LIVE BLOG: QEC

Posted on 06. Jan, 2010 by Heather.

Today is the first Quality Education Council meeting of 2010 [ooooooooooooh]. I’m live blogging throughout the day, posting new content as the day progresses [just hit 'refresh']. Find documents here.

9:05am-9:55am

Local Levy and Local Effort Assistance Funds: Purpose and Uses - Jennifer Priddy and Cal Brodie

PowerPoint available here.

-Total amount of levies and LEA: $2.1 billion

• Extra Curricula and Community: all $85.5 million paid for out of levy funds
• Transportation: $130.8 million paid for out of levy
• Special Education: $77.2 million paid for out of levy
• NERCs: Estimated $502.6 million paid for out of levy
• Extra Classified Staff: $168.5 million paid for out of levy
• Extra Instructional Staff: $195 million paid for out of levy
• Actual Classified Staff: $210.7 million paid for out of levy (additional pay and benefits)
• Actual Administrative Salary: $169.7 million paid for out of levy (additional pay and benefits)
• Additional Instructional Salaries: $608.8 million paid for out of levy

>>Another round of questioning about TRI (Time, Responsibility, Incentive) pay.<<

-Levy solvency projections don’t look good (slide 33 of above doc)

• For 2011-12, levy revenue will increase by about $120 million
• In that same year, levy expenditures could increase by $174.8 million, leaving districts with a $54.8 million hole
• If the QEC recommendations are enacted, levy revenue would increase by $325 million ($120 million + $205 million for transportation and NERCs); and even with additional expenditures for full-day K and class size reductions, districts would have $150.2 million in levy funds left over

9:55am-10:05am

Summary of Governor’s Proposed Supplemental Budget - Julie Salvi

In short, the budget situation is bad. The governor’s budget proposes $408.1 million in cuts to K-12.

10:05am-10:45am

Impact of Governor’s Proposed Supplemental Budget on Education: Superintendent Panel - Dr. Art Jarvis (Tacoma), Dr. Nick Brossoit (Edmonds), Martin Kay (Aberdeen), Dr. Chip Kimball (Lake Washington)

-Dr. Jarvis, Tacoma: We can survive for one more year; maybe a second year, but not a third year. Cannot cut programs like full-day K and then ask districts to improve and reform.

-Mr. Kay, Aberdeen: Governor’s proposed budget would be “disastrous” for equity. Aberdeen would face about $3 million in cuts (10 percent of its budget).

-Dr. Brossoit, Edmonds: Edmonds would face $6 million in cuts. If they don’t face cuts, they can survive for one more year. With a budget of $188 million, only $200,000 isn’t already appropriated. Local associations are working with district and have made concessions.

>>Questions from QEC members on levy/LEA proportions of budget. Superintendent of Public Instruction Randy Dorn asked about class sizes in secondary math classes (answers of 28-33), and then pontificated on the teaching load burden faced by math teachers who will need to get students to ‘proficient’ levels on the state assessment in order to graduate from high school. [State assessment or not, proficiency should be the goal for all students by all teachers.]

-Dr. Kimball, Lake Washington: Not sure what else we can cut; we cut everything that could be last year as a result of that budget.

 -Collectively: Every district is in trouble.

11am-11:20am

Finalize Council’s Report to the Legislature

Report available here.

-Items for discussion

• Early learning - would like to have AG come in and explain opinion
• Statewide collective bargaining - added to work plan

>>Reps. Pat Sullivan, Marcie Maxwell, and Bruce Dammeier spoke against adding it to the work plan, wanting to leave any compensation-related tasks to the Compensation Work Group.

-Sen. McAuliffe’s minority report will be appended.

>>Mary Jean Ryan would like the language in the executive summary about not reducing education funding to be ramped up. She suggested that it may come best as a cover letter from Superintendent Dorn, as chair of the QEC.<<

Report to Legislature: approved

11:20am-11:40am

Public Comment

Lynn Tucker, Seattle parent - advocated for better diagnostic system, improvements and a plan for gifted/talented education

Mark Campeau, Olympia School Board - Districts are struggling

Carolyn Logue, library media association - Import of libraries

Pat Montgomery, Auburn PTA - Support early learning in basic education

11:40am-12pm

Discussion of 2010 Work Plan

>>Dr. Bette Hyde would like to add more about early learning. Stephen Rushing would like to add consideration of the impact of increased data collection and reporting on staff. He would also like to consider diagnostic assessments. Sen. Curtis King would like to consider year-round schools (alternate scheduling). Dr. Jane Gutting would like to add researching the relationship between teacher retention and compensation and student demographics served.<<

Probable meeting dates: May, September, November

Meeting adjourned

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC, day 2

Posted on 01. Dec, 2009 by Heather.

We’re back for Day 2 of the Quality Education Council, which appears to be the most exciting action in Olympia today — TVW is broadcasting live. Meeting documents are available here.

9:05am-9:45am

Achievement Gap Committee Update - Erin Jones

PowerPoint available here.

-Recommendations

* Racial and ethnic diversity on the QEC

* Review the funding formula through the lens of equitable versus equal

* Increase allocation for schools with high achievement gaps

* Ensure students can meet graduation requirements

* Accountability for schools with achievement gaps

* Early implementation of English Language Learner funding

* Further investigate implementing instructional coaches

* Coordination between program funding and increased capacity

* Learning Improvement Days designated for cultural competence training

* Funding for cultural competence training

* Teaching and maintaining tribal languages, history and culture

* Culturally and academically relevant instructional materials

* Culturally relevant, research-based assessment tools

>>Some clarifying questions on what “cultural competence” is.<<

9:45am-10:30am

Early Learning Recommendations - Dr. Bette Hyde, Nina Auerbach, Randy Dorn

Plan available here.

-Recommendations

1) Increase investment in and phase-in enhanced early learning opportunities from birth to grade three that are available to all who wish to access them and work to close the preparation and achievement gap children are experiencing

2) Sustain investment in the health services for children

3) Invest in and strengthen partnerships with parents, families, schools and communities

4) Invest in and strengthen support for providers and teachers

5) Develop and invest in the early learning system infrastructure to promote, sufficiently fund and hold accountable equitable access and quality for all

>>Generally speaking QEC members were receptive and supportive.<<

10:45am-12:15pm

Funding Formula Technical Working Group Recommendations: Baseline Adoption & Funding Formula Design - David Iseminger, Shawn Lewis, Stephen Nielsen, Randy Parr, Neil Sullivan

PowerPoint available here.

-Prototypical School Structure

• Recommend creation of district-wide support category, separate from school staff and central administration
• For allocation purposes only, although funds for categorical programs must be used for those programs but districts develop their own delivery structure
• Calculate the percentage for central administration based on percentage of staff, not resources

-Baseline for Prototypical School Model

• Crosswalk should reflect reality, teacher schedule includes planning time
• Crosswalks presume 5.6 instructional hours in elementary (1,008 hours over 180 days), 6 periods in secondary (1,080 hours over 180 days)
• While baseline includes 1,000/1,080 instructional hours, does not mean schools are ready for 24 credit graduation requirement - state considers a student full time if they attend for 5 periods

>>Length of school day/opportunity for 24 credits to graduate from high school was a big sticking point. Sen. Eric Oemig didn’t like the inclusion of CORE 24 in the FFTWG presentation, and preferred their changing the wording to 24 credits. Then the group got into the comingling of levy and state dollars for Basic Education.

• Class sizes: grades K-4 (23.11), 5-6 (27), 7-8 (28.53), 9-12 (28.74), CTE (26.58), Skills Centers (22.76), Lab Science (28.74), AP/IB (28.74)
• Number of staff per prototype elementary of 400 students: Principal (1.253), Teachers (19.103), Librarians (0.663), Professional Development Coaches (0), Counselors (0.493), Student Health (0.135), Instructional Aides (0.936), School Office (2.012), Security (0.079), Custodial (1.657)
• District-wide support staff per 1,000 students: Technology (0.628), Facilities Maintenance (0.201), Warehouse (1.944)
• Central Administration staff per 1,000 students: Supervisors (0.773), Office Clerical (1.763), Certificated Administrators (0.867) [5.35 percent of school and district-wide support staff]
• Administration assumptions: districts employ 3.7 administrators per 1,000 students, baseline must account for 4 administrators per 1,000 students
• LAP instructional hours per week for class size of 15: 1 hour, 18 minutes
• TBIP instructional hours per week for class size of 15: 4 hours, 50 minutes
• Highly Capable instructional hours per week for class size of 15: 2 hours, 12 minutes
• Special Education: maintain current formulas
• NERCs/MSOCs: proportional distribution of current $511.60 per student
• Small schools and districts: continue to review, hold harmless

-Implementation

• Early investments
  • Transitional Bilingual Instructional Program
  • Guidance counselors
  • Mentor teacher program
  • Instructional coaches
  • Office support and security staff
  • MSOCs
• Determine final target levels of service as soon as possible
• Accelerate timeline for compensation work group
• Fold I-728 funding into the prototype school model to address class size and staffing improvements
• Phase-in increases to programs serving struggling students, ELL students and students in high-poverty schools at a similar pace targeting the highest need school districts first
• Continue to utilize the FFTWG for periodic input on specific issues in formula development and implementation

-Revenue Options

• Recommend any revenue package have varied sources to provide greater stability
• Property taxes remain a fundamental source of revenues for schools; property tax should be cornerstone of any revenue package
• Some portion of growth in current revenue sources should be dedicated to implementation of K-12 funding reforms
• Any resources generated for the implementation of ESHB 2261 should be dedicated in an education trust to preserve these funds for K-12 investments

-Key Policy Implications

• Divide prototype into 3 sections: school staff, district-wide support and central administration
• Use district-wide enrollment for prototype allocations, excluding class size reductions in high-poverty schools
• Use school enrollment and Free/Reduced-Price Lunch percentage for high-poverty school allocations
• OSPI should create an interactive report so that the public can compare the prototype staffing allocations to an actual district
• Assumed staff in prototypical school categories would be certificated instructional staff, certificated administrative staff or classified staff, for salary purposes
• Option to calculate smaller class sizes for high-poverty schools: eligibility based on percentage of FRPL population, or concentrated number of students eligible for FRPL
• Funding for class size reduction for high-poverty schools should be for allocation only
• Blend primary and all other MSOC rate, so there is one MSOC rate per student (cost of $263,000)

[There are other recommendations, and much more detail, in the full FFTWG report]

>>Many kudos to the members of the FFTWG, as well as staff.<<

1:15pm-5:10pm

Amendments to Proposal from Reps. Priest and Sullivan - Jennifer Priddy

Documents aren’t online yet. We have the latest version of the proposal of Reps. Priest and Sullivan, and amendments to the proposal from QEC members. The QEC is running through the amendments and will take votes. I will do my best to convey amendments, discussion and votes.

• Sen. Oemig Amendment 1 - Legislature may is urged to not reduce education funding in 2010 supplemental budget - approved

>>Dr. Hyde cannot support this given the dire economic times, and the fact that other departments and programs will have to take severe cuts. Rep. Pat Sullivan said a strong message should be sent to the Legislature. Sen. Joseph Zarelli offered a friendly amendment, that the QEC urges the Legislature to not reduce K-12 education funding. Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe supports the friendly amendment.

• Ms. Ryan Amendment 2 - Delete limitation on number of QEC meetings per year; fund the study and analysis costs for compensation and local funding work groups by 2011 Legislature; start compensation and local funding work groups immediately - approved

>>Ms. Ryan offered this out of urgency. Sen. McAuliffe said the limitation on QEC meetings was out of concern for cost, so she doesn’t disagree, but does have cost concerns. Superintendent Randy Dorn worried about his staff being stretched too thin (OSPI is also working on Washington’s Race to the Top application). Rep. Sullivan wondered if there are enough capable people in the state, even if OSPI could hire more staff. Ms. Ryan said if staffing is such a concern for QEC meetings, then she withdraws that part of the amendment. Rep. Sullivan suggested that the groups have preliminary reports by the suggested earlier dates. Rep. Skip Priest said he agrees with Ms. Ryan but is concerned about strain on staff. Stephen Rushing supported Ms. Ryan’s intent, especially for the compensation work group. Dr. Jane Gutting agreed, saying she doesn’t care when the groups start as long as the QEC gets initial reports by November 2010.

