulated Order—Coffey, Barbara June (Gladstone SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Public Reprimand and Order for Barbara June Coffey. The Order imposes a Public Reprimand on Coffey.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Gladstone School District of this action.


The Commission imposes a public reprimand on Barbara June Coffey and this Order shall serve as the public reprimand.

3.6 Stipulated Order—Farlow, Andrew Don (LaGrande SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Suspension and Probation for Andrew Don Farlow. The order suspends Farlow’s Initial Teaching License for a period of ninety (90) days. To reinstate, Farlow must submit documentation that he has undergone an evaluation by a psychotherapist or medical professional acceptable to the Commission and the evaluator submits a report attesting Farlow is fit to work with children and teenagers and there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar behavior in the future. Upon reinstatement, Farlow shall be placed on probation for three years subject to conditions.


RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the LaGrande School District of this action.


Andrew Don Farlow’s Initial Teaching License is suspended for a period of ninety (90) days effective the date of this signed Order. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Farlow’s Initial Teaching License will be reinstated upon the following conditions:

1. Submission of a complete application and fees pursuant to OAR 584-050-0015(3); and2. Submission of documentation that he has undergone an evaluation by a psychotherapist

or medical professional acceptable to the Commission, and the evaluator submits a written report to the Commission attesting: (a) Mr. Farlow is fit to work with children and teenagers; and (b) there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior in the future. Any costs associated with the assessment or treatment will be Mr. Farlow’s responsibility.

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Farlow shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of three (3) years, subject to the following conditions:

1. Mr. Farlow shall substantially comply with any treatment or counseling as recommended by the individual who completed the evaluation described above. Mr. Farlow shall authorize and sign any consent forms as necessary for the treatment provider or counselor to furnish records to or discuss Mr. Farlow’s treatment with the Commission.

2. Mr. Farlow shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

3. Mr. Farlow shall provide information annually from the date of this signed Order as requested by the Commission to verify that he has complied with the conditions of probation, including a statement from a future employing district that he has complied with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Farlow’s teaching license subject to Mr. Farlow’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

3.7 Final Order—Greenfield, Lori Faye (Alsea SD)MOTION, to move to amend to accept the Administrative Law Judge’s order.

Moved by Jones / seconded by Evenson-Brady / CarriedOpposed / WattAbsent / Bell

Discussion:Regarding 3.7, it was moved to accept the Attorney General’s (AG) order. To be clear, the proposed final order attached here is the AG’s amended order, not the Administrative Law Judge’s (ALJ) order.

Attorney General: To clarify that with one nay vote, the ALJ’s proposed order be accepted as the final order.

3.8 Stipulated Order—Harrell, Max Murray (Central Linn)


MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Public Reprimand and Order of Probation for Max Murray Harrell. The Order imposes a Public Reprimand on Harrell and places him on probation for a period of two years.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the complainants and the Central Linn School District of this action.


The Commission imposes a public reprimand to Max Murray Harrell, and this order shall serve as the reprimand. The Commission also places Mr. Harrell on probation for a period of two years from the date of this order. Conditions of probation are that Mr. Harrell shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Educators under OAR 584 Division 020.

3.9 Stipulated Order—Holling, Thomas Warner (Greater Albany SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Suspension and Probation for Thomas Warner Holling. The order suspends Holling’s Standard Teaching License for a period of ninety (90) days. To reinstate, Holling must submit documentation that he has undergone an evaluation by a psychotherapist or medical professional acceptable to the Commission and the evaluator submits a written report attesting Holling is fit to work with children and teenagers and there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Upon reinstatement, Holling shall be placed on probation for four years subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Greater Albany School District of this action.


Thomas Warner Holling’s Standard Teaching License is suspended for a period of ninety (90) days effective August 5, 2005. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Holling’s Standard Teaching License will be reinstated upon:


or medical professional acceptable to the Commission, and the evaluator submits a written report to the Commission attesting (a) Mr. Holling is fit to work with children


and teenagers, and (b) there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Any costs associated with the assessment or treatment will be the responsibility of Mr. Holling.

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Holling shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of four (4) years, subject to the following terms and conditions:

1. Mr. Holling shall substantially comply with any treatment or counseling as recommended by the individual who completed the evaluation described above. Mr. Holling shall authorize and sign any consent forms as necessary for the treatment provider or counselor to furnish records to or discuss Mr. Holling’s treatment with the Commission.

2. Mr. Holling shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

3. Mr. Holling shall provide information as requested by the Commission to verify that he has complied with the conditions of probation, including a statement from a future employing district that he has complied with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Holling’s teaching license subject to Mr. Holling’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

3.10 Stipulated Order—Leneve, Lori D. (Beaverton SD )MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Reprimand and Probation for Lori D. Leneve. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Leneve and a four-year probation subject to conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Beaverton School District of this action.


The Commission adopts the above stipulation of facts and imposes a Public Reprimand upon Ms. Leneve. This Stipulation of Facts, Order and Probation constitutes the Reprimand.

Furthermore, the Commission imposes a four (4) year probation upon Ms. Leneve subject to the following conditions.

1. Ms. Leneve shall, at her own initiative and expense, continue to obtain treatment for alcohol dependency as recommended by her alcohol treatment provider;

2. During the period of her probation, Ms. Leneve shall submit to the Executive Director of the Commission reports of her compliance with the treatment plan. Ms. Leneve shall provide these reports every six (6) months during her probation, on or before: February 5, 2006; August 5, 2006; February 5, 2007; August 5, 2007; February 5, 2008; August


5, 2008; February 5, 2009; and August 5, 2009;3. Ms. Leneve shall sign a consent form authorizing the Commission to request the

treatment provider or counselor to provide, a summary report, as necessary verifying Ms. Leneve’s continued compliance with treatment requirements; and

4. Ms. Leneve shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance under Chapter 584, Division 020.

If Ms. Leneve does not comply with her treatment plan based on the reports of her treatment provider or as otherwise determined by the Executive Director she shall be in violation of the terms of this probation. Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Ms. Leneve’s teaching license subject to Ms. Leneve’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether she violated probation.

3.11 Default Order—Macias, Armando Alejandro (Tillamook SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order Suspending Right to Apply for Licensure for Armando Alejandro Macias. The Order suspends Macias right to apply for licensure for a period of six months.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Tillamook School District of this action.


The Commission hereby suspends Armando Alejandro Macias’ right to apply for licensure for a period of six (6) months effective August 5, 2005.

3.12 Default Order—Malmstrom, Kodiak Jack (South Lane SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of License Revocation for Kodiak Jack Malmstrom. The Order revokes Malmstrom’s Restricted Transitional Teaching License.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the South Lane School District of this action.


The Commission hereby revokes the Restricted Transitional Teaching License issued to


Kodiak Jack Malmstrom.

3.13 Stipulated Order—Mettee, Jerome G. (Banks SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Surrender and Order of Revocation for Jerome G. Mettee. The Order accepts the voluntary surrender of Mettee’s Oregon Basic Teaching License and hereby revokes it.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Banks School District of this action.


The Commission accepts the voluntary surrender of Jerome G. Mette’s Basic Teaching License and hereby revokes said license.

3.14 Default Order—Munson, Reed Alden (Newberg SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of License Suspension for Reed Alden Munson. The Order suspends Munson’s Standard Teaching License for a period of six months. To reinstate, Munson must submit documentation that he has undergone an evaluation by a psychotherapist or medical professional acceptable to the Commission and the evaluator submits a written report attesting Munson is fit to work with children and teenagers and there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Upon reinstatement, Munson shall be placed on probation for two years subject to conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform Newberg Public Schools of this action.


Reed Alden Munson’s Standard Teaching License is suspended for a period of six (6) months effective August 5, 2005. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Munson’s Standard Teaching License will be reinstated upon:


or medical professional acceptable to the Commission, and the evaluator submits a written report to the Commission attesting (a) Mr. Munson is fit to work with children and teenagers, and (b) there is a high probability he will not use school district


equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Any costs associated with the assessment or treatment will be the responsibility of Mr. Munson.

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Munson shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of two (2) years, subject to the following conditions:

1. Mr. Munson shall substantially comply with any treatment or counseling as recommended by the individual who completed the evaluation described above. Mr. Munson shall authorize and sign any consent forms as necessary for the treatment provider or counselor to furnish records to or discuss Mr. Munson’s treatment with the Commission.

2. Mr. Munson shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

3. Mr. Munson shall provide information as requested by the Commission to verify that he has complied with the conditions of probation, including a statement from a future employing district that he has complied with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Munson’s teaching license subject to Mr. Munson’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

3.15 Stipulated Order—Powell, Gary Lane (Eugene SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Surrender and Order of Revocation for Gary Lane Powell. The Order accepts the surrender of Powell’s Oregon Initial Teaching License and hereby revokes it together with his right to apply for a teaching license.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Eugene School District of this action.


The Commission accepts the surrender of Gary Lane Powell’s Oregon Initial Teaching License and hereby revokes said license together with his right to apply for a teaching license.

3.16 Stipulated Order—Reed, Scott Lloyd (Central Linn SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.




RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Public Reprimand and Order of Probation for Scott Lloyd Reed. The Order imposes a Public Reprimand on Reed and places him on probation for a period of two years with conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the complainants and the Central Linn School District of this action.


The Commission imposes a public reprimand upon Scott Lloyd Reed, and this order shall serve as the public reprimand.

Mr. Reed shall be placed on probation with the Commission for a period of two years from the date of this order. Conditions of probation shall include the following:

1. Within the next 60 days, Mr. Reed shall attend a class concerning safety and avoiding risk of exposure to blood-borne pathogens. Mr. Reed shall furnish to the Commission written verification of his attendance.

2. Mr. Reed shall not lick blood on the person of any student or co-worker.3. Mr. Reed shall comply with all Standards of Competent and Ethical Performance of

Educators under OAR 584 Division 020.

Failure to comply with any condition of probation shall be a basis in itself for discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Reed’s teaching license, subject to Mr. Reed’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

3.17 Stipulated Order—Stringer, William Mark (Ontario SD)This agenda item was removed from consideration via the addendum to agenda.

3.18 Stipulated Order—Van Rooy, Nancy Christine (Portland SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Suspension and Probation for Nancy Christine Van Rooy. The order suspends Van Rooy’s Standard Teaching License for a period of six months. Upon reinstatement, Van Rooy shall be placed on probation for four years subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Portland School District of this action.


The Commission adopts the foregoing Stipulation of Facts and suspends the Standard Teaching License of Nancy Christine Van Rooy for a period of six (6) months effective on the date this order is adopted by the Commission. At the end of the suspension period, Ms. Van Rooy may apply for reinstatement of her Standard Teaching License.

