a strong voice for kids 2nd Congressional District
a strong voice for kids 2nd Congressional District
LITTLETON: Has been working on the Reading Summit; we will soon receive our invitations. It has been a very busy month.
MUNN: Will be talking later about his work on closing the achievement gap. Attended a community meeting in the Cole Middle School neighborhood that did a “post-mortem” on the process for converting Cole to a charter school. Has been talking with DPS about Bruce Randolph Middle School, which we’ll discuss later.
HUDAK: I shared the recommendations that came from CSEAC at their Retreat, noting that CSEAC would be making a report to the Board later in the day. They asked that they be notified of meetings of the HR-1 Hub Committee and about any proposals to revise the special education funding provisions of the School Finance Act. They are very concerned about the Highly Qualified Teacher provisions of NCLB. They suggested that the School Finance Interim Committee be asked to report to the SBE. I reported that I had accomplished doing the Trikes for Tikes Celebrity Race in Breckenridge and passed out a picture as had been requested. It wasn’t very easy to ride a little tricycle. I didn’t win – got somewhat affected by the altitude toward the end of the race – but at least I didn’t come in last. There was only one other woman in the race, the superintendent of Summit County School District. I reported that I attended the beginning of the first meeting of Alternate Assessment Study Group, which the SBE had appointed most of the members of. I attended the recent meeting of the State Advisory Committee for Gifted and Talented Education and distributed a flyer about a forum upcoming and also the committee’s suggestions for the SBE’s legislative agenda. I have been attending most of the meetings of the School Finance Interim Committee. Finally, I shared that in my job at the Department of Human Services, I have been preparing rules and appeared as staff in front of the State Board of Human Services recently; it has given me a good understanding of what our staff goes through when we are passing rules.
DEHOFF: Attended the first day of school at the Charter School Institute’s two charter schools. Has been continuing to work with Munn on CTAG issues. Went to a recognition event for the Title I Distinguished Schools; there were 8 of them, which had the largest improvements in Reading or Math over the last 3 years. Encouraged fellow Board members to attend Title I Directors training; we’ll have a different attitude toward rules. Is now quite disinclined to write more rules, now that he’s seen the bureaucracy that results from them. Daughter Grace took two awards in a riding competition at the State Fair.
ORR: Ran into Don Perl’s people again and spoke with them at length about CSAP. Their concerns seem to be about how they are treated by their principals. Spoke with Beth Celva at CDE and found out that it’s not legal to opt out of CSAP. District 6 (Greeley) has heard that they will go on Accreditation Watch; it has generated a lot of press and conversation. Feels that we are doing the right thing by holding them accountable. Their new superintendent brought it to the front early so they can deal with the issue. The local business community is very concerned. Appreciates the work that CDE has been doing on it; they have handled it well.
MIDDLETON: Had an extremely busy month. Met with superintendents from eastern Colorado, who said it was the first time in 33 years they had such a meeting. Attended the Adams 14 welcome-back rally with Polis ; all district staff attended. Met several times with Aurora teachers and visited some schools. Heard the Governor speak about C & D at several events. Attended the Alliance for Quality Teaching Board meeting and retreat. Attended 6 meetings of the School Finance Interim Committee and Task Force. Yesterday the Task Force made their report, with 3 recommendations: revise the School Finance Act, tweaking it to reflect current requirements of accountability and to review definitions; increase funding for education; and make adjustments to base per-pupil funding. Good information was provided by CDE and Vody Herrmann in particular. There are dollars that will go away and it will affect how districts operate. Capital needs estimates range from $4 billion to $10 billion. Suggested that the state needs to tour the facilities around the state to see the problems. Asked if CDE could gather a summary of the statewide needs. Recommended that a P-16 Council be convened. On September 27 the Interim Committee will come up with proposals for bills. They intend to increase funding for preschool and kindergarten, and they are examining having an insurance pool to pay for special education. They heard our message on what our needs are.
POLIS: Even more impressive than Hudak’s tricycle race, she walked 10 miles for C & D on Sunday, and then 4 miles the next day. There are school board elections around the state; great to see the enthusiasm of democracy at work. Boulder Valley will vote on extending the length of time in their term limits for school board members. The Academy of Charter Schools has a new building; it is rare to see such a great capital facility for a charter school. Yesterday Hudak and he took turns attending the G/T Advisory Committee. It is a very vibrant and engaged group. As Count Day approaches, encourages our Board to find a better way to do it.
SUCKLA: Attended a meeting of the Commission on Indian Affairs; reported that at the meeting, an elder chief said to the Lieutenant Governor Jane Norton, who is the chair: “When you first came on, I thought you were just a blonde; now I know that you know something.” Will complete her report tomorrow, since we’re running behind on the agenda.