• Sen. McAuliffe Amendment 1 - Include a goal of establishing a system of support as presented in the Anatomy of Change presentation by WASA - withdrawn

>>Ms. Ryan didn’t know if she completely agrees with the Anatomy of Change, but she does agree that the state should do more long-term planning and the State Board of Education tries to do that. Supt. Dorn said it would be great to have the staff to do this, and then said the superintendent of public instruction should be “czar” of all the education agencies in the state and the staff to do it. Sen. McAuliffe withdrew the amendment due to the staffing concerns.

• Sen. McAuliffe Amendment 2 - Sets implementation of new pupil transportation funding formula earlier than 2013 as a goal, rather than in statute - rejected

>>Rep. Priest pushed back saying enough work has been done on pupil transportation, we know how much it costs, and districts need additional funding for the transportation the state requires. Rep. Bruce Dammeier agreed with Rep. Priest. Supt. Dorn also spoke against the amendment, saying districts have to use levy dollars to fund basic education. Sen. McAuliffe reminded everyone of the looming $2.6 billion deficit in 2010, and hoped everyone against this amendment speaks in favor of tax increases to fund this. Rep. Sullivan said that if they don’t do this (fund transportation) they are just passing this off to another body, and districts are really hurting.

• Sen. King Amendment 1 - fund new pupil transportation formula when funding is available, rather than in 2011 - rejected

>>Mr. Rushing respected the amendment but said it is up to the Legislature to make funding decisions and the QEC shouldn’t let that weaken its recommendations. Dr. Gutting agreed that the QEC should make strong recommendations regardless of what the Legislature might do.

• Ms. Ryan Amendment 3 - task the FFTWG local funding work group with providing recommendations on phase-in of new pupil transportation and MSOC formula and associated impact on local funds - approved

>>Sen. Zarelli asked if the intent is for the FFTWG to look at levies and levy lids once the state pays its full share of education costs. Ms. Ryan said her intent was for the state to help districts figure out where to spend local dollars freed up by the state increasing its investment in education. Speaker Frank Chopp offered a friendly amendment striking language about the FFTWG to recommend “best mechanisms for the state to direct” districts on productive use of funds. Rep. Dammeier made a friendly amendment that this work be delegated to the local funding work group, rather than the FFTWG.

• Sen. McAuliffe Amendment 4 - set increased MSOC allocations as a goal, rather than in statute, and wait until all work group reports are in - rejected

>>Rep. Sullivan said they know what districts are spending now, and this is Basic Education, the state should fund it. Supt. Dorn said the QEC needs to move forward and is making recommendations to the Legislature, so should be bold.

• Sen. King Amendment 2 - increase MSOC allocations as funding becomes available, rather than set in statute - rejected

>>Sen. King cited the $2.6 billion deficit as his rationale. Rep. Sullivan echoed his earlier comments. Sen. McAuliffe said that she recognizes the QEC is making recommendations independent of the Legislature, but she doesn’t want to make false promises to anyone. Rep. Priest said legislators take an oath to follow the state Constitution, whether they agree with it or not, and they must advocate for fully funding Basic Education. [Some tempers flared.] Dr. Gutting said they should also consider making recommendations around new revenue sources.

• Sen. Oemig Amendment 2 - Legislature shall provide funding to help local districts implement new data and accounting reporting systems, including training for staff - approved
• Sen. Oemig Amendment 4 - Provide 2 percent of Basic Education funding (excluding transportation) for “Innovate to the Top” competitive grant program - rejected

>>Sen. Oemig explained this as a state version of Race to the Top. Supt. Dorn said he likes the idea, it puts the onus on districts to develop innovate programs.

• Sen. Oemig Amendment 3 - create a “Struggling Schools Oversight Fund” for districts designated by the State Board of Education in binding conditions as required action districts, as part of prototype funding model - approved

>>Rep. Sullivan asked if this would work since the SBE does not currently have the authority to intervene in schools. Ms. Ryan said the SBE plans to put forward legislation that would enable it to intervene in schools. She also offered a friendly amendment to have the language match what the SBE proposal (SBE doesn’t use the term “binding conditions”).

• Sen. Oemig Amendment 5 - Legislature shall allocate at least 50 percent of new state revenue to the implementation of the Basic Education program as established in ESHB 2261 - approved

>>Supt. Dorn hoped that more than 50 percent of new revenue would go to K-12 education. Sen. Oemig agreed, changed his amendment to “at least” 50 percent.

• Supt. Dorn Amendment 2 - set inflation indices for MSOC allocations - approved
• Ms. Ryan Amendment 4 - one priority for early phase-in of increased MSOC allocations go toward textbooks and curriculum - withdrawn

>>Rep. Dammeier asked if the intent is for this funding to be categorical, rather than as an allocation. Ms. Ryan said that is a good point, and if it were up to her she probably would, but since the new model is for allocation purpose, they can at least send a message that textbooks and curriculum funding is important. Mr. Rushing offered that the language should be amended so this is the number one priority, instead of one priority. Rep. Sullivan said textbook and curriculum cycles vary, so they don’t want to prioritize for districts that may have just purchased new materials. Dr. Gutting spoke against the amendment. Sen. Zarelli said that in light of the model being for allocation purposes, any new money is green and regardless of intent statements, districts can spend the funds as they see fit. [Sen. McAuliffe had to leave us at 3pm.]

• Ms. Ryan Amendment 5 - Legislature should provide at least 4 Learning Improvement Days, phased in over 3 years - withdrawn

>>Dr. Gutting asked if the LIDs will be directed at specific tasks. Ms. Ryan said she didn’t have a detailed plan. Mr. Rushing spoke in favor of the amendment and the import of LIDs. Sen. King said he understood that while LIDs can be useful, they should be a secondary priority. Rep. Priest said he thinks professional development is important but they don’t know the number of days that are most effective. Questions were also raised about whether the LID allocations were staff costs or the non-staff costs (answer: non-staff costs). Ms. Ryan said her intent was for staff costs to be covered (so there don’t need to be waivers from the 180-day school year) and that this should be considered by the compensation work group.

• Sen. McAuliffe Amendment 5 - set goal to phase-in beginning teacher mentoring - rejected
• Sen. McAuliffe Amendment 6 - recommend the Legislature develop a program of early learning for at-risk children (strikes more detailed proposal) - rejected
• Sen. Zarelli Amendment 1 - strike language including early learning in Basic Education - rejected

>>Sen. Zarelli said the state has enough on its plate, and needs to focus on K-12 first. If he could, he would spend new money on early learning rather than all-day kindergarten. Dr. Hyde disagreed, and supports making early learning available to all children, but start with at-risk children. Rep. Sullivan spoke in support of inclusion of early learning in Basic Education. Rep. Priest said previous court decisions have said the state may fund programs specifically for at-risk children (for example, LAP). Sen. Oemig spoke for Sen. McAuliffe, saying she would offer that the QEC is getting ahead of itself, the Attorney General’s office is going to present on Thursday about this issue.

• Sen. Oemig Amendment 7 - allocate early interventions like all-day kindergarten, K-3 enhancement and early learning to districts in single block grant - rejected
• Sen. McAuliffe Amendment 7 - strike Priest/Sullivan Recommendation 9 and replace with goal to first restore I-728 funding before Legislature provides enhanced funding for additional class size reductions in primary grades at high-poverty schools - rejected

>>Supt. Dorn asked if this has already been done in legislation earlier this year. Ms. Priddy said a bill was passed to restore I-728 funding, but didn’t address the second part of the amendment. [Speaker Chopp had to leave us at 3:30pm, Rep. Maxwell now voted in his place.]

• Sen. Zarelli Amendment 2 - move Priest/Sullivan Recommendation 9 and insert under Recommendation 11 - rejected
• Ms. Ryan Amendment 7 - create a continuum of primary education for age 3 through grade 3; DEL and OSPI set performance expectations - approved
• Sen. Zarelli Amendment 3 - strikes Priest/Sullivan Recommendation 10 and replace with QEC examining program delivery reforms for LAP and TBIP and reporting to Legislature in December 2010 - approved

>>Sen. Zarelli wondered about the effectiveness of these programs, and if districts are incentivized to not exit students from the programs. Supt. Dorn said districts across the state supplement LAP/TBIP programs with local funds. Sen. Oemig supported the amendment, saying more research needs to be done on these programs and their funding. Sen. Zarelli hoped the goal wasn’t just to get more money into the system, but rather create an effective system, which will probably require additional funds. [Speaker Chopp returned at 3:45pm.] Speaker Chopp raised concerns over the supporting language under Sen. Zarelli’s amendment. Sen. Zarelli said that was meant as supporting rationale for the amendment, not to be included in the report. Other concerns were raised about delaying things. Sen. Zarelli said he will go with the will of QEC members and joked that he is used to losing on these (funding) issues. [ha ha ha]

• Sen. Zarelli Amendment 4 - include examining transferring collective bargaining to the state in the 2010 QEC workplan - approved

>>Rep. Sullivan said that to be consistent with how he voted on the BEFTF, he will vote against the amendment. Sen. Zarelli said the QEC at least needs to look at the issue, that’s all he is asking for. Dr. Gutting said she supports the amendment as the issue is worth examining. [Apparently Speaker Chopp only returned for his coat.] Ms. Ryan said that given the state’s responsibility for Basic Education, it doesn’t make sense to not look at state involvement in bargaining. Rep. Dammeier wondered if this task was better left to the compensation work group. Sen. Zarelli said he sees this as separate from compensation (salary amounts), and about who pays. Rep. Dammeier clarified that the compensation work group’s task plays into this, and with help from Ms. Ryan, suggested the QEC look at this issue after the compensation work group completes its work. Sen. Zarelli pushed back that the QEC should consider this, which is why he wants to add it to the workplan.

• Sen. Zarelli Amendment 5 - add review of local levy authority and uses to 2010 QEC workplan - approved
• Sen. Oemig Amendment 8 - develop process for how to adequately fund and use research-based, empirical data analysis to analyze and drive evidence-based practices - approved
• Ms. Ryan Amendment 11 - include Race to the Top work, cost estimates for full implementation, implications of recommendations on local funding and compensation, supplanting policy and capacity analysis, expected return on investment, revenue or funding plan in 2010 QEC workplan/recommendations - approved

>>Questions over whether other amendments have covered these items. Ms. Priddy said the first and last two items have not been included in other amendments. Rep. Priest wondered if the state has the ability to study all of these things (e.g. can WSIPP do it). Others had staff concerns. [Sen. Zarelli and Ms. Ryan had to leave us.]

• Reps. Priest and Sullivan Amendment 1 - Legislature should continue implementation of Part II of ESHB 2261 to assure availability of robust and high-quality data - approved
• Supt. Dorn Amendment 1 - establishes 2018 discussion values as goals for consideration by the QEC in 2010 - approved

>>Many voiced concerns about these numbers, but some supported. [back and forth, back and forth]<<

• Reps. Priest and Sullivan proposal, as amended - preliminarily approved

Meeting adjourned.

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC, day 1

Posted on 30. Nov, 2009 by Heather.

The Quality Education Council is meeting today and tomorrow in Olympia (no online agenda yet, sorry meeting docs now up). For those interested in seeing Superintendent Dorn’s mustache (it is Movember), tune in to TVW.

I’ll be posting updates throughout the day, all you need do is hit ‘refresh.’

9:05am-10am

Beginning Teacher Mentor Program (Beginning Educator Support Team) - Erin Jones, Jeanne Harmon, Fran Oishi, Jamie Schneider

PowerPoint available here.

-Included data on the positive effect of teacher participant in quality induction program on student achievement

-Other research shows import of supportive culture and positive work environments for teachers

-$2.348 million in both 2009-10 and 2010-11; BEST is competitive grant program

-BEST program supports beginning teachers through Professional Certification, assessment at completion of program

-Federal Way, Lake Washington, Renton, ESD 112 Consortium, Lover Valley Consortium (Grandview, Toppenish, Zillah, Wapato)

>>Some pushback/questioning around use of student test scores as demonstrative of teacher effectiveness. Superintendent Randy Dorn asked how mentors are selected and trained. Jeanne Harmon answered that there are standards that are used, as well as training provided by OSPI.