Furthermore, upon reinstatement of licensure, the Commission imposes a four (4) year


probation upon Ms. Van Rooy to commence the date of issuance of said license subject to the following terms and conditions:

1. Ms. Van Rooy shall, at her own initiative and expense, continue to obtain treatment for her alcohol dependency as recommended by her alcohol treatment provider and shall abstain from the consumption of alcohol;

2. During the period of her probation, Ms. Van Rooy shall submit to the Executive Director of the Commission reports of her compliance with the treatment plan. Ms. Van Rooy shall provide these reports every six (6) months during her probation. The first report due no later than six months from the date of this order;

3. Ms. Van Rooy shall report in writing within ten days to the Executive Director of the Commission any arrest or citation for any felony, misdemeanor, major traffic violation or violation of criminal probation; and

4. Ms. Van Rooy shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators pursuant to Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

If Ms. Van Rooy does not comply with her treatment plan based on the reports of her treatment provider or as otherwise determined by the Executive Director, she shall be in violation of the terms of this probation. Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Ms. Van Rooy’s teaching license subject to Ms. Van Rooy’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether she violated probation.

3.19 Stipulated Order—Waxenfelter, Aaron Lyle (Clackamas ESD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Suspension and Probation for Aaron Lyle Waxenfelter. The order suspends the Basic Teaching License of Waxenfelter for a period of ninety days. To reinstate, Waxenfelter must submit documentation that he has undergone an evaluation by a psychotherapist or medical professional acceptable to the Commission and the evaluator submits a written report attesting Waxenfelter is fit to work with children and teenagers and there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Upon reinstatement, Waxenfelter shall be placed on probation for four years subject to terms and conditions.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Clackamas Education Service District of this action.


Aaron Lyle Waxenfelter’s Initial Teaching License is suspended for a period of ninety (90) days effective on August 5, 2005. At the end of this suspension period, Mr. Waxenfelter’s Basic Teaching License will be reinstated upon:


or medical professional acceptable to the Commission, and the evaluator submits a


written report to the Commission attesting (a) Mr. Waxenfelter is fit to work with children and teenagers, and (b) there is a high probability he will not use school district equipment to access sexually explicit materials or engage in similar inappropriate behavior. Any costs associated with the assessment or treatment will be the responsibility of Mr. Waxenfelter.

Upon the reinstatement of licensure, Mr. Waxenfelter shall be placed on probation by the Commission for a period of four (4) years, subject to the following conditions:

1. Mr. Waxenfelter shall substantially comply with any treatment or counseling as recommended by the individual who completed the evaluation described above. Mr. Waxenfelter shall authorize and sign any consent forms as necessary for the treatment provider or counselor to furnish records to or discuss Mr. Waxenfelter’s treatment with the Commission.

2. Mr. Waxenfelter shall comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

3. Mr. Waxenfelter shall provide information as requested by the Commission to verify that he has complied with the conditions of probation, including a statement from a future employing district that he has complied with the Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Waxenfelter’s teaching license subject to Mr. Waxenfelter’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

3.20 Default Order—Willits, Toby Allen (n/a) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Final Order Denying Application for Toby Allen Willits. The Order denies Willits’ application for an Oregon teaching license.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Arizona State Board of Education of this action.


The Educator License application for Toby Allen Willits dated May 23, 2004 is hereby DENIED.

3.21 Stipulated Order—Wilson, Gary Brooks (Grants Pass SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.




RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation of Facts, Order of Reprimand and Probation for Gary Brooks Wilson. The order imposes a Public Reprimand upon Wilson and a one-year probation subject to terms.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Grants Pass School District of this action.


The Commission adopts the above Stipulation of Facts and imposes a Public Reprimand. This Order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

Furthermore, Mr. Wilson will be placed on probation for a period of one (1) year. It is understood by the parties that during the next year Mr. Wilson will identify a competent counselor and obtain counseling regarding his goals of achieving very high quality in the classroom and the best approach to achieve such goals, including refraining from choosing words which are inappropriate in the presence of students.

Mr. Wilson will comply with all Standards for Competent and Ethical Performance of Oregon Educators under Oregon Administrative Rules, Chapter 584, Division 020.

Violation of the terms of this probation may constitute an independent basis for the Commission to impose discipline, up to and including revocation of Mr. Wilson’s teaching license subject to Mr. Wilson’s right to a hearing on the issue of whether he violated probation.

3.22 Stipulated Order—Allen, Mark Paul (Coos Bay SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions:

Moved by Pierce on behalf of the Discipline Committee / Seconded / DENIEDAyes / Peterson, DeMarsh, Weiseth, CharbonnierOpposed / Watt, Jones, Pierce, Myers, Pickard, Hoiland, Robinson, Cedillo, Walborn, Evenson-Brady, Alba, MackAbsent / Bell


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Stipulation and Order of Reinstatement for Mark Paul Allen. The Order reinstates the Standard Teaching License of Allen for one school year until June 15, 2006. To retain his license, Allen shall apply for renewal prior to its expiration. At that time, the Commission will consider any factors that the Commission deems relevant, including Allen’s performance during the 2005-06 school year and his behavior that resulted in the prior discipline and the result of a mental health evaluation. If Allen’s license is renewed, he shall be placed on probation for a period of two years, subject to conditions. Within 120 days, Allen shall undergo at his own expense an evaluation by a mental health professional of the Commission’s choosing.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission inform Coos Bay School District of this action.

TSPC: The district believes this man is wonderful but it was stated that he does not represent what


the Commission would like to see of our teachers. If he is embezzled and was convicted, we would not give him his license back. Concern was expressed that the Commission be consistent. We are saying this is a person who should not be teaching on a valid license but we will let the district decide. The Commission should take a stand stating we do not feel he should be teaching.

Question to AG: Can we direct the district not to allow him to teach by being a teaching assistant with a substitute? That subverts the whole intent to having him suspended. Given our previous revocation and reinstatement history, we should talk with him. There is a hearing scheduled before an ALJ on August 16, 2005. This will come back to you again after the Judge has recommended an Order. Our mission statement says that children will be taught by Caring, Competent and Ethical Educators and this man is neither competent nor ethical. The district and Mr. Allen would like to know what your decision is as opposed to tabling this decision. We should ask him to attend the November meeting and talk with Commissioners.

3.23 Default Order—Lenz, Paul Clyde (Lincoln County SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Default Order of License Revocation and Revocation of Right to Apply for a License on Paul Clyde Lenz. The Order revokes Lenz’ Oregon Substitute Teaching License and revokes his right to apply for a teaching license.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Lincoln County School District of this action.


The Commission hereby revokes the Oregon Substitute Teaching License issued to Paul Clyde Lenz and revokes his right to apply for a teaching license.

3.24 Final Order—Tubré, Bruce Joseph (Jefferson SD) MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Final Order Revoking Licenses for Bruce Joseph Tubré. The Order revokes the Standard Teaching License and the Basic Administrative License of Tubré.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the Jefferson School District of this action.



The Standard Teaching License and the Basic Administrative License of Bruce Joseph Tubré are REVOKED.

4.0 DISCIPLINE ISSUES CONSENT AGENDA

The policy procedures for the Consent Agenda are established by Policy 3522. The Executive Director recommends adoption by single consent motion the following listed items which are identified on the agenda by a double asterisk: 3.1, 3.3, 3.5, 3.6, 3.8 through 3.16, 3.17 and 3.18 through 3.22. Any of these items may be removed from the Consent Agenda upon the request of any Commissioner. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be considered in the order they are listed on the agenda.

Marit Pierce requested without objection to move 3.2 (Ronald Ray Baker), 3.4 (Angela Regina Cantwell), 3.7 (Lori Faye Greenfield), 3.23 (Paul Clyde Lenz), and 3.24 (Bruce Joseph Tubre َ) to the Consent Agenda.

There was an objection to 3.7 being moved to the Consent Agenda. A request was made to remove 3.22 (Mark Allen) from the Consent Agenda. The Commission will hear the objection to 3.7.

MOTION, to accept the Consent Agenda for Discipline with the addition of Agenda Items.3.2, 3.4, 3.23, 3.24.and removal of Item 3.17 and 3.22.

Moved by Meyers / Seconded by Evenson-Brady / CarriedAbsent / Bell

THURSDAY, AUGUST 4, 2005

5.0 PRELIMINARY BUSINESS 5.1 Introduction and Comments of Agency and Organization Representatives and Guests(Guest Comments Regarding Non-Agenda Items)

Chair Walborn introduced and welcomed the new Commissioner, Mario Alba, Principal of Thomas Middle School in Hillsboro. (Replacing Peter Tromba)

Tom Greene-University of PortlandShelly Smolnisky-Pacific UniversityNancy Wolfe-Leslie UniversityTeresa Ferrer-OEAHilda Rosselli-Western UniversitySue Thompson-WU/OACTEMargaret Mahoney-U of O/ OACTEPeter Cookson-Lewis & Clark CollegeNancy Nagel-Lewis & Clark CollegeHeather Stanhope-EOUBrenda Simpson-Umatilla-Morrow ESDJonathan Leonard-Concordia UniversityTom Buchanan-Cascade College


Dew Anna Brumley-Warner Pacific CollegeLinda Samek-Corban CollegeKip Gladder-University of PhoenixHolly Lekas-Beaverton SD

5.2 Acceptance of AgendaMOTION, to accept the agenda.

Moved by Jones / Seconded by Pickard / CarriedAbsent / Alba

5.3 Approval of Minutes-April 28, 2005Approved as part of the Consent Agenda / Seconded by Jones / Absent / Alba

5.4 Chair Walborn’s ReportIn the absence of Peter Tromba, Chair Walborn asked Susan DeMarsh to fill in the Vice-Chair position until elections are held in November. Anne Jones will be the Parliamentarian. Carol Mack is the Interim Dean at Portland State University as of September 1, 2005.

After our meeting in April, Teresa Ferrar, Karen Weiseth, and Leslie Walborn traveled to a National Licensure Board Conference in Washington D.C. Oregon is a leader in this field.

5.5 Executive Director Chamberlain’s ReportThe Active License List shows the licenses that we offer. It does not show how many of these people are employed. There are 58,366 active licenses. About 36,500 of those licensed educators are employed in the public schools. About 9,500 of the 36,000 are administrators. Approximately 26,000 are teachers, school counselors and school psychologists. We have 22,000 active licensed educators that are not employed at this time. We still have shortages in certain areas. It was asked why so many people from out-of-state are being hired. It does not have as much to do with recruiting as the fact that Oregon is still the biggest in-migration state in the nation. A lot of those people are professional educators.

Discussion:TSPC: Does your report on employed educators include private schools? No, that is the figure we get from the Oregon Department of Education (ODE) report. Traditionally the private schools have between 2,200 to 2,500 licensed educators.

Gallery: A statement was made that 60% of the teacher’s licenses are from out-of-state. Many in-state students are getting their license but they are not getting hired and it would help us challenge the opinion of the Legislature that we are not doing our job in preparing the workforce. A request was made for the data that reflects what percentage of working educators are from out-of-state.

TSPC: We receive our information in December so we can generate that data the following January for the current school year. One graph you have in front of you reflects the time-in and the time-out process for licenses. The number of C-1’s that come in on a weekly basis are reflected in one graph. We issue approximately fifty licenses on a daily basis.

Several of us were invited to be on the Chalkboard Project regarding teacher and administrator quality and how it should be measured. The recommendations of this group will be taken to the foundation boards that may or may not accept them. The goal is to have legislation ready for the 2007 Legislative session.