We are in the same place as last month on the budget process; staff will be going to the OSPB hearing on Friday and will hear what the Governor’s office wants included or excluded in our budget. In order for something to be in the budget, it has to have already been legislatively authorized. We can review it after we set our legislative priorities tomorrow. There is $2.5 million for CSAP, which is mostly the CELA. There is a request for $487,500 for CTAG. There are several requests to restore various funds for libraries, such as online databases and the regional library system CLIC. For capital construction, $91,526,021 is requested for Giardino current needs as well as back needs. I asked if it includes money for the contingency reserve; it doesn’t, but we can always go the Legislature for an emergency supplemental if needs arise. The problem with having it as a supplemental is if anything happens in the first half of the year, we have to wait for the supplemental. Polis said that he thought we were going to put a request for $500,000 for the Colorado Online program.
CTAG: Munn and DeHoff, as well as some staff, went on Sept. 1 to a meeting with CASE, CASB, and CEA to draft a proposal, which has two elements – federal funding and state funding. The proposal includes funding for school support teams visiting schools with a significant achievement gap, based on the federal criteria. We are asking for enough funding to visit about a third of the schools that we estimate will have a significant gap. This is basically a place-holder, because we don’t have the specifics of which schools will meet our SBE-defined criteria. Munn expressed concern that this funds about 20 schools, which isn’t likely to be enough to meet the need. Stroup said that we heard that even if C & D pass, the Legislature will have only $60 million extra money for new programs; if they don’t, will have to cut $300 million more. She proposed something that is modest, so it would have a chance of being approved. Middleton said that we should give them the big number also, so there is awareness of what the need is. She asked if there is a possibility of school-level funding for at-risk students. DeHoff said that we aren’t sure if all the schools meeting the definition will apply to be in the program and it will take some time to gear up, but we do need to make it clear how much money is needed in total. Munn pointed out that it is usually not possible to “bargain up.” Suckla said that we need to say that this is what we need to do the job; we should be tough about this. The full need is about $1.46 million.
Windler showed us a brochure from our federal programs office, with a copy of the schools that had support teams for Title I – schools that didn’t make AYP and were very far from making it, as well as being on School Improvement or Corrective Action.
There are approximately 350,000 students in the U.S. who have no school because of Hurricane Katrina. USDE will reallocate funds that would have gone to the destroyed schools to states and schools taking the displaced students.
The co-chairs of the Committee of Practitioners were introduced to us, Cheryl Hutter, federal programs director for Cherry Creek, and Larry Romine, Superintendent of Lamar. They really know and understand how NCLB works and what its effects are on students, schools, and communities. They have good idea what is working in NCLB and what needs to be fixed. The COP has membership from various educational backgrounds, including teachers, administrators, and parents. The COP was formed several years ago; it has tried to extend information and suggestions to CDE. This year CDE came to them and asked them to help revise the state application for NCLB that we will submit next spring. They want the process to involve all the stakeholders and work for improving schools and closing the achievement gap. They encourage people to work with them as they analyze what is happening in the field. At their work session on September 26, they will have CDE review the state plan and what is really going on, as well as what other states are doing. They want to be creative. Polis asked if they had seen the “white paper” that was submitted to us from CASE, CASB, etc. They have seen it and believe that we need to make more specific recommendations. Middleton said that she wants to ensure that any recommendations that come from COP are shared with the Hub Committee.
Gotlieb reported that an agenda has been established for the next meeting of the Hub Committee, which is to review the Consolidated Plan and address the plan, the audits of the plan, and the white paper. The COP will discuss the effects of the plan on the field and on practitioners, such as ELL and special education staff and try to figure out how to revise the plan. The Hub Committee is more the political side of the issues and has the education organizations representing the interests of their membership. It is likely to look at the policies that the white paper brought up.
Sibigtroth reviewed changes to the rules for Accreditation that are being proposed because of changes in the law in SB 91. The first change is to move from December to January the deadline for districts to submit their progress reports on the accreditation indicators. This will enable them to report simultaneously on NCLB and the SARs. There is a change in the details of reporting on advanced placement courses, adding the International Baccalaureate program. Also added are continuing education rates and mobility rates. Some changes were made based on our experience doing Accreditation, such as removing the one-year requirement to improve before going on Probation after being on Accreditation Watch, or from Probation to Non-Accredited. It also allows districts on Watch or Probation to EITHER meet the indicators OR show adequate growth on their improvement plan. This change is designed to allow CDE to give them more than a year to improve. I asked if there is adequate protection to districts that it won’t be less than a year. Orr expressed concern that there is no set time period, which could be problematic. DeHoff said that one year seemed to be a good timeline. No decision was made, since the item is on the agenda only For Information for Future Action, and no hearing has yet been set.
