Summary of the State Board of Education Special Meeting

Governmental Relations Dr. Tim Ogle, Executive Director Janice Palmer, Director of Governmental Relations & Public Affairs Geoff Esposito, Governmental Relations Analyst

Summary of the State Board of Education Special Meeting August 14, 2015

MEMBERS PRESENT: Greg Miller, President; Reginald Ballantyne, Vice Chair; Diane Douglas, Superintendent of Public Instruction; Dr. James Rottweiler, Community College President; Dr. Roger Jacks, Superintendent; Tim Carter, County School Superintendent; Chuck Schmidt, Public Member; and Jared Taylor, Public Member. Members Absent: Dr. Michael Crow, University President, Amy Hamilton, Classroom Teacher and Chris Deschene, Public Member. CALL TO THE PUBLIC  Kelley Murphy, Children’s Action Alliance Director of Early Childhood Policy, stated that it is critical that students get the support they need for early reading skills and that while the $40 million for the Move on When Reading program is a good start, more resources are needed. GENERAL SESSION 1. The Board unanimously approved, on a roll call vote, the proposed AzMERIT performance levels/cut scores. Dr. Leila Williams, Associate Superintendent of High Quality Assessments and Adult Education, presented that standard setting committee stayed focused on the SBE values, including wanting results in a timely manner for the first year. Irene Hunting, ADE Deputy Director of Assessment, further stated that the American Institutes for Research (AIR), the assessment provider, has given its endorsement that the cuts scores are technically and psychometrically sound. Ms. Hunting stated that the educators that participated in the standard setting process upheld the SBE values and that the cuts scores are at least as rigorous as the ACT college ready benchmark standards. Further, ADE and AIR separately conducted mode comparability studies to determine any assessment differences based on mode (paper/pencil v. online); both found no difference. Last, a representative from AIR stated that the bookmark method was used for this standard setting and described in detail the standard setting process, including what each day entailed.  Dr. Joe O’Reilly, Mesa Public Schools Executive Director for Student Achievement Support, referenced the letter sent to the Board expressing his and two other representatives to the state’s assessment Technical Advisory Committee observations of the standard setting process. They all felt that it was a very well organized, professionally run process. He stated that teachers took the SBE’s goals to heart and set rigorous cut scores to reflect that. Last, he provided the example of Pennsylvania, in which the media reported large number of students failing and the example of Idaho, in which the media stated that standards were increased and the disappointing results were expected. He urged the media to choose the latter in reporting Arizona’s scores.  Becky Hill, representing the Arizona Chamber of Commerce, congratulated the Board for setting high standards and creating the precedence of honesty to our students, parents, and community. She urged the Board to continue on this path and to resist the urge to scale back any rigor. Last, she also stated concern on the sample parent reports as being confusing and the need to revisit and revise those reports.  Gina Ballman, a teacher on the standards setting committee, described the process.  Analisa Kirsch, a member of the standards setting committee, stated that she worked on the 7th and 8th grade math standards and supports the recommended cut scores.  Dr. Ildi Laczko-Kerr, AZ Charter Schools Association Vice President of Academics, urged the Board to support teachers who were part of the standard setting process by approving the student cut scores recommended and thanked ADE staff for all of their work.  Dr. Patricia Tate, Osborn Elementary School District Superintendent, stated that the recommended cut scores upholds increased standards and align with Osborn’s commitment to excellence.