>>Sen. Curtis King asked if mentors are still in classrooms, or if they mentor full time. Ms. Harmon said it varies by districts, and depends largely on the number of beginning teachers in a district. Small districts may have only one or two beginning teachers, and don’t have a need for full-time mentors. Larger districts may have more than 30 beginning teachers, and employ a full-time mentor or two rather than providing release time for part-time mentors.

>>Dr. Jane Gutting asked about retention rates of teachers who complete induction programs. Ms. Harmon said the Center for Strengthening the Teaching Profession does collect data on retention, and rates are higher for teachers who go through induction.

>>Sen. Eric Oemig asked if Washington could conduct a study like Tennessee did, with student growth and the like. Ms. Harmon said we could not do such a study statewide, but some districts do also use assessments that measure student growth.

>>Dr. Gutting asked what the cost would be to expand BEST to all teachers, and if it could be incorporated into alternative route teacher preparation programs. Ms. Harmon said when they last costed it out a statewide program would cost $24 or 25 million, and they had not yet looked at incorporating the program into Residency Certification programs. Rep. Skip Priest asked if the provided funding was adequate. The question wasn’t completely answered, but Ms. Schneider did say they are able to give much better support to beginning teachers this year than in previous years (when the state provided less than $900 per new teacher).<<

10am-10:55am

State Board of Education Update - Edie Harding, Kathe Taylor

PowerPoint available here.

>>Supt. Dorn asked if Career Concentration courses had to be Career and Technical Education course. Edie Harding said they do not have to be taught by teachers with CTE endorsements, which is the same as current requirements around the current occupational education requirement. Sen. Joseph Zarelli asked why these aren’t all just lumped into the elective category so students can choose additional courses that interest them, CTE or otherwise. Kathe Taylor said that because not all high schools have CTE programs, the Career Concentration requirement needs to allow flexibility, and the implementation task force is considering that. Additionally, the flexibility of the requirement allows students to take the courses relevant and/or of interest to them (for example, additional language courses if they know they want to pursue a career abroad).

>>Speaker Frank Chopp asked where financial literacy fits in to these requirements, especially given our current economic conditions. Ms. Taylor said those standards have been incorporated into social studies. Speaker Chopp pushed for financial literacy to be its own requirement. Ms. Harding said she would be open to that, and it needs to be brought to the State Board of Education to consider. Supt. Dorn asked about the third math credit. Ms. Harding said it can be Algebra II, but it could also be Accounting, and depends on the student’s High School and Beyond Plan.

>>Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe asked about waivers for certain requirements, including physical education and art. Ms. Taylor said there are waivers for PE, allowable for “good reason,” but there isn’t a current waiver for the art requirement. Dr. Gutting asked if the impact of CORE 24 on the teacher workforce as been studied. Ms. Harding said they have looked at that, however, many new teachers in shortage areas can’t find jobs because of the economy.

>>Speaker Chopp asked if students needed to take remedial courses at community and technical colleges because advanced math courses weren’t available in their high schools. Ms. Taylor said they are tracking our most recent high school graduates in community and technical colleges. Supt. Dorn then pontificated on the WASL component of graduation requirements, and how the Class of 2013 will need to pass the Math WASL in addition to the Reading and Writing WASLs.

>>Sen. Zarelli asked if the SBE can implement graduation requirements on its own, or if the Legislature has approval authority. Ms. Harding said the SBE does not plan on implementing CORE 24 until there is adequate funding, and the Legislature may always “trump” the SBE.<<

11:05am-11:50am

Anatomy of Change - Paul Rosier, Greg Lynch, Carl Johnson

PowerPoint available here.

[In short, a proposal on how to deal with future changes in requirements, system changes, etc.]

1pm-2pm

Phase-In of Funding Recommendations - Isabel Muñoz-Colon

PowerPoint available here.

>>Some relevant and irrelevant questions.<<

2pm-3pm

Discussion of Proposal by Reps. Priest and Sullivan

PowerPoint available here.

>>Sen. McAuliffe brought up that other members of the QEC met with Reps. Priest and Sullivan, and asked if this proposal reflects their involvement. Reps. Priest and Sullivan said they did have conversations with others (including Dr. Bette Hyde, Mary Jean Ryan, Sen. Oemig and Rep. Bruce Dammeier) and this proposal does include thoughts/reflections from those conversations.

-Recommendations

1)      2010 Legislature should adopt baseline prototypical school funding formula for implementation in 2011, based on Funding Formula Technical Working Group recommendations, but with a more simplified set of funding factors

2)      Amend ESHB 2261 to start the work of the Compensation Working Group (change lead staff agency to OSPI) and Local Finance Working Group in May 2010; continue FFTWG to monitor early implementation of the prototypical school model

3)      2010 Legislature should implement new pupil transportation funding formula in 2011 ($806,000 in 2010)

4)      Legislature should phase-in full funding of new pupil transportation formula over a 3-year period beginning in 2011 (full implementation cost: $150.5 million if in 2011-12)

5) Legislature should increase MSOC factors in the prototypical school funding formula ($1,082.76 per student; full implementation cost: $619.7 million if in 2011-12)

6)      Legislature should monitor outcomes of the Beginning Educator Support Team program; if it proves effective, phase-in funding to cover all beginning teachers (full implementation cost: $31.8 million if in 2011-12)

7)      Legislature should include a program of early learning for at-risk 3- and 4-year-olds as part of Basic Education, beginning in 2011, 3 year phase-in (full implementation cost: $54.4 million beyond current ECEAP if in 2011-12)

8)      Legislature should continue incremental phase-in of full-day kindergarten, with completion in 2018 (full implementation cost: $181.5 million if in 2011-12)

9)      Legislature should prioritize class size reduction in primary grades by providing K-3 class size allocation of 15 students per teacher, phased in over 5 years beginning in 2011, starting with high-poverty schools (full implementation cost: $645.5 million if in 2011-12)

10)    Legislature should increase funding allocations to support LAP and Transitional Bilingual Instruction Program in 2011 (full implementation cost $256.1 million for LAP and $75.4 million for TBIP if in 2011-12)

11)     QEC workplan for 2010 should focus on increased instruction hours, CORE 24, increased allocations for critical support staff, research-based professional development and possible innovations to support student/school health, with recommendations to the 2011 Legislature for a phase-in schedule

>>Sen. McAuliffe expressed concern for putting certain formulas in statute since the Compensation Work Group won’t have made its recommendations yet, and we won’t know how much educator compensation will be.

>>Sen. Zarelli would like to see the QEC recommend a system of professional development and support to the Legislature, rather than pieces, to weigh whether certain programs work well together, or not. He would also like to know the capacity of districts to handle smaller class sizes; facilities will need to be considered.

>>Dr. Hyde spoke to the cost savings of quality early learning programs, citing work from five years ago that found Bremerton saved $3,000 per child per year (reduced special education and remediation rates).

>>Others brought up data systems and accountability, as well as the intent for the funding formula to eventually be an allocation model. Sen. McAuliffe played Debbie Downer and reminded everyone of the $2.6 billion deficit that has to be dealt with 2010.

>>Rep. Sullivan pushed back on the comments calling for delay, saying the line is already forming for proposals for when the economy recovers, and given the Constitution, the QEC needs to put forward a strong proposal so the Legislature makes sure to move education to the front of the line.

>>Supt. Dorn posited that many districts that can’t pass levies aren’t able to provide what we would consider Basic Education, and the state needs to step up and meet its obligation. Going forward, members need to put forward proposals, and the QEC should consider adopting 2018 values so they know what they are working toward.

>>Ms. Ryan thought the QEC should go back through ESHB 2261 and sync up some of the dates, most likely moving up the work of certain groups. Ms. Ryan also reiterated her sense of urgency.

>>Rep. Dammeier said he sees ESHB 2261 as the vision and the proposal from Reps. Priest and Sullivan as the foundation, and he likes a lot of what is in their proposal.<<

3:40pm-4:15pm

Public Comment

Lucinda Young, WEA - also support WASA’s Anatomy of Change proposal; concerns over Master Certification work of PESB; early learning continuum extends to grade 3; would like to see 2018 values; fund transportation and MSOCs; support teacher mentoring

Pat Montgomery, Auburn parent volunteer -structure implementation of ESHB 2261 so that when funding becomes available, we fund the underfunded first

Doug Nelson, Public School Employees -be bold; support adoption of 2018 goal values; increase support staff allocations

Neil Sullivan, representing himself (works in Spokane Public Schools, on Funding Formula Technical Working Group) - levies are now used to fund Basic Education and that’s not how it is supposed to be, per the state Constitution

Kim Howard, Washington State PTA - supports adoption of 2018 goal values; transparency and ease of understanding are important; support moving work group timelines forward

George Scarola, League of Education Voters - QEC is on the right track, has simplified how to get started and made it easy to understand; QEC/OSPI needs more staff support; tying teacher mentoring to extended provisional contract is good way to support beginning teachers; implement early learning, all-day kindergarten and K-3 class size enhancement synchronously; beef up CORE 24 recommendations; adopt 2018 goal values

Adjourned until tomorrow…

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC, day 2

Posted on 03. Nov, 2009 by Heather.

We’re on TVW again, all day, LIVE. You may even catch a glimpse of me or George.

9:05am-9:10am

Update on Funding Formula Technical Working Group - Julie Salvi

[It happened, in 5 minutes, take away: group has more work to do]

9:10am-9:25am

Financial Outlook - Bryon Moore

Presentation here

>>Rep. Skip Priest brought up the Doran I and II court decisions, which coincided with the economic downturn of 1979-81/83. Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe asked if Mr. Moore’s office is presuming the stimulus funds will go away. Mr. Moore answered that they are presuming the federal stimulus will not be renewed and the state will probably face a $4-5 billion hole.<<

9:25am-10:45am

Early Learning Work Group Update - Dr. Bette Hyde

Document here

-Near-term policy priorities

• Early literacy
• All-day kindergarten
• Voluntary universal pre-K for 4-year-olds (mixed delivery)
• Birth-to-3 continuum
• Health insurance and medical home
• Strengthen partnerships with families
• Support and resources for QRIS
• Enhance/strengthen early learning system infrastructure

[Dr. Hyde described how doctors use books to assess development of children and the doctors' need for books. Sen. Curtis King mentioned a book program started by Dolly Parton. Rep. Bruce Dammeier looked up the actual name of the program, and Superintendent of Public Instruction Randy Dorn joked he could now get off the Dollywood site...Jokes! Before 10 a.m. even.]

>>Rep. Priest mentioned work by the Washington State Institute for Public Policy that found all-day kindergarten didn’t produce significantly greater results than half-day kindergarten. On the Basic Education Finance Task Force they wrestled with this; he asked Dr. Hyde her opinion. Dr. Hyde responded that studies have found that benefits of all-day K can peter out after 1st grade, which is why they want this to be a P-3 initiative, with supports in place through 3rd grade.

>>Rep. Pat Sullivan brought up that so many children coming to kindergarten are already behind, so it’s important to make an investment in 3- and 4-year-olds, as well as all-day kindergarten. Dr. Hyde agreed.

>>Mary Jean Ryan came out swinging in favor of a robust early learning program, with full-day programs for 3- and 4-year-olds, quality curriculum and trained/certificated teachers. She does not think a 300-hour program is adequate. Dr. Hyde does not disagree. Speaker Frank Chopp would like to have more cost information, since we’re currently serving 16 percent of eligible children, we need to know what it would take to serve all kids (by ramp up by quartiles).

>>Stephen Rushing agreed more or less with Ms. Ryan and made the point that the average elementary student is in school for 5 or 5.5 hours a day, but only receiving about 4 hours of instruction. We can do so much by investing in programs for 3- and 4-year-olds.

>>Sen. McAuliffe said she wouldn’t advocate one way or the other for including early learning in basic education, but does appreciate the work being done on the early learning plan. She also wanted to remind everyone about the one million children in our K-12 system, and too many of them are dropping out each year.<<

11:05am-12pm

Continued Workplan and Implementation Plan Discussion - Jennifer Priddy

Follow-up on questions/comments/need for clarification from yesterday

-Baseline/crosswalk: put into law? Consensus: Yes

>>Sen. McAuliffe would like it to be called a baseline. Speaker Chopp agrees.

