This is the "one on the MCAS" though note that updating the state's accountability regs is also on today's agenda, as is a bullying regulation change, and an update on the budget. Because this was not a regularly scheduled meeting, I will not be liveblogging it all, but will catch up later.
Posting as we go once the meeting starts...jumping in mid-public testimony
Interesting: the livestream missed this, but as the first panel was being introduced, there was a member of the public yelling about "no child is safe" though it was unclear on exactly what.
Senators Comerford and Jehlen here, speaking against the proposed increase to the competency determination
Comerford: these investments in our schools meet the moment, when there has been incalculable harm to students
students who otherwise fulfill graduation requirements not graduating
notes systemic challenges "that individual students will pay for"
disproportionally low income, English learners, students of color
"of course we need data and evaluation"
individual students "will pay the price with their precious futures"
Jehlen:
Rep. Jim Hawkins speaking as a former 10th math teacher
may have to cause more students to take remedial courses
Jehlen: ask you not to raise our passing score
students learning English: children most affected by raising the passing scores don't yet read and write English fluently
what happens to students who don't pass; more likely to drop out
without a diploma or a GED; can't get into college, the military, certificate programs
persist and stay in school, won't help them to learn English faster
"not communication skills they need"
not internships, applied skills that business leaders say they need
"please don't raise this barrier to their success"
MTA President Max Page
"not here to plead with you against a vote to raise MCAS scores; you already made pretty clear in public and no doubt in private meetings that you intend to do so"
others will speak more specifically to the problems of lifting the MCAS
"you've fetishized an approach to education that is the very least outdated, and at the most destructive of our schools and communities"
extended metaphor here about mood rings and REO Speedwagon
"then I grew older and then I grew up"
"obsessed with a test" from 20 years ago
"looking beyond this meeting today," waiting for replacement of board who "will replace this travesty"
"we must face the fact" that we've never had schools that base their goals on "the joy of the individual instead of the fear of social dynamite or the imperatives of economic growth"
"It struck me that we have a fundamental difference on the purpose of what schools are for"
different vision of education "won't happen with the people in front of me" but will with those "beside me and behind me"
"we'll be here...for as long as it takes to tear down the system that you're perpetuating"
MTA Vice President Deb McCarthy who opens by quoting Mother Jones on the Children's Crusade
says she was elected as a direct result of MCAS fight
"has caused real harm and trauma for children in this Commonwealth"
he runs through her experience as a teacher of fifth graders these past few years; she said students in her class spent 65% of their school year "on the repetitive drills of a multiple choice test"
her students participated in 24 days of online testing; 18 days for Galileo (which must be a local choice) and 6 for MCAS
"they lost a year and a half of gym, music, and art" (I think this is referencing the pandemic, but it isn't clear to me why that was necessary?)
for two and a half years "they were isolated" and working on Chromebooks
"not only harmful, but purposeful negligence" to raise scores now
Quotes Mother Jones: "Some day the workers will take possession of your city hall, and when we do, no child will be sacrificed on the altar of profit"
time to stop testing used for "creating a two tiered educational system in this Commonwealth"
"It is time to stop the harm to our Black and brown communities by data that is used to red-line school districts"
Joe Herosy reading a letter from Barbara Rose of Hudson who was on the Hudson School Committee
says her son failed both components of the MCAS when he took it
Questions relevance; says students have ground to make up
asks if there is any data showing benefits of raising scores
Says it is unwise to raise the scores
Sarah Bol special education teacher in New Bedford
"our students are struggling"
"having a conversation about raising educational standards and having a discussion about raising MCAS scores" are two different things
we do need to do better for all our children
Lisa Graf speaking on the budget on COVID safety
HVAC upgrades and outdoor spaces for meals
pool testing, rapid testing
vaccination deployment (shouting in the room)
highly protected masks (more shouting)
policies that help us to support each other and support those disportionally impacted
and there is now more shouting as she finishes
Chair Craven welcomes the new student rep from Westford Eric Plankey
Farzana Mohamed of Newton
Tricia Canavan of South Hadley
and thanks the two prior members
Peyser notes inclusive concurrent enrollment program in expanding college access
bill on mental health enacted last week
$100M to continue skills capital grant program
economic development bill not done: section on COVID relief to meet minimum NSS requirements and "hope there will be an opportunity to revisit that before the end of the calendar year"
Riley: looking forward to school getting "as fully back to pre-pandemic norms as possible"
DPH and DESE
should focus on "vulnerable" and
"not recommending universal masking requirement"
statewide mandate in school health offices
phased out testing program last spring
The presentation shared is online here
Curtin notes that some of the slides have been shared before, but there are new members who may need or wish further context.