2



Mike Huckins, Greater Phoenix Chamber of Commerce Vice President of Public Affairs, appreciated the Board’s commitment to high standards. The Phoenix Chamber continues to work with the business community to support these higher standards and will have a video coming out soon to help get the message out.  Erin Hart, Expect More Arizona Chief Operating Officer, expressed EMA’s support of high standards and rigorous cuts scores; however, there is still more work to be done. She provided the Board with feedback on the parent reports, specifically stating the need for clarification on the Move on When Reading score and the need for context about what the proficiency levels mean.  Arlon Cardenas, teacher on the standards setting committee, spoke about the process and his support of the recommendations.  Jennifer Reynolds, stated that she is a parent, was not involved in this process, and she found that problematic. Further, she asked the Board not to move forward, as there is currently a Standard Review Committee meeting to replace the Common Core standards. Thus, she stated that the Board should wait for that process to finish before having to be back here one year from now.  Lisa Hoberg, Scottsdale Parent Council Vice President Legislative Liaison, requested additional attention to the parent reports to ensure that they are easy to understand.  Joe Thomas, AEA Vice President, stated that teachers support increased standards and rigor; however, they need the resources and continued support to be successful in meeting these expectations.  Rebecca Gau, Stand for Children CEO, supported the recommendations and urged the Board to keep this high standard level into the future.  Janice Palmer, ASBA Director of Governmental Relations & Public Affairs, stated ASBA’s support of the process, thanking ADE staff, educators that participated in the standard setting committee, and SBE staff. Further, she articulated that this was only one step in a longer process, in which the extra time taken (and tabled agenda items) to get the performance level descriptors right provided the key direction to the standard setting committee, resulting in strong, rigorous cut scores. Last, she stated that this isn't the end of the process, but more about halfway, as we need to communicate to parents how their students are performing, school boards need to be able to articulate to their community the increased rigor, and other members of the public.  Joe Guesig, a parent in Gilbert, asked the Board “Why educate?” He was pleased with the high level of rigor shown in the recommendations and was supportive. Vice President Ballantyne, Superintendent Douglas, and Member Rottweiler all expressed their appreciation to ADE and SBE staff, as well as to all of those who helped bring us to this day. Member Rottweiler stated that he felt “hopeful for Arizona’s future.” Last, Member Taylor expressed his desire to reflect on what could be done better in the future to set teachers up for success. 2. The Board tabled the adoption of a “Move on When Reading” cuts score for AzMERIT Grade 3, English Language Arts (ELA) until the August 24th meeting. Ms. Hunting stated that the standard setting committee was directed not to focus on MOWR, rather, to focus on the performance level indicators when determining Grade 3 (and all grades) cuts scores. ADE’s recommendation would be comparable to “falls far below” on the current AIMS reading exam.  Dr. Laczko-Kerr expressed concern that the Board would deviate from the high standards that were just approved and move essentially backwards. While she stated that the resources to assist the 44% of 3rd graders scoring at minimally proficient would be problematic, she felt the issue needed to be raised and the conversation to take place. She

3

also suggested that the Board articulate that the MOWR cut score would be set at a “Board level” and then revisit it if it remained in its current recommended form. After much discussion from Board members, it was determined that the following needed to be addressed at the August 24th Board meeting: 1) determination whether the Board had the legal authority to present an ELA score or if it must determine a reading proficiency level only as it relates to MOWR; 2) if the SBE must approve a reading proficiency level only, what options are there available (besides the presented comparability with AIMS “falls far below”) to ensure rigor; and 3) if two scores are required (one ELA and one MOWR for 3rd graders), options to ensure clarity for the student reports to parents. 3. Audra Ahumada, ADE Director of Alternative Assessment, presented the Board with proposed performance levels/cuts scores for the National Center and State Collaborative Alternate Assessment (NCSC). Of the approximate 84,000 Arizona special needs students, over 7,000 students were administered this exam. This item will be brought back at the August 24th Board meeting for approval. 4. The Board approved, on a 7-1 vote with Supt. Douglas dissenting, Christine Thompson, SBE Executive Director, to fill Board staff vacancies in the positions of Deputy Director and Administrative Assistance for the Investigative Unit, including consideration of the Superintendent’s recommendation and those of other Board members. 5. Mary O’Grady, SBE outside counsel with Osborn Maledon, provided the SBE with an update on Douglas v. State Board of Education. She stated the Superior Court had dismissed the lawsuit; however, a final judgment has yet to be issued. Once this judgment is entered, she expects an appeal from the Superintendent. The Board then voted to go into Executive Session for discussion or consultation for legal advice. Next regular meeting of the State Board of Education will be on August 24, 2015

4