-Ending values/2018 values: Recommendations or set?

>>Sen. King has concerns over setting concrete values, ranges may be better. Rep. Sullivan thinks that the QEC’s recommendations need to be bold; there is an expectation that the QEC will show leadership on this. Dr. Hyde would also like to have the end picture, but not all of the subgroups will finish their work in the next month, so can’t set the 2018 values yet.

>>Sen. Eric Oemig thought this to be meaty and may be better to flag those issues without consensus and come back to them. Supt. Dorn pushed back, saying the QEC needs to make bold recommendations.

>>Sen. Joseph Zarelli asked if the QEC has yet defined prototypical schools. He understood the crosswalk idea, but wasn’t clear on the specifics. Sen. Oemig explained the model school formula (base shell) and the prototypical schools (with numbers filled in). Sen. McAuliffe said they need to create a QEC proposal to make sure the numbers in the proposal reflect the values of the QEC, and that is a task for 2010.

>>Speaker Chopp asked when the QEC would get to setting the 2018 values. Sen. King said, for him, it’s after the QEC gets reports back from all the subgroups. Speaker Chopp said the baseline report from the Funding Formula Technical Working Group will be given at the end of the month, but the QEC should move up other work groups and get to work on determining end values. Sen. King pushed back that he, again, doesn’t think they can set the values until they have all the information from the other groups.

>>Rep. Priest said some prototype model values are clear, while others will require more work. QEC can’t waste more time “chatting,” but need to get other parts going so the QEC can keep moving. Dr. Hyde said she agrees there are things they “can do, and they should do them,” while continuing to work on other areas. Ms. Ryan asked if that is what Reps. Priest and Sullivan were advocating for in their proposal. Reps. Priest and Sullivan said “yes,” there are certain things the QEC can recommend the Legislature put in statute in 2010, and other things the QEC needs to keep working on.

>>Sen. Oemig joked “so much for tabling this.” He went on to cite the expected budget shortfall in the next year, and expressed caution. Rep. Dammeier reaffirmed his commitment to the effort, and said he doesn’t think anyone is expecting the QEC to figure it all out by December. However, they do need to keep moving forward, and certain items are ready for action/implementation/phase-in now. He would also like to see the Compensation and Local Finance work groups start earlier. The QEC can do certain things now, but he is not ready to vote on 2018 values. Sen. King said there are certain things he feels comfortable moving forward on - transportation, MSOCs, baseline for prototypical model - but not 2018 values.

>>Supt. Dorn asked Reps. Priest and Sullivan to flesh out their proposal more and have it ready for distribution in the next two weeks, allowing QEC members to comment and discuss at the December meeting. Sen. Zarelli said he still has questions about LAP, ELL, all-day kindergarten and early learning. He does think increasing MSOCs makes sense, but other things they don’t know enough about.

>>Rep. Priest said they’ve learned a lot in the past two days, their proposal presented yesterday was a draft and they do plan to get a revised proposal out soon.

>>Sen. McAuliffe said she appreciates the work of Reps. Priest and Sullivan, but would like a larger subgroup to make recommendations and for at least two other people to join them. Supt. Dorn said he views everyone as in the group and everyone is free to make proposals, etc.

>>Mr. Rushing expressed concern that too much time is passing and the QEC needs to take positions or offer feedback to the FFTWG so the subgroup can complete its work. Dr. Gutting said she feels a little bit better because they have a meeting scheduled for early January, and impressed by the members of the subgroups. Dr. Hyde agreed that she would like to spend more time talking to one another rather than having more people talk at them. Mr. Rushing added that the discussion over early learning today teased out some concerns, and the QEC hasn’t discussed other important issues and they need to.<<

Lunch break…

1:05pm1:40pm

Continued Workplan and Implementation Plan Discussion - Jennifer Priddy

-CORE 24

>>Questions over how CORE 24 fits in with ESHB 2261. Ms. Ryan explained that certain parts of CORE 24 are already in motion, namely the Algebra II requirement. And while other parts do still need action, 2261 seemed to support CORE 24 by saying high school should prepare students for post-secondary life. Ms. Priddy along with legislative staff clarified that 2261 has language that will go into effect in 2011 (including increase in instructional hours), but doesn’t mandate there be a implementation plan attached. However, the QEC’s January report is required to have an implementation recommendation.

-Instructional hours: 1,000 in elementary, 1,080 in secondary

>>Mr. Rushing asked what is considered “instructional.” Ms. Priddy said administrative code (WAC) lists what type of activities can be counted, and they will make that available. Sen. King asked if there are cost estimates for increasing instructional hours. Ms. Priddy said the increased instructional hours are meant to provide the opportunity for students to earn 24 credits in high school, and the baseline will be helpful in answering that question.

>>Dr. Hyde asked if the proposed accountability framework will be implemented without funding. Ms. Ryan said she hopes the State Board of Education can present on its work (CORE 24, accountability) at the December meeting to help people understand how it all comes together.

>>Ms. Ryan suggested that the QEC work with the proposal from Reps. Priest and Sullivan, make strong recommendations in January and then spend 2010 perfecting values. She also hoped the FFTWG could not dissolve, as the QEC is going to need technical guidance as they move forward. Rep. Sullivan said that if they want to move up other subgroups’ timelines, they can certainly include language to maintain the FFTWG.<<

1:40pm-1:55pm

Pupil Transportation - Isabel Muñoz-Colon

Presentation here

>>Sen. Zarelli asked why the cost went up. Ms. Muñoz-Colon said it did because the initial cost estimate did not include a transportation GIS analyst. Sen. Oemig asked if regulations around things like bus stop locations can be relaxed or loosened.

>>Supt. Dorn said the Legislature can decide to build the new transportation system whenever it has $806,000 to implement those changes. Funding the new system will come down the road.<<

1:55pm-2pm

Question Follow-Up - Isabel Muñoz-Colon

Presentation here

>>Sen. Zarelli asked if they can look at funding with salaries and benefits separated out, along with student-teacher ratio. Sen. Oemig asked if they can find out how many support staff are employed in other states.<<

2pm-2:50pm

Public Comment

Pat Montgomery, Auburn parent volunteer - clarifying earlier testimony, advocating for equity of opportunity for all students

Marie-Anne Harkness, librarian in Federal Way - thank you for keeping teacher-librarians in formulas, please implement increases sooner rather than later

Philip Mosely, high school science teacher in Fife - important to fully fund any program increases so schools don’t have to cut other offerings; reduction in class size is important

George Scarola, League of Education Voters - proposal from Reps. Priest and Sullivan is a good start, gets implementation started, recognizes three distinct cost categories (compensation, fundamentals, and program); like the investment in early learning, LAP/ELL programs, Beginning Education Support Team program, CORE 24; QEC should adopt 2018 values

Kim Howard, WA PTA - QEC needs to adopt crosswalk; need to consider how to phase-in new model as allocations with evidence of new programs

>>Sen. Zarelli asked a follow-up question about the allocation versus categorical issue. Ms. Howard said the end goal is to have a allocation model, but until the system is fully funded any increases may need to be categorical.

Lorraine Hirakawa, teacher in Puyallup - need to attract quality people to teaching

John Traxler, chemistry teacher - worried about use of National Board certified teachers as evaluators of other teachers

>>Dr. Hyde asked if he would be willing to serve as a coach or mentor. Mr. Traxler said he currently serves in that role and is happy to do it.

Molly Prater, teacher in Snoqualmie Valley - paraeducators are valuable in classrooms

Jim Kainber, Stand for Children - support adoption of crosswalk; appreciates inclusion of BEST program in proposal from Reps. Priest and Sullivan

Anne Melgaard, 3rd grade teacher in Snoqualmie Valley - teacher collaboration is important

>>Dr. Hyde asked if Ms. Melgaard is advocating for common planning time, or for teachers to not evaluate other teachers. Ms. Melgaard said she agreed with Mr. Traxler that teachers should not evaluate other teachers. Speaker Chopp asked if any teacher supports the idea of teachers evaluating other teachers. Answer from the audience: “no.”

Janice Trabin, Seattle parent - does not want the QEC to delay implementing ESHB 2261; fully fund gifted/talented education; budget cuts are limiting course offerings, decreasing counselors

Heidi Bennett, Seattle parent - basic education is underfunded, Washington students can’t get into state public universities; embarrassed by funding disparities between districts; high school graduation requirements are not adequate, need CORE 24

Deb, citizen from Pierce County - please include feedback from parents

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC

Posted on 02. Nov, 2009 by Heather.

We’re live on TVW.

Documents from the meeting are available here.

9:05am-10:25am

Workplan Discussion - Jennifer Priddy

-2018 values for prototype model

>>Superintendent Randy Dorn thought 2261 directs the QEC to look at the prototypical school model and propose 2018 values. Dr. Bette Hyde agreed. Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe didn’t think they could look at one area without looking at others [seems to disagree]. Rep. Pat Sullivan thought that, especially in light of the pending McCleary suit, the QEC does need to look at the whole, but also set priorities for phase in.

>>Sen. Curtis King had concerns about setting values for 2018; doesn’t want the state to lock itself in to values it may not be able to afford. Mary Jean Ryan thought the QEC does need to prioritize phase in, and look at the 2018 values in 2010 to at least give direction to their work. Sen. Eric Oemig thought he agreed with Ms. Ryan, and that they do need to figure out 2018 goals. Supt. Dorn said he doesn’t care if they are end “goals” or “values,” the QEC needs to have some 2018 recommendations for the Legislature. Dr. Jane Gutting said she wants to set 2018 values.

>>Dr. Hyde equated this work of the QEC to the early learning draft that’s being done - need to set the end goal so we know how to implement. Looking at the charge of the QEC, there are some deliverables due in January, but the QEC is also directed to keep going. Sen. Joseph Zarelli worried about setting 2018 values in statute because the state is then on the hook and we don’t want to obligate the state before we try some other low-cost options.

>>Rep. Skip Priest referenced the Doran decisions from the 1970s, and focused on the constitutional responsibility of the Legislature to fully fund basic education. Rep. Bruce Dammeier had concerns after the last meeting that the QEC would be prematurely setting 2018 values - without the Funding Formula Technical Working Group vetting numbers, knowing the full cost of everything and not considering everything that should be in the final plan. It is more important to him that the QEC get the numbers right rather than have numbers for the 2010 legislative session.

>>Supt. Dorn asked Ms. Priddy what 2261 requires the QEC to deliver in January. Ms. Priddy answered that the QEC report must include: beginning teacher mentor program, program of early learning, schedule for phasing-in new transportation formula, schedule for phase-in of changes to program of basic education, and resolving issues requiring legislative action in 2010 session.

>>Stephen Rushing said he’s hearing a lot of members wanting more information, and we need to make those needs clear so staff can get answers to the QEC quickly. He is concerned that they are going to get down to the wire and members are still going to be want more information, which will slow things down.

>>Rep. Sullivan said the QEC can’t lose momentum, and need to at least adopt crosswalk values, but should also push to have strong recommendations for 2018. He doesn’t want to have the courts tell them to be more aggressive 20 years later. Sen. McAuliffe said not all members are familiar with all of this work (from sitting on Basic Education Finance Task Force, etc.) and the QEC hasn’t discussed a lot of the values in the crosswalk. [Sen. McAuliffe probably meant the 2018 values] Supt. Dorn said that given the work of Washington Learns and the BEFTF, they need to adopt the crosswalk so they can keep going with their bigger tasks. In the end, they need to have those honest conversations and ask tough questions, because that is what’s best for kids. Sen. McAuliffe asked what happens to ELL students if they come to Washington in 11th grade. Supt. Dorn gave a sort of answer, and then spoke about the need to lower class sizes so we can get all kids to pass classes like Algebra II. [Then members went off on class size confusion..] Sen. Zarelli brought it back to class size as a cost driver, and the need to reduce the number of strings attached to school funding.