We won’t be moving to a 5-year license and we will have to increase the fingerprint fee. The Legislature passed SB 755 which requires administrators to put educators on administrative leave until law enforcement or the Department of Human Services determines that they are guilty or not guilty when the Administrator receives a report about an educator who may be involved in child abuse. School Boards are drafting policies at this time. SB 755 was passed and signed by the Governor. This is a result of the Joseph Billera case in the Salem Keizer School District.

5.6 Reports from Liaison Appointees:State Board / Joint Boards of Education...............................................Peter TrombaOregon University System Board............................................................Carol MackBusiness Education Compact...................................................................Keith MenkLegislative Committees.......Mary Lou Pickard/Charleen Hoiland/Pat Evenson-BradyOregon Fund for Advancement of Teaching Excellence...........................Anne Jones

Approved as part of the Consent Agenda / Seconded by Jones / Absent / Alba

5.7 Review of Correspondence and Information of Interest to CommissionersApproved as part of the Consent Agenda / Seconded by Jones / Absent / Alba

6.0 FULL COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF PROGRAM APPROVAL ISSUESNancy Watt, Program Approval Chair

6.1 ESOL Proposed StandardsThe Executive Director recommends that the Commission approve attaching the ESOL Standards to the Administrative Rule for adoption at the first convenient date following the meeting.

Discussion: TSPC: We gathered a number of educators to discuss the standards about ESOL and how closely they align to the National Standards. We are encouraged to adopt these rules for ESOL.

How will these rules affect current programs? If we adopt these rules, it is the expectation that the programs that offer ESOL will have to make adjustments to be in compliance with these standards. If there are minor adjustments, the programs will need to indicate that in their annual reports. If there are major modifications to be made then those modifications will have to be submitted to the Commission for approval.

Is there a difference between an English as a Second Language (ESL) program and English to Speakers of Other Languages program (ESOL)? A suggestion was made to label the entire document as ESOL. This wording is from the National Standards. The group reviewed it and adopted them as they were written but we can make corrections to the terminology. From the colleges' stand point, it doesn’t make a difference if we use the National Standards language or adapt the language to meet Oregon’s Standards.

Many times we leave out the bi-lingual speaking children. Understanding the language acquisition for the bi-lingual child is not reflected in this document. Under (2)(a)(A) and (B) of the Knowledge and Skills: Understands and applies processes and stages of the English language for the bi-lingual child. Please review (1)(b)(K), (L), and (M) that it should read: To help ESOL and Bi-lingual students develop language proficiency. To clarify this document ESOL and B-lingual should be used throughout.

The National Standards are using ESOL to describe the student and ESL describes the method.


MOTION, to refer this resolution to hearing as edited.

Gallery: Please clarify on Page 1(b) (K): Help ESOL students to communicate in socially and culturally appropriate ways. It seems biased and an explanation was requested.

TSPC: These are verbatim objectives from the National Standards. There are no specific notes or discussion on this item or what it meant.

Gallery: The Commission and the programs should consider if this is a standard they want to incorporate into their programs.

TSPC: It was suggested that the group of educators meet and discuss this issue. (1)(b)(K) is very ambiguous. What culture are they referring to? This will have to be clarified before we adopt the resolution.

MOTION to move the ESOL Standards to Administrative Rule Hearing.

Moved by Watt on behalf of Program Approval / Seconded / CarriedAbsent / Alba

The printed resolution states:

RESOLVED, that the Commission approves referring the attached ESOL standards to administrative rule hearing for adoption at the first convenient date following the Commission meeting.

6.2 NES Tests-Consequences of Suspected CheatingThe new ORELA test developed by NES is Oregon’s test. We have to resolve the issues of people who cheat on the test.

Discussion:TSPC: NES will review test score gains after they have developed a test. If they see a dramatic jump in someone’s test scores, they suspect that something has happened. They look at a number of factors to determine if some type of inadequacy has occurred and then they refer it to TSPC for further investigation and possibly a recommendation to void the scores. Oregon does not have any administrative rules regarding what we will do with these referrals. In California if they determine that someone has cheated on a test; they flag the person’s file and wait until the person applies for a license to take action. What do you believe the Commission should do in these instances?

Can something be added to the Character Questions on the PA-1 to allow us to examine it at licensure time? We cannot do anything about it when these individuals are students. A suggestion was to research other states and see how they incorporate this into their licensure procedure.

Gallery: How has the Commission dealt with this in the past? Would this have been an issue for C-BEST?

TSPC: C-BEST is an NES test but it is a California test so the rules that apply to voiding scores or investigation fall to California because it is their test. Cheating on tests in California is a serious problem so they have an investigation group. A suggestion was to refer it to Keith and Vickie for further consideration.


6.3 C-2 Fast-Track ProcessThere is a new C-2 Fast-Track process that changes the way universities submit recommendations for licensure. Currently there are nine programs that are using this new process.

An audit process was established by TSPC. We determined that we would look at a minimum of fifteen files or 5% of the total Fast-Track submissions from each institution. We reviewed the files in our office to ensure that we audited the process from start to finish and provided feedback to the institutions. The overall results indicate that the system is working fine. Our goal is to bring all institutions in the teacher preparation programs into the online C-2 Fast-Track process by the end of this calendar year. This schedule will require some training so institutions are familiar with the process. We will annually audit the institutions. We have accepted 600 Fast-Tracks and approximately 580 have been processed. We are able to issue the license within the ten-day limit.

Gallery: It’s a wonderful system. The process works well but one suggestion is that there should be a “comment section” for irregularities.

TSPC: It is difficult to design a program that will pick up these irregularities. A suggestion was made to create a “file cabinet” to store information electronically that will be used in the C-2 process. With the file cabinet, the computer will be doing more of the validation.

6.4 Corban College Proposal for Post-Baccalaureate Initial License ProgramLinda Samek - Dean at Corban College. We view this program as a re-packaging of something that we’ve been doing for some time. Last fall we began our third Masters program. Since 1990 we have been serving people who are post-baccalaureate. As we were looking at developing our MED program we discussed developing our MAT program. We chose to look at a post-baccalaureate program at the graduate level that culminates in licensure when they complete the entire program. One option is about one-half of the course work can be reserved and applied to the MED program on campus or some courses can be transferred to other universities.

We have designed two crafts for the program. One includes Early Childhood / Elementary Authorization and the other includes Middle Level / High Authorization. There are a number of core programs also. We have not formally advertised our Master’s program or this program and yet we have had several inquiries about them.

Discussion:TSPC: How does it differ from a MAT?

Corban: It does not culminate in a Master’s Degree. Most of our students teach in small private schools. These students have limited time and limited funding so they need to be able to do this in their own time.

TSPC: What you are saying is they have the option to not culminate in a Master’s. Who will take these courses?

Corban: Our clientele are people who have changed their major at some time or taken some time off and want to return to the education program. The other students are those who want to complete their adult degree. About 75% of our adult degree completion students are online and this gives them a flexible, individualized program.

TSPC: What prerequisites do students need to enter this program?


Corban: They must have the appropriate Child/Adolescents development courses. If they haven’t spent time in a classroom in the last five years, we do an in-depth interview process with them. If they have never been in a classroom they are not eligible for the program. We suggest they volunteer or obtain experience as an instructional assistant.

TSPC: Are you saying this is your undergraduate program in a different format?

Corban: Yes, the basic content is but these are graduate level courses. We have been cognizant of the fact that this is a graduate level program not an under-graduate level program.

TSPC: There are a number of things that you cover in the under-graduate program that you don’t cover in the graduate program such as art and music particularly at the Early Childhood Level.

Corban: The last course syllabus for student teaching and seminars lists additional coursework.

TSPC: In the undergraduate program you have six hours dedicated to teaching math to Early Childhood and Elementary Teachers. Is this program 2 hours?

Corban: This one is three hours. The difference is our under-graduate students take the six-hour course which is a mixture of methods and content. The three-hour course is specifically a methods class for teaching math.

TSPC: How do you deal with the content?

Corban: We make the assumption that if they have a Baccalaureate degree, we do a transcript review and if they passed the C-Best, and they are literate, they should have had reasonable exposure to all of the content.

TSPC: Do you require an under-graduate math course?

Corban: That is not something that was written into the admissions process. Many of the students have had the 211, 212, and 213 math sequence at the community college or they have done other coursework in mathematics.

TSPC: The methods in literacy for ECE / ELE do not appear to have writing.

Corban: It is in the course. I’m not sure why it’s not in the syllabus.

TSPC: How and where do you differentiate in the four authorization levels in reading? Where is the reference to Middle level?

Corban: Our instructors have never been asked to add anything to their syllabi. We are aware of the importance of the developmental spectrum from Early Childhood through High School. We spend time with the Oregon Content and Standards Benchmark.

TSPC: Is the same true for reading?

Corban: Our instructor for the literacy course has a Master’s degree in reading.

TSPC: Is there an option to do Elementary and Middle?

Corban: Not at this time. Since Corban is a Christian College there is a year of bible and theology


required which would make this a five-year program.

TSPC: The syllabus ends with the field experience. Is the 554 the second authorization field experience?

Corban: There is not a syllabus here because we have had no need for it. The 563 is here so you would have an idea what it will look like for this fall.

TSPC: Where do you do your primary work sample methodology?

Corban: They do a full work sample and instructional alignment. They do a full work sample in each of the two authorizations.

TSPC: It is not distinguishable between an ECE and a MS. It appears that the teaching work sample methodology is non-specific to authorization levels.

Corban: It is non-specific in theory and in course descriptions but certainly not in practice. We do the instructional alignment with all authorization levels in the same section of the courses. All candidates have the opportunity to experience how you teach from pre-school through high school.

TSPC: Were the faculty properly licensed at the different authorizations when they worked in the public schools?

Corban: Yes they were. We don’t have anyone who was exclusively a teacher in private schools.

TSPC: How much of a challenge is field placement?

Corban: It is not a challenge. The students are from schools that are on the approved list.

TSPC: Under-graduates do student teaching for ten hours of credit, graduates do it for six hours but they do a full fifteen weeks of student teaching. For Ed 563, how do you get all the PE and Fine Arts methods for Music, Art and Drama in an eight hour seminar?

Corban: This is not ideal but we feel this gives them enough foundation to get started.

TSPC: Are you coming in for Continuing Teacher License (CTL)?

Corban: If the Commission writes some standards for CTL we’ll be here.

TSPC: You need to identify the methodology of the different authorization levels. You also need revisions of the syllabi in terms of literacy, writing and speaking. You need to address the admissions requirements or procedures in terms of content.

Corban: Would it be appropriate if they come with a passing MSE score? It states in our admissions requirements that candidates are expected to take the MSE no later than the end of the first quarter of coursework.

TSPC: We lean toward approval with conditions. Corban is scheduled for a full site review in one year and these issues can be looked at then.

MOTION, to accept the resolution as printed.


Moved by Jones / Seconded by Hoiland / CarriedAbsent / Alba


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the Corban College proposal for Post-baccalaureate Initial License Program based on favorable review of the Commission.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that Corban College is authorized to recommend candidates to the Post-Initial Teaching License after August 8, 2005.

