WORK SESSION 8-8-07

Pam Suckla introduced the new Commissioner, Dwight Jones, who is with us for his first meeting today. She also introduced the other new employees: Deputy Commissioner, Ken Turner; Communications Director, Mark Stevens; Assistant Communications Director, Tanya Price; and Director for State Board Affairs, Mary Frances Nevans.

Don Domagala from CDE covered our project to create a Data Dictionary, which is required by HB 07-1320. A Data Dictionary is part of a database that holds definitions of data elements, a repository of descriptive information about data, and a collection of descriptions of the data items. CDE is looking at what data is requested, how we gather this data, and why we capture this data. There are about 6,000 data elements collected by CDE. EDAC (Education Data Advisory Committee) in CDE approves what data is collected. CDE wants to create a web-based system so people will have access to some of the data. They are researching what other states’ systems look like. Data analysis is in process right now; a project team is working on it – it’s a huge task. We have some contractors helping us with this. They are doing some application prototyping. HB 1320 has an aggressive timeline, requiring the work to be done by October 1. The presentation is being made to the Board today because a deadline in the bill requires a report to the SBE. DeHoff asked if there is adequate funding to do the job. He said the bill asks for "gifts, grants, and donations" to pay for adding a teacher identification number to the Data Dictionary. Domagala said the bill pays for a full-time person to get the work done and feels that there is enough money to get the work going.

Jan Rose Petro from CDE, Chair of EDAC, reported on what EDAC is doing. HB 07-1345 requires EDAC to have members that are representative of the state geographically. EDAC was originally established by CDE in 2002 to advise the department on how to improve the efficiency of data collections. The legislation just added the requirement for a couple of additional members. All collections of data are reviewed, regardless of whether they are required or voluntary.

HB 07-1345 has a number of requirements that EDAC finds unrealistic, including the following: (1) Timing – CDE does not collect data on the courses students take, and it is unrealistic to begin collecting the data in the coming school year, because if we rushed into it, the data might not be accurate; therefore, EDAC recommends leaving the SAR panel "Students per Teacher Ratio" the same for this year, while working collaboratively with districts to design and program the file. (2) SAR course categories – HB 1345 requires Reading and Writing to be reported separately, but districts teach "English" or "Language Arts"; furthermore, it requires History and Geography separately, but districts teach "Social Studies." EDAC recommends collecting data on these collectively. A letter has been written about these issues from EDAC to the Senate and House Education Committees, as well as the Commissioner and SBE.

I asked some questions about EDAC: Is EDAC supposed to be advising the department about its own data collections, in which case, if it has CDE members, aren’t they advising themselves? Who is EDAC accountable to, CDE or the SBE? The answers are complicated. Petro said that CDE members are just advisory to the committee, but at the same time, EDAC is required to have CDE members on it; its job is not only to advise internally, but also externally.

There are two kinds of funding requests that we submit to the Joint Budget Committee (for the following fiscal year): One is the CDE budget that we submit to the Governor’s Office of State Planning and Budgeting that is part of the Governor’s request due to the JBC on November 1, and the other is the SBE’s own budget priorities that are in addition to those approved by OSPB. We meet with the JBC in December for them to decide if they will accept the SBE’s budget requests, as well as that of the department. Our staff would like to know what the SBE’s priorities are, because September 12 is the deadline to submit CDE’s budget request to the Governor and September 20 is the deadline for the SBE’s "Strategic Plan" to be submitted to the Governor (the Strategic Plan refers to the new administration’s "performance objectives" with quantifiable performance measures to judge the success of programs within departments).

There are several items that CDE is asking to be increased as part of the department’s budget, including increases in total program funding and categorical programs; anticipated increases in assessment contracts; additional costs for the School Audit Unit; and more for legal services (we needed to ask for supplemental funding for legal services for this year as well, because of so many charter school appeals and hearings on exclusive chartering authority). Commissioner Jones said that CDE will have other requests in the near future, because of changes being made in the department. He said they will bring those to us at our Retreat.

SUCKLA: Went to the CLASS conference – it’s the best you could go to, giving ideas for improving the funding from school trust lands. Concerned because Congressman Udall has a proposed bill restricting access on roads, which would affect school trust lands, but he has withdrawn it for a year. We have been waiting for a response from the Attorney General’s office about who can be the spokesman for the beneficiary. The Colorado CLASS group will be putting together a packet for legislators.

DEHOFF: Attended the NASBE Board of Directors meeting in June; they discussed the bylaws and elections process. Ken Willard from Kansas will be President-elect. NASBE’s financial status has improved significantly. The NASBE annual conference is coming in October – encourages us all to go, because it is a great opportunity to network and to get professional development as board members. Went to the Arts in Education conference, where he heard that when there was a rumor that Pueblo 60 was going to cut the arts, the outcry from community caused them to keep it in. Went to the 21^st Century Learning Navigators conference, from which there will hopefully be good ideas coming out in the reports. Went to the Education Commission of the States’ National Policy Forum, which was very good. We heard about lessons learned from other states doing P-16 councils. Sees hope under Colorado’s P-20 subcommittee structure, but the Council itself doesn’t have all the players that other states recommended. Attended a session on early college programs; they discussed many of the same issues we’re dealing with. Overall, it appears that Colorado is ahead of where many states are. Attended the CASE conference, which was very good. The best aspect of it was how much people appreciate our attendance at these conferences. Did a workshop there on 21^st century design; it stimulated a good discussion.