>>Rep. Sullivan reminded the group that the prototype model is meant for allocation purposes only; schools and districts can spend the funds as they see fit. Sen. King appreciated Rep. Sullivan’s reminder but doesn’t feel knowledgeable enough to set 2018 values. Dr. Hyde said more funding is needed, and the allocation model will drive dollars toward those best practices that have proved effective.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked what the workplan for 2010 is, and if that would help clarify things for some people, and Ms. Ryan should probably speak to that. Ms. Ryan sort of agreed, admitting that she doesn’t have a lot of patience with this process, and does see value in setting 2018 end goals. She also recognized the need to consider cost effectiveness and academic issues. She suggested the QEC create a “sketch” of 2018 so people can know what they are thinking and “calm down.” Sen. McAuliffe suggested Ms. Ryan work with staff to create a 2010 workplan.<<

10:40am - 11:10am

Proposed Implementation Plan - Reps. Priest and Sullivan

PowerPoint here. Entire proposal here.

-Adopt the crosswalk in the 2010 legislative session so the new formula can be implemented in 2011

-Include a program of early learning for at-risk 3- and 4-year-olds in the definition of basic education

-Adopt a preliminary implementation plan that phases in the redefined program of basic education and selected improvements to the prototypical funding model

• Phase in program of early learning over three years
• Continue phase in of full-day kindergarten
• Phase in new pupil transportation formula beginning in 2011
• Recommend increased instructional hours and CORE 24 to 2011 Legislature
• Convene Compensation and Local Finance work groups in May 2010
• Reduce K-3 class size over five-year period
• Increase allocations for librarians, student health and classified staff
• Increase instructional time for LAP and ELL
• Increase allocations for MSOC

-Monitor outcomes of the Beginning Educator Support Team program (mentoring/induction program)

>>Sen. Zarelli asked that if research shows negligible benefit for all-day versus half-day kindergarten, why we would spend a couple hundred million dollars to expand full-day K. And with early learning, if we only provide it to some kids, wouldn’t the state be sued for not providing a universal program? Rep. Priest said he would rather do all-day K all at once, but we don’t have the funds for that. And gifted/talented education probably isn’t basic education but it’s treated as such, and looking at LAP and other specialized programs, the courts would probably allow for a focused program of early learning to help those students most likely to struggle.<<

Discussion to continue after NBPTS symposium presentation

11:10am-12:10pm

National Board Certified Teacher Symposium: Report of Results - Michaela Miller, Sarah Applegate, Paul Rae, Cindy Rockholt, Gunnar Guttormsen

Recommendations here

-Top three funding priorities (first four years)

• Mentor/induction program for beginning teachers
• Reduction of class size for high-needs schools
• All-day kindergarten

>>Questions from members about instructional coaches, mentoring programs, teacher education programs<<

Lunch break until 1pm

1:05pm-3:10pm

Crosswalk of Current Funding into New Formula Structure - Neil Sullivan, Shawn Lewis, Stephen Nielsen

Presentation here

>>Questions and discussion over length of teacher work day, class size, cost to implement CORE 24, LAP/ELL funding (being categorical)

[Neil Sullivan made what is perhaps the only budget joke we will ever hear: insurance companies have been increasing premiums for school districts at rates greater than inflation, they didn't know about the Implicit Price Deflator rule - trust me, it's funny.]

>>Rep. Priest requested that clarity be pushed over precision; we don’t want to create another complex system that only experienced budget professionals can understand. Sen. McAuliffe would like everyone to remember that what students need to be successful isn’t necessarily reflected in the class size numbers.

>>Supt. Dorn asked what the Funding Formula Technical Working Group needs from the QEC. Mr. Nielsen said, for him, the direction given today that says the FFTWG should follow 2261 is helpful. Mr. Lewis appreciated the comments on keeping the formula clear and not stressing over the details; however he does see value in keeping details in the background while having a very transparent system in the foreground. He also thinks the Compensation and Local Finance groups should start their work sooner rather than later. Mr. Sullivan said he would like the end goal to have a more transparent budget reporting system, and accountability for districts, without the distrust that districts are “hiding” dollars.<<

3:15pm-3:40pm

Public Comment

Pat Montgomery, Auburn parent volunteer - need to make school funding more equitable

Rachel Aeby, kindergarten teacher in Franklin-Pierce School District - early learning will help more students arrive to kindergarten ready to learn

Pam, 5th grade teacher - would like QEC to enact real education reform, and don’t wait until 2018 to implement changes

Sam Fields, junior high science teacher in Bethel - concerns over teacher salaries and merit pay, reduction in school funding, and time dedicated to assessments

Convened until tomorrow

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC, day 2

Posted on 30. Sep, 2009 by Heather.

LIVE BLOG: QEC, day 2

9:10am-10am

Professional Educator Standards Board Update - Jennifer Wallace

PowerPoint is here.

>>Sen. Eric Oemig asked a rhetorical question about National Board certification being the equivalent of the proposed master level certification, implying the proposed master certification is unnecessary.

>>Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe raised concerns over the cut scores for the WEST-B (assessment for entrance into teacher education program) and the impact on teacher diversity.

>>Mary Jean Ryan asked who evaluates the pre-service assessment. Jennifer Wallace answered trained educators will evaluate the assessments.

>>Dr. Bette Hyde asked if districts would be able to ask for assessment scores from candidates. Ms. Wallace was unsure if scores would be used to inform district hiring decisions.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if this assessment would assist with certification reciprocity. Ms. Wallace said yes, these states would have reciprocity.

>>Ms. Ryan asked if teachers would use WASL scores as evidence of student work on the ProTeach portfolio. Ms. Wallace said that may be one piece of data teachers could use, but student evidence is meant to be from the classroom.

>>Sen. Oemig asked if the ProCert portfolio is meant to filter out “gross incompetence” and/or drive professional development. Ms. Wallace said both, although she didn’t like the term. The idea is that ProCert is awarded to teachers who have demonstrated a certain level of teaching mastery, and if candidates cannot pass the ProTeach portfolio then they should transition out of the profession.

>>Ms. Ryan asked if tenure is tied to certification. Ms. Wallace said tenure is a contract issue and not tied to certification.

>>Sen. King asked if ProCert has a expiration date. Ms. Wallace said ProCert is good for five years, and then needs to be renewed, which teachers can do through clock hours. The PESB needs to figure out what to do for renewal under the new system going forward (once the ProTeach portfolio is in place).

>> Dr. Hyde asked about giving clock hours for completing the ProTeach portfolio. Ms. Wallace said that is an option, but they would prefer teachers earn a pay bump for earning ProCert, but it’s not cheap. They calculated that a $1,500 pay bump for ProCert would cost the state $18 million.

>>Rep. Pat Sullivan mentioned that in ESHB 2261 the compensation work group starting in 2011 will look at the disconnect between certification and compensation. Ms. Ryan said they should be thinking about this now. Ms. Wallace agrees.

>>Rep. Sullivan said this was a big issue during the Basic Education Finance Task Force, and former Superintendent of Public Instruction Terry Bergeson was a big advocate for at least awarding teachers a one-time payout for completing ProCert, because of the cost to complete. Sen. McAuliffe said there is more an incentive to pursue National Board certification because of the ongoing pay bump.

>>Rep. Marcie Maxwell asked if the e-cert system is part of the early data work. Ms. Wallace was uncertain if e-cert was going to be online early on, and thought the CEDARS system was more of a priority.

>>Rep. Sullivan asked if the PESB is going to make a budget request for a ProCer pay bump. Ms. Wallace said they are having conversations with different bodies, but don’t plan on making a specific budget request.

>>Dr. Jane Gutting asked if the PESB has looked at the e-cert systems used by ESDs. Ms. Wallace said the e-cert office in OSPI may have.<<

10am-10:50am

Pupil Transportation Implementation Plan: OSPI Update - Allan Jones and Mike Kenney

Proposal is here. PowerPoint is here.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if they are looking at different start times for elementary and secondary, to increase efficiency. Mike Kenney said that will be part of their recommendation to districts, that they look at bell times and the like, but much of that depends on the geographic size of the district.

>>Sen. Oemig asked if every district provides transportation to students. Allan Jones said all districts do, either through their own system, or through contracting with a neighboring district. Mr. Jones added that school boards have the authority to decide if student transportation is necessary. Mr. Kenney said transportation is a part of basic education, and transportation cannot be a barrier to a student’s education. Sen. Oemig was concerned about districts being penalized (in funding) for making their transportation systems more efficient. Dr. Hyde asked if walking programs could be better used to combat child obesity and save transportation funds.

>>Sen. Joseph Zarelli said this may not be the final answer yet, and it may make more sense to allocate transportation on a FTE basis. We need to move to a system that encourages “out of the box” thinking on getting students to school.

>>Rep. Bruce Dammeier asked if they have a cost estimate for the new model using the road mile instead of the aerial mile. Mr. Jones said they didn’t have a concrete cost estimate. Rep. Dammeier asked if the state could save money by purchasing one routing program and give access to all districts, rather than purchase 295 copies. Mr. Jones said they plan to do that for small districts.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if there were incentives in the plan to get students out of cars and into school buses. Mr. Kenney said adequate funding will help. Mr. Jones said they didn’t want to get into the high school students in cars issue.

>>Dr. Gutting asked about state statistics on student injury and deaths due to transportation. Mr. Jones said the state has data on incidents related to school buses, but not to private transportation.

>>Stephen Rushing said incentives for more efficient transportation systems would be better, and systems should include funding for safe walking routes (supervisors, etc). Mr. Rushing also pointed out that high school students’ days start the earliest, but that doesn’t work best for teenagers’ biological clocks. But athletics and other activities conflict with that, so some rules may need to change.

>>Superintendent of Public Instruction Randy Dorn asked how long the study has been going on (answer: 5 years) and if the entire transportation community has been involved (answer: yes) and districts will be held harmless (answer: yes). Superintendent Dorn mentioned that most districts are cutting back on transportation system (eliminating stops, etc.). Then Superintendent Dorn asked how much is needed from the Legislature. Mr. Jones said they need $670,000 for development of the technology infrastructure. Dr. Hyde wondered if any federal funds could be used to fund the IT part of this.<<

11:05am-11:50am

Race to the Top Updates - Superintendent Randy Dorn and Mary Jean Ryan

-Began with reading a letter from the governor to the superintendent. In it, Gov. Gregoire said the plan is to submit a Race to the Top application in the first round, and if unsuccessful submit a second application in round two.

-Other states are changing laws in attempts to make themselves more competitive (Rhode Island, California, Colorado).

-SBE will be proposing language to the Legislature improving the SBE’s ability to work with low-performing schools.

>>Sen. Zarelli asked if Washington has to do all of the corrective actions under NCLB, or if we can pick and choose. He would prefer that we use outside teams to assess what is happening in struggling schools where everything has the potential to be on the chopping block. Ms. Ryan said that is part of the SBE proposed accountability plan.

>>Rep. Sullivan expressed concern over the state taking over struggling schools; the state knows what it needs to do, we just need to commit resources. Sen. McAuliffe asked what metrics would be used to determine which schools are “struggling.” Ms. Ryan said they are still working on that, and the SBE is trying to meld the proposed state system with the federal system.

>>Dr. Gutting asked about the steps of “academic watch” in the SBE plan. Ms. Ryan said the SBE would rather work with school boards, and does not want to take over schools.

>>Sen. McAuliffe wondered if voluntary focused assistance is successful (for OSPI’s program, yes), and if the state was providing enough funding (no).

>>Rep. Dammeier is excited about the SBE’s accountability work and think it gets to the heart of ESHB 2261.<<

11:50am-12:40pm

Public Comment

Jim Kainber, Stand for Children - hearing positive feedback from legislators re: education; encourage QEC to adopt a prototype model, will help direct work for Funding Formula Technical Working Group; induction piece is important in phase-in, easy early investment to make in teacher quality

Rick Allen, United Way of Pierce County - stressing importance of early learning

>>Sen. Zarelli made a statement that educating parents may be a better investment. Mr. Allen said he didn’t disagree, and envisioned an early learning system that included various providers, parents and state agencies to meet community needs.

Joel Ryan, Washington Head Start/ECEAP - would like early learning to be part of basic education; believe in universal preschool starting with at-risk children; Head Start and ECEAP focus on children and parents

>>Sen. McAuliffe made the comment that the ideal early learning system would serve children from birth to 5-year-olds.