6.5 Lewis & Clark Program Approval Time ExtensionAfter discussion and consideration by the Program Approval Committee, Lewis and Clark’s Graduate School of Education and Counseling is granted an extension to their Program Approval until December 1st, 2005. There were three unmet regulations on the recent Lewis and Clark site visit. An opportunity was extended to them to describe how they intend to resolve these issues.

Discussion:Lewis & Clark: Thank you all. I appreciate your consideration for an extension to December 1st, 2005. There were three regulations that were unmet. They are Curriculum Design for Teacher Licensure, Practica and Student Teaching, and Evidence of Effectiveness. We submitted to a NCATE/TSPC joint site visit which was professionally done, thorough and fair minded. We take these unmets very seriously. The last two were substantial. We are discussing how we can change our programs to bring them into alignment so that all regulations are met. The faculty is meeting today and after internal discussions we are prepared to make changes in our programs that are significant.

TSPC: One of the things that is important to be on the record is that these changes are going to be met immediately and with the current cohort.

Lewis & Clark: Yes, these changes are going to be met now and with the current group who is going through the program.

TSPC: I’m in agreement to grant the extension. I really do want to see this in writing with the full substance of what you are going to do. It must take place with the current cohort.

Lewis & Clark: Absolutely.

TSPC: Your letter addresses the Curriculum Design Standard for Student Teaching but it doesn’t address what you’re going to do to address Evidence of Effectiveness.

Lewis & Clark: Yes, the basic problem with that is we have to include two work samples.

TSPC: When we come back in November we will have the full Site Visit Report, the rejoinder and then we will conduct the full formal program approval.


Moved by Bell / Seconded by Hoiland / CarriedAbsent / Alba



RESOLVED, that after discussion and consideration by the Program Approval Committee, Lewis and Clark College’s Graduate School of Education and Counseling is granted an extension to their program approval to December 1, 2005

6.6 Approval of Willamette University Initial & Continuing Administrator License Program Approved as part of the Consent Agenda / Seconded by Jones / Absent / Alba

6.7 Upcoming Site Visit DatesApproved as part of the Consent Agenda / Seconded by Jones / Absent / Alba

6.8 Annual ReportsApproved as part of the Consent Agenda / Seconded by Jones / Absent / Alba

6.9 Civil Rights Workshop ApprovalsRESOLVED, that the Commission approve the discrimination workshop programs with new syllabi and test plans that are consistent with the template approved by the Commission.

Discussion:TSPC: Regarding both of these Civil Rights Workshops, we received certifications from some educators when they applied for renewal of their license indicating that they had taken these workshops. We denied their application because these workshops were not approved. We changed the template for the Civil Right’s Workshop and the existing workshops had to get re-approved. These two workshops did not get re-approval because when they were approved previously they met the needs of the individual districts. When we contacted them to submit for re-approval, they did not receive our emails or letters. Their first notice that they had to submit for re-approval was when TSPC turned down the renewal of the applicants who took their workshops. Initially they sent in the tests and some general information about the workshops. TSPC responded that they needed to submit a syllabus. They did submit a syllabus and it was determined that these workshops do meet the Civil Rights template that we approved. TSPC recommends adoption of both workshops.

Gallery: Given that the Commission approves these workshops, what is the disposition of those educators who were denied their license? Would they be allowed to use the same application fee and process or do they have to apply again?

TSPC: When a person applies for a license and there is an incomplete, we hold the fee for 90 days. They would have to resolve the Civil Rights component and notify us that they have completed the workshop.

Gallery: The educators that submitted that workshop completion; do they have to complete the workshop again once you approve it?

TSPC: We will do it on a case by case basis but it may be that we require folks to re-take an approved workshop before we approve their license. If the workshop providers can demonstrate to us that the original course syllabi and outline is essentially the same as what we are approving today, then we will accept those license renewals. If it is not, then the educators will have to retake the workshop. That is between those candidates and the vendor who is providing the workshop.

Gallery: Is there a list of approved workshops that the candidates are given? How would they know that they should not have gone to those workshops?

TSPC: There is a list of approved workshops on our web site with associated links. These workshops


were not on our web site at the time. We were not aware that these workshops were being offered.


Moved by Hoiland / Seconded by Bell / CarriedAbsent / Alba

The printed resolution reads:

RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the discrimination workshops programs with new syllabi and test plans that are consistent with the template approved by the Commission

6.10 Update on Completing Standards for Division 065Approved as part of the Consent Agenda / Seconded by Jones / Absent / Alba

6.11 Other matters as time permits.TSPC: We don’t have an endorsement area for Educational Computing and Technology. It is an important area and we should consider standardizing the training and requirements to better serve the state. Warner Pacific is in the process of developing a technology certificate that has a concentration of coursework of using technology in the classroom. There is a great deal of interest in this area.

Without objection the Chair suggests Pat Evenson-Brady be the liaison to the State Board to replace Peter Tromba.

7.0 COMMISSION BUSINESS

7.1 Cultural Competency Discussion and Next StepsDiscussion:TSPC: As a Commission, what do you want to do next? This area needs to be addressed and we need to move forward. The most useful thing that we can do is develop some description of the outcomes that we are looking for so people can begin working on them. At this time, there is a great deal of confusion and misunderstanding. I appreciate the opportunity to provide training on cultural competency. Higher Ed and educators in our classrooms are having challenges and they want to address this from a professional development standpoint. It isn’t necessary to provide definitions but we must provide guidelines. It is our duty to provide resources, ideas and strategies for professional development. Defining Cultural Competency is very challenging. It must be addressed from a professional development standpoint for the educator who needs help. Cultural Competency (CC) will continue to change and we have to accept that. The Commission and Higher Ed must decide how those behaviors might look in a classroom setting because they need to be addressed in teacher education programs. It must be embedded in our teacher ed programs so our future teachers are capable of dealing with those issues. The committee has taken the objectives for Initial Teaching and reviewed those standards to see where Cultural Competency is embedded in our current standards.

Is the wording appropriate or does it need to be revised? Suggestions are coming forward regarding revisions on Division 017. The next step is to determine what the revised standard should look like.

How are you currently assessing folks to determine if they are meeting that standard? How do you assess out-of-state educators? Since this will impact people in the field they must have input. The current working educators should work in tandem with Higher Ed. OACTE is not only looking at the Initial Teaching competencies but also the administrator, the school counselor and school psychologist competencies.


We must move forward from what we learned yesterday. How do you prepare teachers who do not address certain issues of gender or sexual preference or religion? The work is not just how we impact the OAR’s but how we impact our work together as people. We have the opportunity as a Commission to influence the training that our teachers will obtain so they can be successful in the schools

Gallery: OEA, OSPA, ODE, and NWREL representatives as well as TSPC and faculty from Higher Ed are all on this committee. We have chosen to focus on teacher preparation because that is the largest group out there. We did look at the administrative competencies and will be addressing that at a later date. In the course that Corban has on the diverse learner, we address all the facets of diversity in the classroom. When NW Christian College came forward with their School Counseling Program, we saw the attacks from the community. This is a real concern for us. There is a misperception of us, people are important to us in all of their choices of life. We are looking forward to additional work on Cultural Competency this fall.

Are we talking about creating our own definitions? Our language at the Cultural Competency meeting yesterday was different than the definition that is being used. A report will be provided to the Commission regarding strategies and what to do next. Some momentum can go in a negative direction. The questions that we ask ourselves are more important than the answers to them. Around the state great things are being done in Cultural Competency.

The Commission should move forward with this. We need to exercise good judgment. The first step should be creating a comprehensive and well-thought-out statement which should serve as a foundation for future work. We want to proceed swiftly, cautiously, appropriately and aggressively.

Gallery: We are chronologically and historically at a place where we need to be. There is a lot of good things happening and we need to pull it all together productively. We need to invite districts, Higher Ed, and the educational community to join together to address the educational gap issues. They must feel that they have an up-front voice rather than a represented voice. We must look at standards and outcomes for all educators and what this means in the interest of students and learning. This is a group issue. It’s an institution issue.

7.2 Status of Legislative Bills and TSPC BudgetTSPC: One issue still pending is how are we going to get our fingerprint fees changed? In March of 2005, the State Police raised their fees $16. TSPC’s statute is locked in at $42 so we have been losing $10 on every license application that includes fingerprints. That total amount has escalated to nearly $25,000. Additionally, last session when the PERS reforms were passed they did two things; they took money out of Other Funds budget to back the General Fund and they also took $81,000 out of our budget since all agencies had to pay to help the state pay for PERS bonds to meet their PERS debt. They also increased our budget by $35,000 which they did account for as anticipated increased PERS fees. We submit a pretty skinny budget. We have a $55,000 deficit. We had six hearings in the last biennium and this biennium we had eighteen. Our Attorney fees and Hearing Officer costs were not anticipated and those fees also increased. We honored the Administrative restrictions that the Governor published and people didn’t travel. The trips taken were nominal. We moved our meetings to Portland which saved a great deal of Commission money.

Part of our campaign to move to a five-year license required that we get the fee increases and it was not approved. However, they thought it was okay to raise the fee to the $100 cap per license. If we raise our fees and go to a five-year license we will still run out of money in the 07-09 biennium. This is highly risky to move to five years and increase the fees to $100 knowing that you need $115 to $120 per license. With the volume of licenses we issue, $10 per license adds up fast.


We participated in one other hearing regarding abolishing TSPC. Individual legislators who have served in different capacities don’t like the teacher licensure agency. One theme I heard was, “Why can’t my wife teach that class? She has a Master’s degree.” They also want people to become administrators from any walk of life. We got a budget with a 9.5% increase. They gave us two new positions on a temporary basis. The Legislation passed the “60-day-notice cases” back to the Commission instead of going to the Hearings Officer Panel. We will conduct a workshop on being a Hearings Panel.

7.3 Review of the TSPC Handbook for 2006RESOLVED, that Chair Walborn appoint Charleen Hoiland to review the July 2004 edition of the Handbook for Commissioners.


Moved / Seconded by Evenson-Brady / CarriedAbsent / Alba

7.4 Meeting Calendar for 2006-2007This was sent to you via email asking for feedback. We received one email stating that she could make the dates. These are the dates for the rest of 2005, 2006, through May of 2007.


Moved on behalf of the Executive Committee / Seconded by Watt / CarriedAbsent / Alba

Dates already set by the Commission for the 2005-06 school year:a) August 3-5, 2005 (3 days)......Oregon State University, Bend campusb) November 3-4, 2005..............TBDc) January 26-27, 2006...............TBDd) March 3, 2006........................TBDe) April 27-28, 2006...................TBD

The 2005 Executive Committee proposed the following changes to the latter part of the 2005-06 school year and the meeting dates for 2006-2007. In early July, these changes were sent to Commissioners by email for response. No conflicting issues were raised.

a) March 9-10, 2006...........TBD (proposed change from 2005-06 school year)b) May 11-12, 2006............TBD (proposed change from 2005-06 school year)c) August 2-4, 2006............TBD (possibly the beach)d) November 2-3, 2006.......TBDe) January 25-26, 2007.......TBDf) March 8-9, 2007.............TBDg) May 10-11, 2007............TBD

7.5 Appoint Nominating Committee for 2006 Executive CommitteeThe Chair asked Anne Jones, Marit Pierce, and Gary Peterson to be on the Nominating Committee. In November, the Commission will be electing a Chair, a Vice-chair, and two other people to the Executive Committee. Leslie Walborn will be the fifth member. If you are interested in being on the Executive Committee please let one of those three people know. There will be nominations from the floor in November.