LITTLETON: "Ditto" to what DeHoff said about the different conferences. It was worthwhile having the time to attend those.

MIDDLETON: Attended the NASBE meeting of the Governmental Affairs Committee in June – we are all still waiting to hear about the reauthorization of NCLB; we need to keep an eye on it. An item that keeps coming up is that new ideas are being put forward to add to NCLB rather than fixing the law. Congress is not willing to repeal the law, but to make significant changes. Had a chance to speak with the head of CCSSO (Council of Chief State School Officers), who is "delighted" that we have a new Commissioner. Attended most of the same conferences that DeHoff mentioned. At ECS, heard that the tendency of P-16 councils is to talk a lot but do little. Learned that to be successful, they need to be staffed. Heard that it is important for state departments to talk among themselves on how to work together. Asked Commissioner to pay attention to that. Hosted a town meeting in Aurora recently about libraries; a program aired this morning on Aurora TV to communicate the importance of library involvement in education. Therefore, we need to let people know that librarians should not be replaced by para-educators. Hosted a meeting in May to facilitate a conversation among people working on 21^st century learning through various organizations, so they can avoid duplicating meetings and keep the dialog open. It was attended by Speaker Romanoff, Lt. Gov. O’Brien, Matt Gianneschi, and people from the different groups. A second meeting will be held to follow up. Attended a meeting on civics education last week. DeHoff and she met with CDE staff and people from the League of Charter Schools to discuss how to do a better job of dealing with charter school appeal hearings, about what is a quality application, etc. There will be a State of Education conference in Aurora this Friday morning. APS started school yesterday.

[The remainder of SBE members will report tomorrow, since time for reports ran out.]

CDE staff have looked at other states’ Reading and Writing standards, as well as reports done by various education organizations and researchers around the country. They have gone around the state talking to practitioners and university people to gather feedback on the current standards. They report that they hear frequently that teachers want samples of good writing and benchmarks at each separate grade level, rather than the "chunks" we have right now (K-4, 5-8, 9-12). Every year, we have seen improvement in content areas following the year that we reviewed the standards in those areas. Hopefully that means we will set the state up for improvement in Reading and Writing after this year.

CDE published a report "The State’s Look at Literacy" which encompasses the findings and research mentioned above, including information on literacy preparation and professional development for teachers, and reading and writing performance data.

Student performance in Colorado in Reading has remained relatively flat. Writing improves through middle school and then declines somewhat. The results of CSAP in Reading differ significantly from NAEP results (NAEP shows the state much lower in proficiency), although in Math and Science the results are not as different. In Math we’re 10^th and in Science 11^th on NAEP. We are in the middle (about 25^th) in Reading. NAEP doesn’t assess Writing. NAEP is a multiple-choice test given in a scientifically random sampling. We have remained relatively flat on the ACT English test.

Feedback on state standards on Reading and Writing include the following: The standards and benchmarks are too broad and vague. The benchmarks are perceived as repetitive or dated, and not aligned with CBLA (Colorado Basic Literacy Act) or the 5 components of reading. The 3^rd grade Reading test is not comparable with the other CSAPs. The cut-points seem low. People expressed a need for more state support around middle school and high school reading and writing instruction.

Schools that get good results are those that recruit and develop teachers with deep knowledge of research on proven instruction methods; prioritize time for literacy instruction; establish and use explicit grade-level performance expectations with curriculum and instruction aligned to them; and use all content areas as opportunities for literacy instruction.

AFT (American Federation of Teachers) rates our Reading standards as "sub par." Fordham gave these standards a C and agreed with AFT that they are not explicit enough. Governor Owens’ Alignment Council said they are missing some important skills in the areas of writing, research, logic, informational texts, media, and literature.

Research shows these gaps in our standards:

• Basic reading skills are not delineated.
• Lack of rigor.
• Lack of standard English conventions.
• Limited attention to vocabulary knowledge.
• Benchmarks and assessment objectives are redundant.
• Poor alignment of ELD, CSAPA expanded benchmarks, and EC Building Blocks.

CDE will conduct a series of focus groups to work on revisions to reading and writing standards, on each of the following:

• Benchmarks for basic reading skills and the 5 components of reading.
• Specific vocabulary, literature analysis, and interpretation.
• Writing and knowledge of standard English conventions.
• Research, media, and information processes.
• Rigor and grade-span specificity of benchmarks across all standards.

I pointed out that we need to focus on Writing separately from Reading, and divide the focus groups accordingly. I commented that when it comes to "standard English conventions," few people know them; there is a problem that teachers pass on to students who become teachers and pass on to their students the old-fashioned conventions, and someone needs to pay attention to the Modern Language Association (if it still exists!) and update the standards on modern rules. I volunteered to help in this endeavor.

CDE will also hold study groups to review CSAP reading assessments to review whether the 3^rd grade CSAP should be redesigned and whether the cut-points should be changed grades 3 – 10.

Commissioner Jones said that any major changes we make in the standards and assessments will have a significant impact to districts in their curriculum and training.

Schaffer said that he would like us to have a clear policy on ethics, in order to address the concern expressed in the audit on online education. He submitted some ideas. Suckla asked us to submit our ideas, and we will discuss this topic at the Retreat, which will be held on August 29-30.