Heidi Bennett, Seattle PTA parent - encourages QEC to adopt Superintendent Dorn’s proposed prototype model; increasing instructional hours is a priority; advocating for gifted/talented programs

Allen Jones, Tumwater School District - concerns over proposed funding for high-poverty schools, 50 percent poverty threshold creates unintended incentive, extended school day/year does not include transportation which is a big barrier for students, formulas show no connection to student achievement; proposing allocations be block grants based on student demographics, with successful districts receiving more flexibility and the struggling districts held to higher accountability; need to provide additional funding for struggling schools through the accountability system

Lucinda Young, WEA - clarified licensure, it is a document allowing an educator or administrator to apply for a job; concerns over ProTeach portfolio, calling it “high stakes:” prefer National Board certification; need to expand and fund teacher induction and mentoring program; hope any Race to the Top funds will enhance efforts already underway in Washington; state takeover and turnaround of schools has not been found to be effective

>>Sen. Oemig asked about the WEA’s position on certification renewal. Ms. Young said the renewal process has to be worth educators’ time and not be “arbitrary or capricious;” would like rigorous evaluation of the ProTeach portfolio.

Kim Howard, Washington State PTA - parents are tracking the work of the QEC; appreciate Superintendent Dorn’s proposed prototype; use findings from Washington Learns and the Basic Education Finance Task Force; sense of urgency for reform

1:30pm-1:35pm

Public Comment, continued

Doug Nelson, Public School Employees - supports Superintendent Dorn’s proposed prototype model; need training and professional development for classified employees; child nutrition should be addressed somewhere

1:35pm-2:45pm

Review of QEC Responsibilities - Jennifer Priddy

-Recommend a schedule for a phased-in implementation plan (section 114)

-Set the beginning and end values of the prototype model

-Funding Formula Technical Working Group to recommend to QEC an implementation plan; and focus on the technical issues around implementing a new funding model, not make policy decisions

>>Mr. Rushing asked if there is a list of questions from the FFTWG to the QEC. Ms. Priddy said the FFTWG needs to know the end point for 2018 in order to recommend a phase-in plan. Amy Skei from OFM said the FFTWG needs to know what class sizes to work with.

>>Rep. Skip Priest said the FFTWG got started late, and wondered what needs to be done to support them get work done at a faster pace. Ms. Skei said some of the FFTWG work depends on policy direction from the QEC.

>>Rep. Sullivan is also concerned about the late start of the FFTWG and QEC. During the Basic Education Finance Task Force there was concern that stakeholders were not given enough time to comment on proposals. And since not everyone on the QEC was on the BEFTF, it is too soon to adopt prototype values.

>>Rep. Dammeier asked if the QEC should adopt the prototype values before receiving information from the Achievement Gap Accountability and Oversight Committee, on implementing CORE 24, and other items.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if staff could set benchmark deadlines for all of the responsibilities of the QEC. Ms. Priddy said the law calls for several products, and those products are related. Staff has been trying to sequence things to match the timelines in the bill.

>>Sen. Oemig said he interpreted the bill to direct the QEC to recommend formulae and a prototype model without values, and program goals for 2018.

>>Rep. Maxwell said she believed there should be more of a partnership between the QEC and the FFTWG, and the FFTWG could benefit from the QEC at least forwarding them a framework.

>>Dr. Gutting said the sooner a prototype model with values can be pushed out to the public, the more feedback the QEC can receive. She felt there were more values in Superintendent Dorn’s proposal than the law calls for and asked those be separated out.

>>Ms. Ryan asked if the final values needed to be set in order to work on phasing in the new model. She also sees value in setting expectations for any 2018 values in the prototype. More debate needs to be done around instructional items, like smaller class sizes in high-poverty schools.

>>Sen. Curtis King agreed that they need to put current funding levels into the prototypical model, but aren’t ready to put in 2018 values.

>>Speaker Frank Chopp asked if Sen. McAuliffe was making a motion that a work plan be created. Sen. McAuliffe said she supposed she was, so she made a motion, seconded by Speaker Chopp. Superintendent Dorn said Cal Brodie from OSPI made a presentation on the timeline of work related to ESHB 2261. Sen. Oemig said he more interpreted Mr. Brodie’s presentation to be about deliverables of the bill, and would like to see a work plan for the deliverables of the QEC.

>>Rep. Sullivan said the QEC needs a work plan for now until January 1 - he sent out a memo with a proposed plan with Rep. Priest. The QEC also needs to recommend a prioritized phase-in plan as well, and they need the 2018 values to do that. He recommends they set the 2018 values and then ask for public comment on those values.

[Confusion over a supposed motion from Sen. McAuliffe, leading Superintendent Dorn to say he didn't want to be perceived as "dissing" Sen. McAuliffe by not addressing the motion.]

>>Rep. Dammeier supported having a work plan, and said they should meet more if that’s what is necessary to get the work done.

>>Rep. Priest said they need to remember that the crosswalk is important, putting current values into the new model. Districts need time to adapt to new reporting criteria. He asked if the QEC needed to set ending values for the work to keep moving forward. Ms. Priddy said current funding into the new model (the crosswalk) needs to be adopted by the Legislature in the 2010 session so the formula can be implemented beginning September 2011.

[Lots of confusion over what a crosswalk is, how complete the crosswalk is, and how non basic education funds fit in.]

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked is the crosswalk sets the baseline for the new model. Ms. Priddy said that was her understanding.

>>Sen. Oemig clarified that not all funds driven out through the prototype are basic education dollars, but they do need to be able to be driven out through the prototype (e.g. 728, K-4 enhancements). He agreed that the QEC needs to set the baseline, but they are also waiting for reports back from other groups.

>>Ms. Ryan proffered that the QEC needs to get updates sooner from all of its working groups. The QEC also needs to put forward revenue options for additions to the prototype. Dr. Gutting asked if that was a task for the Legislature, or the QEC. Ms. Ryan said the FFTWG is supposed to make recommendations, and it is implied to the QEC, depending on how one reads the bill.

>>Sen. McAuliffe said they also need to consider capacity of districts to implement any increases to the prototype. Rep. Sullivan said system capacity is a report due from OSPI to the QEC.

[Back to the motion that turned out to be a real motion...]

>>Sen. McAuliffe motioned that the QEC develop a work plan for now until January 1. Superintendent Dorn appointed Sen. McAuliffe, Rep. Dammeier, Sen. King and Rep. Sullivan to an ad hoc committee to create the work plan.

[Break!]

<!– /* Font Definitions */ @font-face {font-family:”Cambria Math”; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1107304683 0 0 159 0;} @font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-1610611985 1073750139 0 0 159 0;} /* Style Definitions */ p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:”"; margin-top:0in; margin-right:0in; margin-bottom:10.0pt; margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} p.MsoNoSpacing, li.MsoNoSpacing, div.MsoNoSpacing {mso-style-priority:1; mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:”"; margin:0in; margin-bottom:.0001pt; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:”Calibri”,”sans-serif”; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-bidi-font-family:”Times New Roman”;} .MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:10.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:10.0pt; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri;} @page Section1 {size:8.5in 11.0in; margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in; mso-header-margin:.5in; mso-footer-margin:.5in; mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1 {page:Section1;} –>

3:05pm-3:50pm

Discussion, continued

Motion #1: Adoption of a work plan

The QEC shall adopt a work plan to address the work products and processes to be undertaken between October 1 and January 1, 2010. The work plan shall specifically provide for the public input on the Dorn-proposed and Basic Education Finance Task Force 2018 funding values. Further, the work plan shall identify when the QEC will adopt a crosswalk of the current Basic Education funding (28A.150.160), operating budget level funding into the new prototype funding structure.

>>Sen. McAuliffe said she would like meeting dates to be part of the work plan. Upcoming meeting dates are November 2nd and 3rd, and November 30th and December 1st. Dr. Gutting suggested any work groups submit reports a few days before the early November meeting so they don’t have to spend so much time hearing reports and can instead get straight to work. Sen. King said Nov. 3-Dec. 1 doesn’t work for him; Superintendent Dorn said he could send an alternate.

>>Ms. Ryan asked the work plan go beyond January 1, 2010 to January 1, 2011. Rep. Priest said they only have so much staff and can’t ask them to do much more than they are already doing. He agrees with Ms. Ryan but doesn’t want to ask staff to focus beyond 2010 right now.

Original motion passed

>>Mr. Rushing said he would like to hear from Council members on what numbers in Superintendent Dorn’s proposal Council members do or don’t like. Speaker Chopp said he would like to hear from stakeholders first before wading through all of the values.

>>Superintendent Dorn asked members to provide feedback for the FFTWG.

>>Ms. Ryan said she has questions about reducing class size down to 15 for all K-3 classrooms, instead of just in high-poverty schools. She would like input on whether poverty enhancements go to districts or schools.

>>Sen. King asked about the 10 LIDs recommendation, as he isn’t clear that more than one LID should be part of basic education.

>>Sen. Oemig asked about phasing in transportation, and would like local effort assistance to be part of the prototype, as well as 728 funds. He would like to see more of those pieces in the prototype, in addition to categorical programs.

>>Mr. Rushing shared that data collection takes a lot of staff resources and time. He echoed Ms. Ryan and asked about smaller class sizes in lower grades and if it should be uniform rather than targeted. He also wondered if social workers and counselors are interchangeable, or if they are separate job descriptions. Superintendent Dorn clarified the scope of work of counselors (students) and social workers (community, families). Mr. Rushing then asked if it made more sense to separate social workers and nurses into two staff categories.

>>Superintendent Dorn reiterated that the prototype is meant for allocation purposes only, so districts can staff as they see best meeting students’ needs. Speaker Chopp said the social worker-nurse question is exactly why he would like public comment.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if Superintendent Dorn’s proposed number of guidance counselors made sense, especially in larger high schools — do high schools of 1,800 really need 10.5 guidance counselors. Superintendent Dorn said the work load of counseling departments has grown drastically, and students could benefit from better access to counselors.

>>Rep. Sullivan said he would like the QEC to ask the Achievement Gap Committee specifically for feedback about how ELL programs should be funded.

>>Rep. Dammeier would like feedback from the FFTWG and others about levies, as well as feedback from stakeholders about early learning and where smart investments can be made.

>>Sen. King would like the QEC to have a discussion about how the state runs ELL programs, whether immersion is better, etc.<<

Click here for coverage day one.

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC

Posted on 29. Sep, 2009 by Heather.

9:05am-9:55am

Funding Formula Technical Working Group Update and Crosswalk Progress - Julie Salvi and Jennifer Priddy

See the PowerPoint here.

>>Sen. Joseph Zarelli asked if the current class size in the crosswalk is based on teachers the state is funding or the number districts actually hire. Jennifer Priddy answered that these number are based on the number of teachers districts hire with the state allocation. Mary Jean Ryan pointed out that these numbers do not reflect staff funded through other funding sources, including local levies, 728, etc.; this information would be helpful moving forward.

>>Ms. Ryan asked about funding assumptions for principal salaries, since most local districts augment administrator salaries. QEC needs to think about that in the bigger picture moving forward, that administrator costs are higher than what the state is funding. Sen. Zarelli would like to see that data. Superintendent of Public Instruction Randy Dorn clarified that these numbers reflect what districts are actually buying, on average, with state allocations. Sen. Zarelli followed up that regional cost differentials are part of this, and doesn’t want to leave districts hanging later on because of regional differentials.

>>Stephen Rushing asked about administrator funding. Ms. Priddy answered that the state funds four administrators per 1,000 students at rates determined in the 1970s. Some districts receive $57,000/administrator from the state while others receive $85,000/administrator. Most administrators earn more than the baseline, leaving the difference to be picked up by districts.

>>Sen. Eric Oemig asked about the state’s ability to track supplemental salary for teachers (data system isn’t set up to collect this). Ms. Priddy said that is mostly correct, and some of the supplemental salaries are for coaches, National Board certified teachers, and the like.

>>Rep. Bruce Dammeier highlighted how helpful the crosswalk will be in phasing in the new funding model and setting phase-in priorities. Dr. Bette Hyde asked about 6th grade in middle schools and if that is reflected in the crosswalk. Ms. Priddy said that only 6th grade in elementary schools was included in the crosswalk.

>>Ms. Ryan asked about other basic education costs not in RCW. Ms. Priddy responded that in addition to staff allocations, NERCs and transportation are also considered basic education.