7.6 Procedure for evaluation of Executive Director ChamberlainThe rules on evaluating the Executive Director are that you may discuss the evaluation in Executive Session provided the goals that the evaluation is based on are adopted in Public Session. The Commission adopted my goals that were submitted last year. The evaluation should be submitted to Higher Ed, stakeholders, the staff and the Commission. They are the exact same goals, objectives, evaluation, and the same measurements. We will attempt to conform this to Survey Monkey and allow people to complete it electronically. We intend to send it to everyone via an email between now and November. The Executive Committee will consider the results and discuss it in November.

The new goals I’m proposing for the following years are: Standard One is leadership and Standard Two is policy, governce and goals. Standard Three is communications: Two new goals will be added. One is to establish ongoing stakeholder committees to seek input to key Commission issues and policies and establish a customer service survey for performance evaluation. The other new goal is in Standard 4: to expand our total automated system to improve online services to educators. We need to look at our total service delivery. We need to look at how we assign jobs and serve people. I believe we can have licenses delivered in two weeks.

Discussion:TSPC: On Standard One for 05-07, the last goal is amended slightly. On Standard Three new language is added. This is all communicating our message. We wish to maintain our direct web access to consumer complaints which has trickled off. The first four pages are my future goals and what I will be evaluated on this year. The part, to implement the rules fairly and even-handedly has had a huge impact on how we are delivering services and peoples’ impression of the agency. It improves our reputation if they can call two different people and get the same answer. This is key to elevating the standards of the agency and the profession.


Moved on behalf of the Executive Committee / Seconded by DeMarsh / CarriedAbsent / Alba


RESOLVED, that the Commission use the goals for the 2004-2005 year for the Executive Director approved at the July 2004 Commission meeting as the basis for this year’s evaluation.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission adopt the attached Executive Director’s goals for 2005-2007 biennium as the basis for next year’s evaluation.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission seek broad input into the Executive Director’s performance from stakeholders and TSPC staff.

7.7 TSPC Data Reportsa. TSPC Statistics for 2004-2005b. TSPC Licensure Reportc. Conditional Assignment Permits (full report at November meeting)d. Waivers of Assignments for Small Schoolse. TSPC 2005-2007 Affirmative Action Plan



7.8 Expenditure Report for the Month of June 2005Approved as part of the Consent Agenda / Seconded by Jones / Absent / Alba

7.9 TSPC - 2005-2006 Work PlanDiscussion:TSPC: What are we doing next with the Child Development Specialists plan? You have allowed CDSs to obtain a Transitional License and we gave them three years to move through a school counselor program. We want to allow you to discuss this in smaller groups and then bring it together and make a proposal.


8.0 FULL COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF LICENSURE ISSUES8.1 Consideration of Alternative AssessmentsThe Commission finds that the portfolios for the following candidates demonstrate competence required for licensure and authorizes waiver of the test.

The candidates are: Irma Sanchez Decker, Cindy Dohee Crosby, Esther McCoy, Mariko Hedges, Andrea Anderson, Karin V Krell, Jeffrey B Roney, Tatyana Stepanenko, Raul Veliz, Jr., Adrian G Castro, and Veronica Montes de Piccini (2).


Moved on behalf of the Licensure Committee / Seconded by Bell / CarriedAbsent / Alba


RESOLVED, that the Commission accept the alternative assessment of competence by the Licensure Committee and adopt the resolutions as specified for the respective candidates.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Executive Director shall determine that any additional evidence of competence, if prescribed by the Licensure Committee, has been submitted prior to issuing a Basic, Standard, Initial or Continuing teaching license with the appropriate endorsement(s).

8.2 Signatures of PEER forms from Charter SchoolsDiscussion:TSPC: The issue is: Nothing requires the Charter School Administrator who signs the form to be identified or licensed. There have been a couple of Charter Schools go out of business and the district that authorized the Charters are reluctant to sign the PEER forms because they haven’t been in charge of the records or the assignments. The purpose of the PEER form is to verify that the educators are validly teaching on their license. TSPC has always required that to renew your active license you have to be teaching in the area of your license. The Charter School rules do not require that anyone has to be assigned on their license. They only require that 50% of the education staff has to be licensed including the administrators.

What’s the purpose of being properly licensed in terms of renewal? If someone asked me to sign off then I would ask them to bring something that could verify what their teaching assignment is. If the Charter School doesn’t specify that they have to be properly assigned then under the Charter School


rules there is not an assignment issue. It’s a renewal issue. The purpose of the PEER form is to verify experience and assignment but they are not misassigned under the rules of a Charter School. We are looking at the PEER form in terms of experience. We don’t have any guidelines when the Charter goes out of business and no one wants to sign off on teaching experience. Can we create a rule that designates someone within the Charter School to verify their experience? We allow the Administrator at the Charter School to verify it. We could also allow the school district that authorized the Charter School to sign it with the understanding they are only verifying experience. We do that now but the districts won’t sign it. Would they sign it if there was a specific rule that allowed them to?

Does the district have any responsibility to the Charter School? The Charter School is part of the district. The rules have been if they have a license, they have to teach in the area of that license to use that experience to renew their license. However, if you have an Administrative and a teaching license you may continuously renew your teaching license based on your administrative experience. The purpose of Charter Schools is to allow flexible assignments. We occasionally get requests from private schools to assign teachers to teach religion 100%.

Gallery: Could you treat teachers teaching outside of their license area in Charter Schools the same as the Alterative Ed teachers? You could also do the same with the CDS if you have someone with a teaching license, they have a pedagogical background. We have other teachers who have no teaching license like educational technology.

TSPC: A Basic Elementary licensed teacher can be assigned at a high school because any license can teach in an Alternative Education program. We would renew. If someone who applies from a private school who has a public license but they haven’t been teaching on the license but they have been teaching religion, we don’t use that experience to renew. We tell Charter School educators because of the rule they have to be teaching in their assignment or they have to complete nine hours of continuing education. We then have renewal rules that allow someone from ODE to renew any education license. It is not even a decision that someone who has two or three licenses and is working on one license that is not related to the other licenses will renew the other two licenses. Logically, what is TSPC doing? If you have a license and are working in a public or private school it doesn’t matter how you are assigned, we will use that experience. If the Charter School rules allow them to teach legally in the school then we use that for experience just like Alternative School. Conditional Assignment Permits are their practicum in the area to add the endorsement. We have specialties and the renewal rule is to honor the specialties. It would be easier to see where the inequities are in a graph.

Gallery: If you look at honoring renewals in private schools be careful not to stray from accredited private schools.

TSPC: We need to frame the resolution with graphs for the November meeting.

8.3 Waivers for Conditional Assignment PermitsDoes limiting the waiver to the lowest quartile of student enrolment really reflect the needs of small districts?

Discussion: TSPC: We are proposing moving from a quartile of enrollment (method) to a number that is reflecting the number of teachers in the district. For schools that don’t have the small school waiver, an educator may only have one Conditional Assignment Permit (CAP) in an endorsement area. For instance, if a district applies for a CAP for a teacher to teach math for someone who isn’t licensed in math, that educator receives one CAP in math. It doesn’t make any difference where they go in the


state. The educator has three years to decide if they want to add math to their license. The Small School Waiver allows them to not be locked into the three years; they still have to file a CAP. Some schools only have a few educators and they need this flexibility. If the educator goes outside the small school they do not receive the same flexibility. It is to help the districts.

Even though the district has 250 teachers the school with the problem has three teachers and sixty kids. Is there a way to look at a small school as opposed to the district or (under this model) does this make the small school ineligible? Yes, that is correct.

We may have to set smaller standards. Could you have the thirty educator threshold for the district to qualify and then ask how many educators could be in a specific school? This waiver means they would not have to get the endorsement. So when an English teacher who has an Elementary degree is on a CAP that person would never have to get the language-arts endorsement? Yes, if the district requested and received a Small School Waiver from the Commission.

Do you want to consider allowing this exclusively for high schools? How many Small School Waivers are there that aren’t high schools? That is not readily known because they go to the districts. Concern was expressed that this waiver is forever. That means that someone can teach English their entire career and never receive training. Maybe it should be limited to five or six years.

The original question is should we change the definition for the Small School Waiver from the quartile and move it to be based on districts with less than thirty educators? How many schools are we talking about? The lowest 25% of students in the state was the old standard. Ranking the districts by student population is not indicative of the district’s resource situation. A misassigned teacher is not HQ if they don’t meet the requirements regardless if they have our permission. Could we call this a Small District Waiver instead of a Small School Waiver?

Gallery: It would be worthwhile to research which districts would meet the new definition of thirty or less licensed teachers. Also, what is the teacher population of the small high schools? To have this data would be valuable before a decision is made.

Move to postpone to a time certain, the November meeting / Seconded by Robinson / Carried

Absent / Alba

TSPC: To clarify, do you want a rule requiring five years to get an endorsement? Clarifying the district piece, the school piece, the number and data pieces? Yes. It was suggested to have a representative from a small school to define what it means to have these changes, possibly a Superintendent. It was suggested that the Executive Director contact some Superintendents for input into this issue for the record.

8.4 Initial Teaching License-New IssuesDiscussion:Issue one: Stop outs. The Commission designed the new Initial Teaching License so that people who obtain it can complete their requirements in ten years. Teachers are asking about “stopping out” for family or other reasons.

TSPC: The issue we discussed pertained to educators completing their post-baccalaureateprogram. For instance, teachers getting their Initial License in June and not teaching that summer but going back with their license and getting nine hours in the summer. This completed their Master’s and technically they are done with continuing education for ten years according to the way the rule is written. The stop out issue was not a problem in the original Initial License because it had a finite life


of six years. Any person who stopped for any reason, that clock continued to tick.

Why is it a problem for ten years? Others have gotten their Standard Teaching License in five years requiring forty-five hours. With the Basic High School License and they stopped out, they can renew for one year. At the end of one year they must have completed half of the standard requirements, 24 hours.

If someone obtains their Initial Teaching License and never teaches, the three years is gone. During the entire ten years they work in another career area. Then they come back and want to teach. What do we give them?

Gallery: If someone comes back after six years of not teaching that person could reinstate their license after doing nine credit hours. For the master’s degree teacher maybe you could consider doing the same. They could do nine credit hours, reinstate their license and be half complete with the program within a certain time. This way the Commission maintains their standard but you allow them to reinstate their license. We recommend to our completers not to continue to renew their license if they are going to stop out. Then reinstate when they come back. The Executive Director will review every scenario and attempt to create a proposal.