The Positive Behavior Support program is a collaboration between the Prevention Initiatives Unit and Exceptional Student Services Unit in CDE. It’s about support systems by school staff for students. It’s a school reform process, not a program or a curriculum; it is a CDE initiative based on research from the University of Oregon. It involves systemic change for discipline. Full implementation takes 3-5 years because of that. Colorado is looked as a national leader in the implementation of PBS. This is the fourth year of implementation in the state. It began 3 years ago with Harrison and Commerce City school districts, in 16 schools. This year 31 districts and 270 schools are involved. Had about 2000 school personnel for this year’s training on PBS. We were presented with an overview of the program and a list of some of the highlights. There has been a correlation with higher test scores at these schools.
The Colorado Special Education Advisory Committee (CSEAC) made a report and presentation on CSAP-A. They showed a video on how the CSAP-A is administered and some examples of students with disabilities who take it. The CSEAC representatives discussed the following:
A draft policy on new graduation and dropout rate calculations will be circulated to the public at several forums around the state to gather feedback. The SBE will be given a copy of the draft prior to its going out to the public, at tomorrow’s meeting.
Moloney said that in 2001, the Legislative Audit Committee discovered 19 high school programs that had a 5th year for college classes; the LAC said that these exceeded statutory authority, that they must cease and desist, and that the SBE and CCHE must pass rules to limit and prohibit them. Karen Stroup agreed with this history and said that the LAC report was “pretty clear” about their concerns. She cited Senator Norma Anderson as saying to the auditors that it was never the Legislature’s intent to slow down graduation so that students could get an Associate’s degree. DeHoff questioned the audit, saying that graduation requirements are to be set by local school districts. Polis asked if the prohibition is only due to SBE rules, and Vody Herrmann, director of the School Finance Unit, said it is, and that the political environment is different now. Munn asked if the SBE has the authority to deny these programs if the state Constitution allows districts to define graduation up to age 21. Moloney said the issue is funding and reiterated that the LAC said these programs can’t be funded with PPOR and that the LAC had “rebuked us and jumped all over us.” DeHoff said that the SBE shouldn’t second-guess districts on this and that we need statutory clarification. Moloney asked who would pay if every district took advantage of this and offered these programs. Munn said that the audit report was about funding and not legality, and that the issue was double-dipping (using PPOR and higher education funding), which was subsequently prohibited. He said that it troubled him to have the SBE pass rules based on only one legislator’s comments (Senator Anderson), even if she was the sponsor of the School Finance Act. He reiterated that state statute allows these programs.
The SBE Chair, Pam Suckla, asked a few of the many people in the audience to speak on the topic. Michael Bennett, superintendent of Denver Public Schools, spoke about the positive effects of Lincoln High School’s college program, which has sent an increased percent of students to college. Lincoln HS principal Scott Mendelsburg spoke next, pointing out that his school population has 75% on free/reduced lunch, has a high dropout rate and a low graduation rate, and needs its students to have hope, which is what the program provides. He that in addition to increasing graduation rates and college-admission rates, the program has helped reduce fights and expulsions. The superintendent of the Sheridan School District, Michael Poore, spoke next, saying that there are similar benefits from Sheridan’s 21st Century Diploma Program. His district has 65% minority students.
Suckla said that the SBE is responsible for K-12 education, not higher education. Polis said that these programs are a local control decision, that they provide hope to students, and they may be an essential way to close the achievement gap. He said that the LAC report did not recommend a rule change regarding these programs, but instead clearly said that state statute authorized them. He said that the former chair of the LAC, Representative Fran Coleman, was in the audience today and favors elimination of the rule prohibiting 5th-year programs. He said that he had spoken with Senator Anderson and she now favors changing the rule, saying “that was then and this is now” and that the SBE could quote her on that. Polis said this is a policy, not a statutory, issue. Middleton agreed with Polis, saying that the SBE has an opportunity to “drive the bus” on a P-16 program like this. Orr said his concern was that local school boards would lose curricular control if they authorized students to take higher education courses in their 5th year of high school. Munn said that fiscal concerns should be addressed by the Legislature, and these programs fit with the SBE’s strategic plan, even if the programs need to be limited in scope. Suckla said she opposed funding the programs because not every school had them. Munn said that they don’t take money away from other students because Amendment 23 requires a minimum increase and PPOR goes to all eligible students.
Moloney said that he’d like to see legislative authorization for these programs. He said that if districts want these programs, they can fund them with other money, like DPS was doing. DPS Board member Elaine Berman, in the audience, stated that there is no other revenue source for Lincoln’s program. DeHoff said that he didn’t interpret SBE Rule 5.18 as outlawing Lincoln’s or Sheridan’s program, because the students were not juniors and were not necessarily graduating with both a high school and post-secondary degree. The board agreed to add it to the agenda for the next day’s meeting; Suckla said that could happen only IF there is a majority vote to add it as emergency rules.
Suckla said that staff is working on a proposal for the SBE to approve for the $200,000 civics grant, but she was delaying it to the October meeting. Middleton asked why the issue was being delayed. Moloney said that CDE had been “overwhelmed” by input on it and would make a proposal based on all the input that would be ready in October.
Copyright © 2001-2007 Evie Hudak - All Rights Reserved