>>Sen. Zarelli asked about certificated staff allocations, and if the state provides specific funding for non-classroom staff (educational staff associates). Ms. Priddy said that ESAs are included in the certificated staff ratio and districts decide how many ESAs to hire. Sen. Cutis King asked about the library enhancement previously funded in the budget. Ms. Priddy said districts could use that allocation to either hire librarians and/or buy library materials; any FTEs purchased with that allocation are not reflected in ESA crosswalk. Sen. Zarelli indicated he would like to see how many teachers the state would fund in the prototype, not just the funded class size.<<

9:55am-10:20am

Early Learning Work Group Update - Dr. Bette Hyde and Superintendent Randy Dorn

One page update is here.

-Dr. Hyde clarified that this plan will be for Washington State as a whole, it won’t be just a Department of Early Learning Program - OSPI and DSHS will also have pieces of it.

>>Sen. Rosemary McAuliffe asked if any other states include early learning for at-risk children in basic education. Dr. Hyde said other states do provide universal preschool or preschool for at-risk children, but not part of basic education. Rep. Sullivan asked for more information about what other states are doing, in regard to state preschool programs.

>>Rep. Skip Priest brought up that investing in early learning programs can save money down the road. That information may be useful for this group, especially for those members interested in cost efficiency. Ms. Ryan asserted that the QEC needs to look at possibly return on investment in all areas, not just early learning.<<

10:20am-11:15am

Date Governance Update - Bob Butts, Debbie Spaulding and Allan Miedema

PowerPoint is available here.

-Bob Butts thinks enough money has been allocated to get the job done.

>>Rep. Priest asked if he just meant OSPI and the Date Governance Group, and not local districts. Mr. Butts said there is enough money to do what was called for in ESHB 2261. Rep. Priest asked if the group will determine what this new system will cost districts. Mr. Butts said that information will be collected during the gap analysis.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if the group will also look at unnecessary reports and perhaps reduce the data reporting burden on districts. Mr. Butts said Sen. King sponsored a bill in the previous session that directs that type of analysis to be done (identify duplicate and/or unnecessary reports).

>>Sen. Oemig asked about the ability to link student and teacher data. Mr. Butts said the group will look at that. Sen. Oemig asked when these reports would be available (per ESHB 2261). Ms. Priddy answered the question, saying he is asking about reports in subsection five of ESHB 2261, and OSPI does intend to produce those reports, but needs more staff.

>>Dr. Hyde asked about progress toward becoming a P-20 data system. Debbie Spaulding said they anticipate other data systems to tack onto the CEDARS Data Warehouse.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if online schools will be included in the data system. Allan Miedema said it is the hope that they would have reciprocity with online schools.

>>Rep. Priest said it sounds like much of the system is punitive, and asked about student mobility. Will teachers be able to use data to inform instruction, or for schools to be able to understand how to best help students who transfer to a new building? Mr. Butts indicated that the intent is for the system to help educators, schools and districts effectively teach students. Ms. Spaulding said that just yesterday these data can now be linked, and users indicated the need for a teacher portal to access the data.

>>Sen. Oemig said that in the bill it called for a “data improvement system,” with the intent that data be used to improve instruction, better match professional development opportunities with teachers, better identify student needs, etc.

>>Rep. Sullivan asked about implementing the expanded data system, and how that would be phased in. Mr. Butts said he didn’t know if the group would be able to do that.

>>Dr. Jane Gutting brought up that in the health care industry, practitioners enter data and are responsible for accuracy. In education, secretaries enter most of the data. How do we want to do data entry in the future? Mr. Miedema said that is a key part moving forward, and staff who enter data need training because they may have been moved from another role/position and don’t have data entry experience.

>>Superintendent Dorn asked if this new system would require every teacher to have access to a computer. Ms. Spaulding said that every teacher has access to a computer and the internet, many of whom have it in the classroom. Superintendent Dorn highlighted the need for teachers to have computers in the classroom.<<

11:35am-11:50am

Meeting Dates and Planning - Superintendent Dorn

-Recommend that the December meeting be two days

>>Dr. Hyde asked if the November meeting should also be two days.

>>Ms. Ryan suggested having a meeting later in December to better digest the recommendations of the Funding Formula Technical Working Group. Ms. Priddy said the legislation limits the QEC to only four meetings per year. Sen. McAuliffe said it was intentionally written that way. Ms. Ryan said it seemed the intent of ESHB 2261 was that the QEC could meet more than four times in 2009 because of startup needs, and then meet only four times in 2010 and beyond. Rep. Sullivan said he believed the intent of the legislation was the QEC could meet more than four times in 2009.<<

-Ms. Priddy presented how current ESA staffing in the prototype model translates to a per 1,000 students ratio (the information Sen. Zarelli was asking for).

11:50am-12:15pm

2018 Funding Values: SPI Proposal - Jennifer Priddy

Proposal is here. PowerPoint is here.

>>Sen. Zarelli asked what the range in class size is nationally. Ms. Priddy said Vermont has the smallest with 10.8, the U.S. average is 15.5, Washington has 19.1 and Utah has the largest with 22.1.

>>Sen. King asked if they looked at the research indicating smaller class sizes do have a positive impact in the early grades, but don’t necessarily in the other grades (citing a WSIPP study). Ms. Priddy answered that they are considering research, and that there is national research indicating smaller class sizes make a difference in high-poverty schools, and workload is an issue for secondary teachers.

>>Superintendent Dorn spoke to teacher workload and the benefits of reducing teacher workload. Sen. Zarelli responded that reducing teaching workload and lowering class size are two separate issues, and teacher workload can be reduced through other methods. Superintendent Dorn did not disagree. Rep. Priest jumped in saying the Basic Education Finance Task Force was a little arbitrary in selecting class sizes for the prototype and settled on many of the numbers because they were round (e.g. 25 instead of 26), and some of the small class sizes were meant to enable smaller schools and districts to offer more specialized programs like AP and CTE (otherwise they wouldn’t have enough students in the program to support it).

More on this after lunch…

1:05pm-3:05pm

2018 Funding Values: SPI Proposal, continued - Jennifer Priddy

>>Sen. Oemig questioned the use of national rankings since we don’t know what other supports all other states are providing.

>>Ms. Ryan would like some data disaggregated to help answer questions, e.g. is lowering class size in the early grades more effective for certain students? What about teacher compensation?

>>Sen. Zarelli said he doesn’t want to take just take the current funding model and increase spending; he would rather funding increases be targeted to effective investments. He would also like allocations be given to districts in block amounts to allow more flexibility. QEC needs to determine priorities for funding.

>>Dr. Gutting suggested members of the QEC sit down with the finance manager for their local districts to see what decisions districts are making and try to identify where the “fat” is.

>>Dr. Hyde said that the intent of the BEFTF’s recommendation was to hold districts accountable for results, and let districts decide how to spend funds. Rep. Sullivan agreed, citing differences between districts.

>>Sen. McAuliffe brought up different learning styles and the needs of today’s students.

>>Dr. Gutting said that they need to “get the most bang for their buck” with new investments but the state isn’t providing enough funding to “keep the doors open.”<<

>>Rep. Dammeier asked if the intent is that guidance counselors could be decreased down the road once dropout rates decrease. Superintendent Dorn spoke to the workload of guidance counselors and the benefit of having more counselors in schools. Rep. Dammeier asked for background on the BEFTF guidance counselor recommendation. Dr. Hyde said it was based on recommendations Picus and Odden made during Washington Learns.

>>Sen. Oemig asked if the intent was still that this model is for allocation purposes only and districts can choose to spend funds differently. Superintendent Dorn said yes, however, districts will probably follow it because districts will worry they will be held more accountable for deviating from the model. Rep. Dammeier asked if the model could include broader staffing categories (e.g. non-teaching staff) so districts can have more flexibility. Rep. Priest said the intent was for the model to lay out specific staffing ratios, citing librarians as an example of the import.<<

>>Sen. King asked how the state will hold districts accountable. If districts have the flexibility to spend funds as they see fit, and then don’t achieve to the desired level, what happens? QEC members pointed to Ms. Ryan for a response. Ms. Ryan said the State Board of Education is working on the accountability system, including improvement plans for low-performing schools and districts. Sen. Zarelli said we can do two things, 1) not promote students that don’t pass the grade, putting pressure on parents, and 2) not give anyone in the building raises if performance targets aren’t met - this way everyone will work together to improve achievement. Sen. King again said something about expectation of results.

>>Rep. Priest shared some background on the BEFTF, including members thinking on recommendations. He said, basically, the BEFTF didn’t want to get too bogged down and focused on those areas with the most impact on student learning (early learning, lower class sizes in early grades, etc.). Dr. Hyde followed up saying the big ideas behind the model were transparency and accountability.<<

>>Mr. Rushing asked about instructional aides, as no one he works with uses that term; does this include paraeducators? Ms. Priddy said it may include paraeducators, although these positions are often funded through special education, or pullout tutors.<<

>>Re maintenance, Sen. Zarelli asked if it made more sense to allocate on a square footage basis. Superintendent Dorn said schools have more going on in the evenings now than in the past, with sports, evening classes, community meetings, etc. which requires additional facilities maintenance. Sen. Zarelli said he understood but was wondering if a different method to determine funding made sense. Rep. Priest said that idea makes sense, and is worth exploring. Ms. Priddy said they have tried to run those numbers, but we don’t have accurate data on the square footage of the entire system. There are national studies that indicate the level of funding necessary to maintain facilities. Sen. Zarelli said the state does have the square footage for every school in the state. Ms. Priddy said they just haven’t collected the data at the state level and JLARC is working on that.

>>Sen. King proffered that state funds should not be used to maintain facilities built with local funds. Superintendent Dorn agreed but said levy funds are not just used for extras anymore. Sen. King agreed.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked about the maintenance supplies per student allocation from Washington Learns; it seems low. Ms. Priddy needs to double check it.<<

>>Mr. Rushing asked if the extended day tutoring in the Learning Assistance Program would occur outside of the school day. Ms. Priddy said it wasn’t prescriptive. Mr. Rushing then asked about transportation for such a program. Ms. Priddy said that could be built into the new transportation formula.<<

>>Sen. Zarelli asked if the ELL program is based on research, because research he’s seen would point in another direction — especially with the growing ELL population. Ms. Ryan mentioned the work being done with ELL students in Spokane, and the strong results they are seeing. Sen. Zarelli again stressed not just putting more money into the system, but spending wisely. Ms. Ryan agreed with him, and cited the need for these programs. Sen. Zarelli added that he just wants Washington to look at best practices from other states and within the state. Dr. Gutting said she would also like to see the research on effective programs for ELL students. Rep. Priest agreed, but added that some districts have greater needs in this area (i.e. more languages spoken at home) and may need greater funding.

>>Sen. McAuliffe said this reminds her of 1209, where the state said it would set the standards then provide the funding to get there.<<

>>Sen. King asked why the state would fund 10 learning improvement days. Ms. Priddy said Picus and Odden recommend 10 LIDs, and WSIPP found research that said increasing LIDs can increase student achievement. Mr. Rushing added that LIDs are in addition to the 180 instructional days. Ms. Ryan brought up that the SBE spends too much time processing waiver requests from districts asking to reduce student instructional days to offer one or two staff professional development days, so if the state pays for 10 LIDs then districts should not be able to apply for those waivers. Ms. Ryan added that any professional development needs to be effective, and curriculum needs to support our academic standards, diagnostic and formative assessments should also be invested in.

>>Sen. Zarelli said he would like to see these built into the academic year, rather than be add-ons. Sen. McAuliffe agreed with Sen. Zarelli, and thought we may not want to think of them just as days, but imbedded in the school year. Mr. Rushing said the funds could instead pay for release time for teachers, and the substitutes that would also be needed, to allow teachers to meet during the school day, or observe other teachers.

>>Ms. Ryan asked about the difference between LIDs and the professional development MSOC allocation. Ms. Priddy said the LID allocation would pay the teacher salary for that professional development, and the MSOC allocation would cover contracted costs (trainer, travel, materials) and costs for professional development for all staff (classified, etc.).<<

>>Questions about the amount of funding local levies provide, including funding for supplemental salaries and transportation. Ms. Ryan mentioned the COLA.

>>Members asked for a break down of QEC responsibilities beyond the prototype, will help inform priorities going forward.