Issue two: Post-baccalaureate v MAT or equivalent. This issue arises around the post-baccalaureate program that does not equal a Master’s degree and/or does not equal forty-five hours.

Discussion:TSPC: The purpose for the additional nine hours was that every new teacher should revisit their education along with their practice. The post-baccalaureate programs are a few hours short of equaling the number of hours for a master’s program which is what is required of bachelor’s degrees. The Commission said in ten years, you must get a master’s or the equivalent hours. The master’s people are doing forty-five plus nine; your post-baccalaureate are doing thirty-nine plus nine; and the bachelor people are doing forty-five or thirty. The intent is to work past the original teaching and a minimal level of knowledge which is five years. What is the logical explanation for setting exact hour requirements? Initially we said everyone has to have a master’s or equivalent. Does that apply to post-baccalaureate?

Gallery: Is the equivalency now being defined by hours?

TSPC: Yes, the current OAR will require students to come back for nine credit hours of continuing education. That is nine credits beyond their Initial Teaching License within ten years.

The issue is the post-baccalaureate programs that result in an Initial Teaching License do not equal the forty-five hours that are required for a master’s. The way it currently is written there are three levels of performance. Master’s plus nine, bachelor’s plus the equivalent hours of a master’s, and the post-baccalaureate program that has the nine hours not equaling a master’s. The intent was to have a minimum of forty-five post-baccalaureate hours and nine hours are post-Initial Teaching License. We have to clarify the rule.

Gallery: It is pretty clear that if you graduate with a bachelor’s degree and an Initial License that you must complete forty-five hours. If you graduate with a concurrent master’s and a license, you must complete nine hours. If you graduate with a post-baccalaureate with a total of thirty hours then the total has to be the equivalent of the bachelor’s degree. The post-baccalaureate would have to equal the forty-five hours.

Issue three: Continuing Professional Development. If a licensee only needs to complete one class


in the first renewal, then they have two additional renewals (with three year licenses) to complete the remaining requirements without any additional professional development in ten years.

Discussion:TSPC: We have said two semester hours or three quarter hours is all that is required for one renewal. They have to complete nine hours within ten years. For instance, the post-baccalaureate program at Southern get their Initial Teaching, come back the first summer and get their nine hours but they don’t apply for the Initial II for ten years. They will go ten years with no additional coursework or professional development. If they are teaching then they are getting professional development. If they are not teaching they cannot renew. Recency used to renew is either teaching experience or nine hours. The way it is written now, if you apply for your second renewal the only requirement is experience. The rule is written to encourage people to get done in nine years with one free year. Each time people apply to renew they must have recency or experience.

8.5 Amend Preliminary Teaching License Rule OAR 584-100-0046Discussion:TSPC: NCLB says the teacher meets the definition of Highly Qualified (HQ) if they are not on a temporary, provisional, or emergency license. They are considered HQ if they have a regular license and they meet the academic requirements in the course area. When out-of-state teachers come to Oregon and districts want to hire them, they might be HQ in a subject matter area and are eligible for a Transitional license but by definition a Transitional license is provisional. We created the Preliminary Teaching License for educators who have completed a teacher education program, have a teaching license in another state and they have met the subject matter requirements to be HQ. At the time it was created it was set up for dire situations where the schools had to hire an HQ teacher so we gave them one year to complete the teaching requirements. The phase-in expires at the end of this school year (2006) and all new-hires must be HQ. The districts want to hire HQ teachers now so they demanded the Preliminary License.

We make it easy for out-of-state educators to apply for a license and be considered HQ and get a job. Our own graduates who have done everything that the out-of-state teacher did cannot qualify. The first reality is you cannot guaranty that the pool of applicants is from in-state. The second reality is the next test is in the middle of September. The fact remains is that we are making it easier for the out-of-state candidates to get a license than we are the Oregon graduates whose program is designed to meet Oregon Standards. Oregon graduates would have to apply where the jobs are and they don’t.

The question was asked about who gets the transitional and who gets the preliminary? Everyone gets the transitional when they get the Preliminary and you can only get the preliminary if you are HQ in the subject. You have to meet the federal test for the subject matter to get the preliminary. You are saying that people with a Transitional license will not be hired.

Gallery: You mentioned that the out-of-state educators must have a valid license from another state and yet I don’t see that in the definition.

TSPC: If they come in with a license or they have completed a program.

Gallery: Could this person be someone from out-of-state who met the requirements except the subject matter competency has been waived because they have five years experience from out-of-state.? Does that qualify them for a preliminary?

TSPC: They could qualify for a preliminary. They could not get an Initial but possibly be able to wave the Subject Matter test.


Gallery: If they have the basic skills but they don’t have the Praxis test score, that person qualifies for a preliminary but could they qualify for an Initial if they took care of the Civil Rights requirement? Do you have a way to say to that person, complete this and you can get an Initial license?

TSPC: The districts are doing that. The districts want fully licensed educators.

Gallery: Then if that person comes to you and wants a license is there a way to look at the requirements and see that they are met except for the anti-discrimination workshop?

TSPC: Yes, we do that all the time. Occasionally they qualify for an Initial but if they sign an affidavit we give them to the first renewal. The letter that goes out with the license states what they need to obtain an Initial Teaching License.

Gallery: There are two different HQ issues with the student from out-of-state. One who takes the Praxis test or one who has the experience that would wave that requirement and would qualify them for an Initial License. Would that person would be HQ?

TSPC: Not necessarily.

Gallery: A person with an Initial license with experience may not qualify as an Elementary teacher.

TSPC: They may not be HQ based on the fact they don’t meet the federal requirement for the subject matter. They must have the equivlilent to a Master’s or they have to have the test. Unless they meet the federal definition they are not HQ.

Gallery: Is TSPC assuring that an Elementary teacher from out-of-state has competency in subject matter because you waved the five years of experience?

TSPC: On the Elementary we review against the basic hours. The only way you can wave the test is on the secondary endorsement subject matter.

Gallery: So you look at the basic hours when you wave the test so that means TSPC has assured the educators competency.

TSPC: This happens to only one in 5,000 applications.

Gallery: Are they out there thinking they have an Initial license and they are not HQ? Who are those people?

TSPC: Everyone who gets a license from TSPC also gets a letter based on our evaluation what they are HQ to teach. Anyone who renews their license gets their file evaluated.

Gallery: Regarding your proposal on Alternative Assessment, TSPC is considering issuing licenses based on transcript review. The in-state students have met all the requirements except they have not passed the test are not eligible for the Preliminary license. This is not fair in a lot of cases.

TSPC: The Preliminary license is just a Transitional license in disguise.

Gallery: But a Transitional is not HQ and a Preliminary is.

TSPC: For one year.


Gallery: But it is very clear that districts are not going to hire educators if they are not HQ.

CALL FOR THE QUESTION by Watt which closes debate.


Moved on behalf of the Licensure Committee / Seconded by Meyers/ CarriedOpposed / Hoiland, WattAbsent / Alba


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the filing of a temporary rule, effective immediately, to amend OAR 584-100-0046, Preliminary Teaching License to be allowed at any school to assist districts with complying with the federal No Child Left Behind Act.

8.6 Electronic Conditional Assignment PermitsTSPC: We are excited about this process. This coming year’s CAPs will have to be filed 100% online. When they apply for the CAP and the educator does not have the right license it will deny it immediately. These used to be processed by hand but now we are able to expedite the entire process. We have 500 to 600 requests a year.

Discussion: Gallery: Is TSPC planning to train the districts?

TSPC: We have trained some districts. The HR people are very excited and this process is easy.

Gallery: Does the electronic application include the educator’s signature?

TSPC: The electronic submission becomes the signature of the educator.

Gallery: Currently on the paper filing there is a place for the educator to sign. The educator must be fully aware of this task and if it’s electronically submitted, how do you assure that?

TSPC: TSPC asked for the opinion of the Attorney General regarding this issue. It is taken care of. The educator is notified about the CAP by a letter that goes to the educator and the district. The requirements go to the educator not the district

8.7 New Look to TSPC LicensesA great deal of questions were raised about the old licenses. Thanks to Pam and Stan, the

authorizationsare clearly defined. Another suggestion was made regarding how to recognize on one license that the educator is licensed in other areas.

8.8 Other matters as time permitsTSPC: Many thanks to all who pulled together to get the portfolios done.

9.0 ADMINISTRATIVE RULE ADOPTION AND REPORTS

MOTION to accept the Administrative Rules as printed with the exception of 9.2, 9.11, and 9.13 with the unprinted changes as per the Commission discussion.


Moved on behalf of the Commission / seconded by Watt / CarriedAbsent / Alba

MOTION to postpone 9.11 and 9.13 to a time certain at the November meeting.

Moved / seconded by Meyers / CarriedOpposed / Charbonnier / Absent / Alba

9.1 584-036-0055 Adoption of Temporary Rule to Amend FeesDiscussion:TSPC: It was understood that by statute the fees could not increase over $42. The Legislature passed HB 2157 which included the fee increase for the fingerprint fee from the Oregon State Police. It cannot become effective until the rule is filed with the Secretary of State. If the finger print fee is received in the TSPC office by Monday the fee is $42. After that date the fee goes up to $62.


RESOLVED that the Commission adopt a temporary rule amending OAR 584-036-0055, Fees, Forfeiture and Expedited Service to become effective upon filing.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that a hearing to permanently adopt the proposed temporary rule will be held within 180 days of the date of filing.

9.2 584-055-0005 & 584-060-0120 Temporary Rules to Adopt Amendments for Small School Waivers

Removed from the Administrative Rules.

MOVED to a time certain, the November meeting.


RESOLVED that OAR 584-005-0005(68) and OAR 584-060-0120 be amended and filed as temporary rules so that small school districts with 30 teachers or less are eligible for assignment flexibility.

9.3 584-017-0110 Temporary Rule to Repeal OAR 584-017-0110There was no testimony or discussion.


RESOLVED that a temporary rule be filed to repeal OAR 584-017-0110 effective immediately and that a hearing be held to permanently repeal the rule.

9.4 584-100-0046 Temporary Rule Amending Preliminary Teaching LicenseThere was no testimony or discussion.


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt a temporary rule amending OAR 584-100-0046, Preliminary Teaching License


9.5 584-060-0052 Adding Authorization Levels to Initial & Continuing Teaching Licenses-AdoptDiscussion:TSPC: Point (2) (a) – What is meant by The Program? Is that the program that goes to Program Approval? Part of the goal is to align Division 060 with Division 017. That language is taken from Division 017 and has been there since 1999 or 2002. We have authorization levels in our existing Initial Licensure programs but the question was asked if a C-2 is required are these based on our Initial Teaching Programs or are they separate programs that are reviewed by the Program Approval Committee? We have not approved the Authorization Programs. The rule has always been that they have to complete the six to nine hours in the developmental methods area. When we did the redesign submission, one thing we included is what we require in authorizations and endorsements.

TSPC has always required a C-2 form from the college for the addition of the levels. We assumed it was part of the program.

Gallery: We have not had an institution come to the Commission with a proposal to add authorization levels. This simply means colleges extract out of the existing program the few appropriate pieces that allow the candidate to be prepared for that additional authorization level.