>>Rep. Dammeier asked if increasing state funding to the national average (along with accountability) will push student achievement higher (since Washington’s student achievement is above average with below average spending). Ms. Priddy said research supports a “yes” answer.

>>Mr. Rushing asked what would happen to funds like 728 when the state transitions to the new model. Ms. Priddy said she doesn’t recall what happens specifically to 728, but that is a policy question to consider, probably just roll 728 into the general fund.<<

3:15pm-3:50pm

Public Comment

Laura Kohn, The New School Foundation - success of The New School, emphasizing investments in the early years

John Bancroft, White Center Early Learning Initiative - stressing the importance of early learning programs, ECEAP/Head Start not adequately funded

George Scarola, League of Education Voters - QEC needs to do three things: 1) develop program for early learning, specifically preschool for 4-year-olds, 2) adopt the prototype model, and 3) create a phase-in plan

Sarah Francis, MomsRising - parents need access to early learning opportunities

Allen Jones, director of finance, Tumwater School District - use the current accountability system, give districts flexibility

Hilary Ryan, parent - early childhood education is very important

3:50pm-4:05pm

Looking to tomorrow

>>Sen. King is unsure of whether LIDs are meant to be included in basic education.

>>Sen. Oemig thinks the QEC should adopt the categories for the prototype, and is less concerned with setting the 2018 amounts right now.

>>Sen. Zarelli said local funding fits into this, and it needs to be considered.

>>Rep. Priest asked for clarification of the tasks before the QEC and the Funding Formula Technical Working Group - who fills in the prototype? Can we direct the FFTWG to vet the numbers in Superintendent Dorn’s proposal? Rep. Marcie Maxwell agreed that things need to move forward.

>>Sen. McAuliffe said the FFTWG is working, and it’s too early for the QEC to make a recommendation, and the QEC should wait for the FFTWG’s recommendations.

>>Mr. Rushing said he would like more time for discussion. Dr. Gutting said she doesn’t want to pre-decide if the QEC can make a decision tomorrow, but think about things tonight and come prepared for good discussion tomorrow.

>>Rep. Dammeier suggested everyone think about this proposal tonight, come prepared to discuss tomorrow and at least set some priorities tomorrow. Ms. Ryan asked about the importance of setting ending values.<<

Click here for coverage of day 2.

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC

Posted on 27. Aug, 2009 by Heather.

2:10pm-2:15pm

Transition to the New Funding Formula Structure - Cal Brodie

>>Sen. Zarelli said this needs to include a revamp of the accounting system, so we know what each dollar buys.<<

2:15pm-2:30pm

Public Comment

David Spring, parent from North Bend - Stressed urgency to find funding solution, implement reforms; tax reform is necessary, has solution for consideration

Tim Knue, Association for Career and Technical Educators - Looks forward to implementation of reforms; don’t forget about CTE, we want to work with you

Pat Montgomery, parent from Auburn - Don’t forget about equity, and paramount duty of the state; be leaders on reform

Rep. Ross Hunter - Allocation model is meant to be building based, not district based, and funding for higher poverty levels is meant to go to the schools with larger populations of low-income students

John Stokes, parent from Bellevue - Supports work of the QEC, parents are here to help; additional funding won’t come until we have reforms; think about what it takes to educate all kids to the highest levels; don’t let more kids fall through the cracks

2:30pm-2:55pm

Other Items for Consideration

>>Rep. Sullivan suggested the QEC also get updates from the Achievement Gap Committee.

>>Sen. McAuliffe would like to have a conversation about how the QEC can help direct legislation.

>>Sen. Zarelli asked about meeting materials, and if they are available online and whether they will always get printed materials. Ms. Priddy said each member gets to indicate their preference.

>>Ms. Ryan would like the QEC to address prioritization of the prototype model, as well as sequencing of implementation. QEC also needs to look at revenue plan. Ms. Ryan would like to see a work plan for the QEC for the near future, worries the group won’t be able to meet deadlines unless they have a loose work plan. Other members agree.

>>Sen. McAuliffe would like the dates of upcoming meetings for 2261 workgroups, State Board of Education and Professional Educator Standards Board [the SBE and PESB publish meeting dates at the beginning of each calendar year]. Ms. Priddy shared information about a forum OSPI is hosting with National Board certified teachers, on October 17. Ms. Ryan offered that the SBE has a CORE 24 Implementation Task Force, and could give a briefing to the QEC, along with the System Performance Accountability Work Group. Ms. Ryan added that public engagement is very important, and the QEC could really benefit from it.

>>Sen. Oemig would like to see the meetings focus largely on the prototype, since they have so much work to do around it. It may be beneficial for members to serve on parallel tracks, since some do not have extensive budget experience.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked if the Washington State Institute for Public Policy ever ran a cost estimate for reforms using existing costs. Staff pointed out the BEFTF final recommendations included cost estimates.

>>Supt. Dorn said he hopes everyone can make every meeting, will help show the QEC is serious about its task.<<

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC

Posted on 27. Aug, 2009 by Heather.

12:30pm-1:20pm

Discussion Related to Prototypical Elements - Jennifer Priddy

>>Ms. Ryan asked about system costs not incurred by schools or districts (State Board of Education, etc) and how they fit into the model; QEC should look at that.

>>Rep. Priest asked about transparency and if the Funding Formula Technical Working Group understands the importance of it. At last week’s meeting it didn’t seem like members thought transparency was a big deal. Ms. Priddy answered yes and no, as an agency they are clear but FFTWG didn’t quite get there, need to reemphasize it to members.

>>Se. Zarelli expressed concern over focusing on categories, instead of actual costs of desired results. He doesn’t want the state to take away flexibility of districts and schools to meets students’ needs by “funding boxes.” Rep. Sullivan said that the model is meant for allocation purposes only and districts/schools can spend as they see fit. And with the transparency component, parents can compare the state allocation to actual expenditures. Rep. Priest spoke to the importance of looking at the “non-sexy” issues related to education, especially the costs just to keep the school doors open, and the need to know actual costs incurred by districts.

>>Sen. Oemig would like to see actual categorical costs to serve kids then divide for a per student allocation.

>>Stephen Rushing asked about class size considerations and differentiation of instructional technology and maintenance technology. He does agree with the thinking of focusing on outcomes, but did say it can be challenging to think about it in a different way than is currently done.

>>Rep. Dammeier asked about paraeducators (where they fit in to the model), maintenance/technology funding (where state funding ends and levy funding begins) and separating out central office costs. Ms. Priddy said “instructional aides” is synonymous with paraeducators. For maintenance/technology costs, the state needs to figure out its responsibility then they can report what districts are responsible for.

>>Dr. Hyde said she would also like to see central office costs separated out. She asked if class size for high school included the necessary periods to implement CORE 24. Ms. Priddy said one of the things they are considering is the definition of teacher planning time, but they are operating in the current funding parameters. For implementation, they need to determine the starting point and then how to get to the outcome outlined in ESHB 2261.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked about professional development for paraeducators, saying its important to include. Sen. King indicated the FFTWG may need to consider the change in need for instructional aides if class sizes are reduced.

>>Supt. Dorn brought up that state funding per student has dropped significantly, but we still run a fairly efficient system, and local levies subsidize many basic education costs.

>>Mr. Rushing asked about the length of the school day, and said they are already trying to cram so much in. Sen. King offered that they may want to make the school year longer with shorter school days.<<

1:20pm-1:55pm

Crosswalk of Current Funding Levels to New Structure - Jennifer Priddy

>>Ms. Ryan said she would like to see state funding broken out by what it actually funds, so as they develop an implementation plan, the state’s share of basic education funding increases to 100 percent. Ms. Priddy answered that once they finalize the prototype, they will be able to show the difference between what the sate provides and what districts are actually spending.

On moving from Non-Employee Related Costs to Materials, Supplies and Other Costs

>>Sen. Oemig suggested the FFTWG presume the state pays all NERC/MSOC costs but only pays for a portion of actual classrooms/class sizes. Ms. Priddy said they had not considered that, and is unsure about that approach as the state has a prescribed maximum class size but would present the idea to the group.

>>Sen. Zarelli said they shouldn’t presume actual district costs are representative of efficient spending. Perhaps the state should buy insurance for all districts, and then provide less in MSOCs. Ms. Priddy said she will present that to the FFTWG, could also be applied for things like auditor’s costs. Sen. King asked about incentives for schools and districts to be more efficient, namely around energy costs. Dr. Gutting said, then, the group should look at performance audits of districts. Sen. McAuliffe countered that performance audits don’t always think about what it actually takes to run schools (e.g. its inefficient to use portables, but the solution is either build new facilities or increase class sizes, neither of which is necessarily feasible for districts).

Generally Speaking

>>Ms. Ryan asked who determines the end values for the prototype. Ms. Priddy said staff was hoping the QEC would provide guidance to the FFTWG on the end values.<<

Continue Reading

LIVE BLOG: QEC

Posted on 27. Aug, 2009 by Heather.

10:45am-11:20am

Federal Race to the Top Funds - Judy Hartmann

Ms. Hartmann shared the governor’s office is hoping the Gates Foundation will provide a grant for the state to complete a Race to the Top application.

>>Mary Jean Ryan said it’s worth it for the state to complete an application, since we’re looking at potentially hundreds of millions of dollars, and possibly the only new money for education anytime soon.

>>Sen. Zarelli liked Ms. Hartmann’s notes that we need to implement reforms that are sustainable, and find long-term sustainable funding sources.

>>Rep. Priest brought up that tomorrow is also the deadline for the state to send a letter to the U.S. Department of Education about the requirements, citing charter schools as an issue the state will want to address (and the possibility of the state to cite schools like Aviation High School as substitutes). Ms. Hartmann said they are working on two letters, one for the State Fiscal Stabilization Fund, phase two and Race to the Top. As for charter schools, the application seems like it’s a “check the box” or “fill in the number” process, rather than demonstrate alternatives, which the state’s letter will address. Speaker Frank Chopp asked if Rep. Priest is making a motion that the QEC also send a letter. Rep. Priest said he would gladly support that idea. Supt. Dorn said his office has been working closely with the governor’s office on this, and they have been talking with the U.S. Department of Education around these issues. He also brought up our murky language around the authority of the state to intervene in low-performing schools and districts. Supt. Dorn said the state is ultimately in charge of Washington’s education system, and gets to decide how close it wants to move toward what President Obama and Secretary Duncan seem to want.

>>Sen. Oemig asked if capital facilities are eligible (answer: no) and if they are partnering with local districts. Ms. Hartmann gave a roundabout answer saying districts are important to this effort.

>>Rep. Sullivan asked if the QEC could have a copy of the letter this afternoon, even if a draft. Ms. Hartmann didn’t know if she could do that. Supt. Dorn said he had no objection to it.

>>Rep. Dammeier asked if the congressional delegation was being engaged. Supt. Dorn said they will be informed.

>>Dr. Hyde agreed with the idea being circulated by Reps. Chopp, Sullivan and Priest. Speaker Chopp joked they could check the box then explain [laughter all around].

>>Supt. Dorn said Washington often has a different name for things, and our system is just a little different.<<

11:20am-11:40am

Funding Formula Technical Working Group Update - Julie Salvi

>>Rep. Dammeier asked if by district-wide allocation, they were recommending that this was by grade for the prototype (answer: yes).

>>Dr. Hyde asked if the group has discussed determining poverty levels, and perhaps differentiating for various levels. Julie Salvi said they will discuss at the next meeting.

>>Sen. King asked if the group will look at current expenditures during consideration of additional funding sources. Ms. Salvi said one of the questions before the group is “Where is the starting point?” which will help inform the group’s recommendations.

>>Sen. McAuliffe asked about doing allocations on a district level, and how parents will look at their schools and figure out prototype allocations. Ms. Salvi said there are different ways to do that.

>>Rep. Maxwell brought up the discussion at the meeting around varying poverty levels of schools in the same district, and how allocating by district could be complicated by that. Ms. Salvi said the group did not come to a resolution on that and will revisit at its meeting next week.

>>Sen. Zarelli clarified Sen. King’s point that the group needs to figure out what “zero” is. He also said they should determine a percentage of allocated funds that are actually spent on what they were intended to fund (e.g. teachers).<<

Continue Reading