TSPC: Division 017 – 3(a) states if you are adding a non-contiguous authorization it is an approved program.

Gallery: The first rule in Division 017 states the Unit makes provisions for adding authorizations. That implies that within the program proposal there is a piece that says if the occasion arises, here is how we will handle the addition of contiguous authorization levels.

TSPC: What about the coursework? If you are giving the six to nine hours of credit, you don’t want to call it a program. Maybe an unauthorized program. Can we call it a provision? TSPC staff has no problem calling it a program because it’s an umbrella. If you have an approved program you may design an add-on level for endorsement programs.

Gallery: Part of the problem is some campuses interpret this differently. As long as the word “approved” is never added and everyone understands that this does not mean a separate proposal for program approval.


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the newly proposed rule, OAR 584-060-0052 Adding Authorization Levels to Initial and Continuing Teaching Licenses.

The Chair recognizes Sam Stern, the Dean of the College of Education for Oregon State University. Dr. Stern welcomes the Commission to Bend.

9.6 584-060-0062 Adding Endorsements to Initial or Continuing Teaching Licenses - AdoptDiscussion:TSPC: One question under the Policy Issue: TSPC staff indicate that “optional assignment” has been interpreted to mean the ten (10) hours that is allowed for misassignment without the requirement for the district to apply to TSPC for the conditional assignment permit. Under this interpretation, only early childhood, elementary and middle-level teacher would be eligible to add an endorsement under this provision.

That does include high school as well. Do you want to allow time that is not on an approved CAP to add an endorsement? The rule does not define what an optional assignment is. To get the endorsement,


people had to get the approval of TSPC to be on the CAP and then TSPC would add the endorsement. Does the Commission want to allow them with verification from the district to use time teaching ten hours or less a week to add an endorsement? Is the issue how much time are we willing to accept in-lieu-of a practicum for credit?

If we allow people to apply experience that is not on a CAP then possibly we should include what people were assigned to do in a Charter School if it is verified to be related to the endorsement. If the person meets the hourly requirement for a practicum and they are teaching regularly it should not matter if it’s an optional assignment or a CAP. In a large system it is easier to move the teacher towards proper endorsement but it is more difficult to do that in a small system.

Gallery: If a teacher is in an assignment which is below the required ten hours for a CAP but is meeting the requirement about adding the endorsement, can the PEER form filled out by the district reflect that?

TSPC: If the practice has been to let people give us experience not on a CAP and we are going to move to that, then we should implement it one year from now and give people notice. If you are going to require them to be on an approved CAP then you are requiring them to add the endorsement.

Will this disadvantage licensed Oregon teachers? If the educators come here with an endorsement from another state we will allow that until they take our test. Once they have an Initial they have the same requirements. It was recommended that the Commission allow verified time, equivalent to one period a day or the equivalent provided it is verified on a PEER form. It must also be amended in Division 038 to be consistent.


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the newly proposed rule, OAR 584-060-0062 Adding Endorsements to Initial and Continuing Teaching Licenses.

9.7 584-001-0005 Model Rules of Procedure -AmendThere was no testimony or discussion.The printed resolution reads:

RESOLVED that the Commission approve proposed amendments to OAR 584-001-0005, Model Rules of Procedure, to become effective upon filing.

9.8 584-010-0010 Approval of Education Program for Teachers, Administrators and Personnel Service Specialists -Amend

Discussion:TSPC: Item (4) of 9.8a: Unless otherwise stipulated, Commission approval of a program shall expire on August 31 of the final year of the approved period. What is the current practice? That is the current language of the rule. We have had requests for extensions. Is there any place where the process is described? The request comes as an action item to the Commission. Item (6) In addition to annual reports, periodic reports may be required from the institution upon evidence that the program, institution or unit has undergone significant modifications. Major modifications are defined in the rules. Division 05 has the definitions: Changes in program philosophy, curricula, practica, resources, personnel or performance standards. These will be brought to you with the evidence and the Commission would vote on it.


RESOLVED that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to OAR 584-010-0010


Approval of Education Programs for Teachers, Administrators and Personnel Service Specialists to become effective upon filing.

9.9 584-017-0130 Middle Level Authorization - AmendDiscussion:TSPC: Do we want the experience on a CAP? This will match what we decide on OAR 584-060-0062. Verifying experience on a CAP would be more formal. How do we know that the experience was successful? If a district signs off on it and they continue to remain employed with the district then it is taken care of.

9.9a: 4(b) Passing the required Commission-approved test or tests, in the subject or specialty, including Basic Math. Are those the high school level tests? If you are talking about the content area tests are you talking about the high school tests? Yes. We don’t include basic math in 4(c) because it is not exclusively middle level.

Gallery: I don’t think the rule is clear yet to show that basic math is not required to teach mathematics in middle school. The way this rule reads is not what the rule intends. It needs to be made clear that a teacher at the middle level teaching mathematics is not required to take the basic math test.

TSPC: The field is looking at Division 060 which says language arts, social studies, science or math. It needs to be in Division 017 as well.


RESOLVED that the proposed amendments to OAR 584-017-0130 Middle Level Authorization be adopted and become effective upon filing.

9.10 584-070-0111 High School Authorizations -AmendThere was no testimony or discussion.


RESOLVED, that the Commission approved the proposed amendments to OAR 584-017-0140 High School Authorizations to become effective upon filing.

9.11 584-017-0150 Selected Subject Matter and Specialty Endorsements Requiring Multiple Authorization Levels-Amend

Discussion:TSPC: Does this mean the multiple subjects test is not required for special ed ESOL? We do not understand fully what qualifies educators to be HQ for special ed. My suggestion is if we require the ORELA then we don’t require both special ed tests. Maybe we could go back to transcripts and render them subject area competent like we do a middle level. Do you mean the HQ evaluation? For special ed teachers under HOUSSE because we are doing the 60 quarter hours. What do new Special Ed teachers have to do to be HQ?

The Federal law is very clear. Special Ed teachers have to meet the same HQ standards that non-specialized teachers do whether they are new or veteran. Multiple subject competencies will be acceptable to be HQ in special ed in pre K-8. We will remove the single-subject middle level with IDEA only. For new teachers to meet the Federal definition for HQ they must pass a comprehensive multiple subjects test. The HOUSSE evaluation is only available for veteran teachers under the Federal law. Concern was expressed about the shortage of special ed teachers and if more tests are


required who will do it?

Gallery: At the University of Portland they take the MSAT or the ORELA.

TSPC: Did you say that if the special ed teachers do not take the Multiple Subjects test they will not be HQ? Yes, but it only applies to new teachers. We can use the HOUSSE standards for anyone who has taught for more than three years. The issue is our new teachers. If we pass this does that mean our new special ed teachers will be licensed but not be HQ? Under the Federal definition that is correct. We believe they are HQ because of the special ed training. The Federal Government is requiring a demonstration of subject matter competency. We must assure that new special ed teachers are HQ.

Gallery: The HOUSSE standards for special ed teachers who teach all five core subjects means coursework across all five core subjects and experience of three years or more across all five core subjects. They also have to demonstrate through CAP forms that they have taught all five core subjects.

TSPC: In pre-K–8 their coursework evaluation will be eighteen hours of language arts, twelve hours of math, nine hours of science, nine hours of social studies, three hours of health, three/music, three/art and three/PE. Those are part of the multiple subjects evaluation for elementary teachers prior to Initial and Continuing licenses. That is the standard we use to evaluate for multiple subject competencies based on not passing a test if they are a veteran teacher. Most people with a liberalized background come close to meeting these standards. Could the ORELA become the HQ measurement for special ed teachers? Yes, absolutely.

Gallery: Those elementary standards are better. Those standards are used for all HQ evaluations for all special education teachers for multiple subjects for K-8.


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to OAR 584-017-0150 Selected Subject Matter and Specialty Endorsements Requiring Multiple Authorization Levels to become effective upon filing.

9.12 584-017-0170 Adding endorsements to Existing Initial & Continuing Teaching Licenses -Amend

Discussion:TSPC: To clarify: An authorization is the grades that teachers are authorized to teach and endorsements are subject matter and specialty.


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to OAR 584-017-0170 Adding Endorsements to Existing Initial and Continuing Teaching Licenses to become effective upon filing.

9.13 584-020-0040 Grounds for Disciplinary Action - AmendDiscussion:TSPC: Concern was expressed regarding number (5). The way the changes are written regarding conduct outside of school hours or off school premises begins to infringe on teacher’s personal rights. It goes too far and it was suggested that the current language is kept.


Gallery: The original language has two important pieces. One you are considering striking is: gross unfitness is any conduct which renders an educator unqualified to perform and replacing with: has substantially limited an educator’s ability to effectively perform. Further on you are considering: Conduct constituting gross unfitness [may include] primarily includes conduct occurring outside of school hours [and] or off school premises [when such conduct bears a demonstrable relationship to the educator's ability to fulfill professional responsibilities effectively]. OEA is arguing the initial intent of this rule is to significantly tie any disciplinary action that occurs outside of the workplace to the performance of the educator. You are considering severing that connection all together. Also you are being asked to consider lowering the standard from unqualified to perform to substantially limiting the educator’s ability. That is a lower standard as well. We are possibly looking at civil liberties issues.

TSPC: The intent was not to make any revolutionary change. This rule applies to off-duty conduct and it is very important that teacher’s off-duty conduct is acceptable. There is a connection to the teacher’s off-duty conduct and their ability to carry out his/her responsibilities in the classroom. We cannot simply discipline an educator for off-duty behavior unless it has a connection to the teacher’s ability to carry out their responsibility in the classroom or on the job. The language OEA refers to: [when such conduct bears a demonstrable relationship to the educator's ability to fulfill professional responsibilities effectively], we felt this was redundant and should be removed. If a teacher’s conduct off-duty has a bearing on their ability to perform in the classroom or on the job this rule applies. The Commission would have to show a connection between the off-duty conduct and their ability to perform in the classroom.

This rule does not say criminal conduct, it just says conduct. Can you clarify striking [may include] and replacing it with primarily includes? We do use gross unfitness primarily for non-school, off premises conduct and [may include] did not make that clear. The substantially limited language sounds vague and we may have a difficult time defining what that means. The Commission is still the reviewer of the facts and the content.

In practice what the Discipline Committee has done is to be very careful that the connection between the action of the educator and the educator’s performance is clearly established. This rule would make it clear to teachers that if they do something that has a substantial impact on their ability to perform they will be held accountable. This rule does not change what the Commission can do. It was suggested that that more work be done on the language of this rule.


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the proposed amendments to OAR 584-017-0040 Grounds for Disciplinary Action to become effective upon filing.

9.14 584-036-0015 Basic and Standard Teaching License- AmendThere was no testimony or discussion.


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to OAR 584-036-0015Basic and Standard Teaching License to become effective upon filing.

9.15 584-036-0055 Fees, Forfeiture, and Expedited Service-AmendDiscussion: TSPC: Dose this mean we will begin charging for the alternative assessment? The option has always been there to charge a fee.



RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt proposed amendments to OAR 584-036-0055 Fees Forfeiture and Expedited Service to become effective upon filing.

9.16 584-060-0012 Initial I Teaching License Requirements-AmendThere was no testimony or discussion.


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to OAR 584-060-0012 Initial I Teaching License to become effective upon filing.

9.17 584-060-0013 Initial II Teaching License Requirements-AmendDiscussion:TSPC: Number (3) would read more clearly if it said: To be eligible for an Initial II Teaching License “when” instead of [and] the Initial I Teaching License was granted. We also need to change it in number (2). Or possibly change it to “if.”


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to OAR 584-060-0013 Initial II Teaching License to become effective upon filing.

9.18 584-060-0051 Levels of Teaching Authorized-AmendDiscussion:TSPC: On page one 4 (b) and throughout. “Special Ed” should be included in the list of specialized licenses. Language regarding PE will be corrected. What about Reading?

Gallery: The reason reading is not listed is because you can’t get a license that just has reading.


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to OAR 584-060-0051 Level of Teaching Authorized to become effective upon filing.

9.19 584-060-0071 Endorsements Requiring Multiple Authorization Levels-AmendDiscussion:TSPC: Does this change practice? No, this rearrangement of the language was done for clarity. Has the practice in the past been if they complete a PE program and then take the Multiple Subject test, they end up with a multiple subject endorsement? That would have been an error because we would have required a C-2 form. This is to simplify the rule and make it conform to Division 060.


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve the proposed amendments to OAR 584-060-0071 Endorsements Requiring Multiple Authorization Levels to become effective upon filing.

9.20 584-019-0045 Filing Petition for reconsideration or Rehearing is condition of Judicial Review of Final Orders of TSPC in Contested Cases-Repeal

There was no testimony or discussion.



RESOLVED, that the Commission approve repeal of OAR 584-019-0045 Filing Petition For Reconsideration Or Rehearing Is Condition of Judicial Review Of Final Order of TSPC Contested Cases to become effective upon filing.

9.21 584-060-0061 Endorsement of Specialties-RepealThere was no testimony or discussion.


RESOLVED, that the Commission approve repeal of OAR 584-060-0061 Endorsements of Specialties to become effective upon filing.

9.22 584-038-0004 Adding Endorsements to a Basic or Standard License-AmendDiscussion:TSPC: (1) (b) will be amended to be consistent with the Initial, Continuing, the CAPS and the ten-hour discussion we had. It will come back before the Commission, have a hearing and be reconsidered again. Number (3) reads: The endorsement will be limited to teaching those subjects in grades 5 through 9 only. Should the language include in a middle or junior high school. The endorsement says Middle School Social Studies so it’s in the title. In Division 038 we have never referred to middle school. We will refer it to Division 036-0015 which is very clear.

Why was math left out? Because the educators automatically get it through the high school. However, this implies a different standard. Adding a Middle School Endorsement on these licenses is huge so we will refer to 036-0015.


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt a temporary rule amending OAR 584-038-0004, Adding Endorsements to a Basic or Standard License.

9.23 584-040-0005 Standard Teaching License Requirements-Amend There was no testimony or discussion.


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt a temporary rule amending OAR 584-040-0005, Standard Teaching License Requirements.

9.24 584-070-0131 Emergency School Counselor –AdoptDiscussion:TSPC: What will be the effect of this rule? There are a significant number of individuals interested in this license. We have a number of disenfranchised high school counselors who may be enrolling in programs and there is no place for them yet.


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt proposed OAR 584-070-00131 to become effective immediately upon filing.


10.0 CONSENT AGENDAThe policy procedures for the Consent Agenda are established by Policy 3522. The Executive Director recommends adoption by single consent motion the following listed items which are identified on the agenda by a double asterisk: 5.3, 5.6, 5.7, 6.6, 6.7, 6.8, 6.10, 7.7, 7.8 and 7.9. Any of these items may be removed from the Consent Agenda upon the request of any Commissioner. Items removed from the Consent Agenda will be considered in the order they are listed on the agenda.

MOTION to accept the Consent Agenda as modified

Moved / Seconded by Jones / CarriedAbsent / Alba

11.0 ANNOUNCEMENTSWhen we return to discuss the Café Topics you will be able to pick three topics to join in on and then you will do a summarization. We will bring back a compilation at the November meeting.

The Nomination Committee is accepting nominations for the Commission positions. At this time those interested are: Susan DeMarsh – Chair; Katrina Myer – Vice Chair; and for the Executive Committee – Nancy Watt, Debra Robinson, Gary Peterson and Aurora Cedillo.

FRIDAY, AUGUST 5, 2005

Barbara Diamond, the educator’s Attorney, stated her client requested Teresa Ferrer be present at today’s executive session. With no objection this request will be allowed.

TSPC: It was stated it sets a poor precedent and does not serve the public’s interest to allow people to be at the Executive Session Hearing.

Gallery: Teresa would only be present during the testimony. The educator was unable to attend and asked that Teresa be allowed to be present.

TSPC: What kind of precedent does this set? The AG stated there are no rules or procedures regarding this issue. Often the teacher is present during oral argument. The Commission has the right to decide who they want to allow into an Executive Session except for the press.

MOTION to allow the wishes of the client and allow Teresa Ferrer to sit in on the Executive Session.

Moved by Jones / Seconded by Robinson / DENIEDAyes / 6 in favorOpposed / 6 opposedAbstain / MackChair’s deciding vote - Vote to not allow to attendAbsent / Alba, Cedillo, Charbonnier


12.0 DISCIPLINARY HEARINGS AND INVESTIGATION REPORTSThe Commission met in executive (non-public) session to deliberate the hearing record in a disciplinary proceeding.

13.0 FULL COMMISSION CONSIDERATION OF DISCIPLINE ISSUES (PUBLIC SESSION)

13.1 Final Order – McBee, Bradley Dean (Eagle Point SD)MOTION, to adopt the printed resolutions.

Moved by Pierce on behalf of the Discipline Committee / Seconded by Evenson-Brady / CarriedOpposed / JonesAbstain / Robinson, WeisethAbsent / Alba


RESOLVED, that the Commission adopt the attached Proposed Final Order for Bradley Dean McBee as the Final Order. The Final Order imposes a Public Reprimand on McBee.

RESOLVED FURTHER, that the Commission shall inform the complainants and the Eagle Point School District of this action.


The Teacher Standards and Practices Commission imposes a Public Reprimand on Respondent Brad McBee for violating OAR 584-020-0040(4)(d) on one occasion. This order shall serve as the Public Reprimand.

14.0 CAFETERIA TOPICS

Discussion topics are:

TSPC Endorsements: Humanities and Science Endorsements School Counselors / CDS Number of Tests per Endorsement Educator Ethics [how to get the word out] Customer Service Performance Measures for the Agency Alternative Assessment Continuing Professional Development – some things mandatory?

[Retires, child abuse reporting, cultural competency]

15.0 SUMMARIZE CAFETERIA TOPICS AND NEXT STEPS

School Counselors / CDS1. Creates a licensed school social worker with school practicum;2. Cerates as alternative path for CDS-Licensed School Counselor;


3. Phase out CDS for TSPC licensure so CDS are subject to TSPC discipline;4. Address CDS in 9-12 and K-12 schools.

Number Tests / EndorsementsThree test areas:

Shortage;Pedagogy;Barrier to low income.

1. High School ORELA instead of CBEST.2. Best skill test?3. Admission request?

New SAT RequirementsMultiple endorsement areas:* Declare primary science (all tests);* Secondary only one content test;* Remove all pedagogy tests;* Stakeholders meetings.

ETHICS-GET THE WORD OUT1. Use mentoring programs as a vehicle to Get the word out;2. Classes within programs on ethics;3. Talk about ethics in districts (get training);4. Create a booklet online with renewals.

Administrators-Superintendents-School Board-Principals1. Train and work on management skills so they model ethical behavior and report what they should;2. TSPC’s job is to inform-create a video;3. Involve COSA / OEA using case studies and statistics;4. Pick one or two ethics a year to highlight, (i.e. internet abuse, email, IM conversations, alcohol)5. Distribute ethics brochures after video showing;6. Get translations of all educational material in discipline.

Alternative Assessment1. Open to all candidates who have failed the test once;2. Must request alternative assessment;3. Transcript review;4. If transcripts support content, candidate will be issued a license with a stipulation that professional

development in that area occurs.

Session Two:1. Should it be all candidates?2. Why only one failed test?3. Remediate after the first test;4. Assessment Fee;5. Committee interview -“An idea whose time has come.”6. Relevant to coursework application?7. One to one correspondence:

* Content knowledge to content knowledge;8. Develop a set of questions for oral interviews?


CPU RULES REQUIRE1. Diversity (Cultural Competency);2. Assessment/Curriculum;3. Teach;4. Education Priority (Ethics, child abuse);5. Subject Matter:

a. Goals are set around subject matter CPU’s;6. Mandate may be problematic;7. ETHICS – Can fit education priority;8. Most of CPU’s are driven by district set goals.

Continued Professional Development1. CPD – any required topics?2. What if colleges give classes to retirees at a reduced cost? (Senior Discount)3. Allow retirees to come to district in-service;4. Let “them” use / have access to PDU’s via employed teacher rules;5. If retired, don’t ask for CPD’s unless retiree takes a full-time job;6. If retired and continue in education then NO CPD’s but if out of education for five or more years, require

CPD to reinstate – Stop out.

REQUIREMENTS FOR CPD’s – Needs more work!1. Districts help provide those trainings;2. Combination of mandatory and optional – (system development difficulties);3. Child abuse, ethics, cultural competency;4. Are there problems with current CPU’s?5. Are there problems with evidence of problems?6. Ask districts if they are happy with CPU’s;7. Scholarship via OEA for college . . .retired;8. Stronger guidelines to districts around Domains – optional / mandatory9. Add Ethics to Domains

Counselors/CDSChange CTL for counselors;Out-of-state counselors.

Possible Proposal:1. Two tests failed;2. TSPC staff review (against 038);3. Content coursework;4. Recency, relevant, better;5. Assessment fee;6. Recommendations for Rx;7. Interview by non-TSPC Commission (video, personal, ect.);8. Must be educators (OEA-COSA-Retired Educators);9. Open to all teachers;10. Other educators added with TSPC agreement.

Alternative Assessment1. Open to everyone;2. No portfolio - portfolio measures teaching skills more that content;3. Transcript review (B or better);4. Talk to NES about breakdown of scores (# per content);


5. Recency on coursework (9 hours);6. Failed test twice (or limited license);7. Contract scoring / evaluation out.

16.0 ADJOURNMENT

The meeting was adjourned at 2:40pm

Respectfully submitted,

_____________________________________Kathleen Rogers, Program Assistant

Accepted

______________________________________Leslie Walborn, Chairperson

*In action items, names are recorded for those Commissioners voting against the motion and for those absent or abstaining from voting. Those members not recorded as absent, opposed, or abstaining voted in favor of the respective motion.

**These minutes may not follow the actual time sequence in order of business, but follow the numerical order of the agenda for easy reference.

teacher standards and practices commission€¦ · web viewthe intent was to have a minimum of...

Documents