Timeline dating back to the Ed Reform Act of 1993:
Competency determination advisory committee
Extended interim competency standard a couple of times
class of '26, incoming 9th grade class, does not have a competency determination
two main consensus points from the advisory committee:
1. current standard as it exists and the work around that standard did not meet what would be considered competency for high school graduation; did not raise a particular point for a new standard, but simply that the current standard did not meet it
2. The Department needed to redouble efforts around messaging as it relates to the competency determination, around supports offered districts, around processes that surround the educational proficiency plans
Commissioner then brought recommendation of '26-'29 as follows:
the 472 falls into the bottom of the partially meeting expectations; the 486 is one point higher than the midpoint of the partially meeting expectation
Minimal change proposed in math
Science currently going through standard setting
Other alternative pathways: retest (up to four additional opportunities); cohort appeals (districts can submit data about the student compared to a cohort of that student); competency portfolio appeal (district submits portfolio on behalf of student)
Not new: appeals processes have been part of the competency determination since the early 2000's
"would agree...that we could redouble our efforts that we could communicate better" about these options
Rouhanifard asks how many are approved; Curtin says appeals options have been used to varied levels
For students who arrive after the final retest opportunity, the Department offers a transcript appeal; those in military families have an additional pathway
Total appeals: 16,204 appeals submitted since 2004
on average in a year there are about 800 cohort appeals, 100 portfolio appeals
about 280 districts have submitted appeal; there are about 340 with high schools, so not everyone have taken advantage of the process
Stewart comments that it's not good that some districts are more familiar with this than others
Curtin: regardless of vote, better communication with districts about process and familiarity
Stewart: plan to engage parents
Curtin: college and career office effort; educational proficiency plan has to be given to parents and guardians
better ways to help districts communication with parents in the EPP process
Take seriously that reflection from the advisory
Canavan: is this included in materials for parents?
Curtin: there's additional materials in the mailing for grade 10 students
Summary of public comment:
Motion and second to discuss the proposal
Stewart: is there a meaningful state credential for those who do not pass MCAS?
Curtin: districts are able to offer a certificate of attainment for those who meet the local requirements but not the requirements for the competency determination. About 1% of class annually
Stewart: does it allow those who get it to go to a college or to get a job?
Curtin: can't speak to the job, for the state college and university system, it takes a diploma
different standards for the community college system
Stewart: received a lot of public comment on impact of raising the CD on historically marginalized groups; what is your office's understanding on what raising the scores will have on those populations?
Curtin: we have looked at and have provided to both the CD advisory committee and the Commissioner prior to making this proposal
there is both the impact on raising the MCAS scores as well as the increase in supports that are being proposed
have to be certain there is guidance and support around those for districts
Stewart: 11% overall part of 3-22 population
28% of students who do not earn a diploma in 5 years
"my concern is seeing an insurmountable equity problem"
Curtin: our generalized supports on what the Department offers
but there's also two components to students graduating: the competency determination, and meeting local requirements. There's the assumption that those who don't graduate have met local requirements; I don't think that's necessarily true.
For students who have met the local requirements and the only barrier is the competency determination, districts could take advantage of the appeals. Because if the students have met "rigorous local requirements," it is likely, according to the data, that they would be successful
Stewart: natural experiment that has presented itself as a result of students not having to pass; is that something the Department has followed?
Curtin: had modified competency determination, requiring passing a course
More students earned the CD through this process than through the MCAS
"we had to come up with a process basically on the fly" to follow the law
"I don't it's necessarily the most comprehensive thing we could have done"
Stewart: "I hope we can continue, Commissioner, to study this for these students"
"we're looking at 140,000-ish shift"
Craven: talk about the relationship between this and Papay and outcomes
Curtin: information presented information at advisory committee and it was quite compelling
looked at students' long-term outcomes who are right at the current cut line or below
they don't experience the positive long-term outcomes when you look at, for example, their earnings by age 30
and their need for remediation and their persistence in post-secondary
those students weren't as successful in their future outcomes
"those students weren't prepared for what they were going to be encountering after high school"
Craven: this is not an intellectual test; this is a test of learned materials, diagnostically?
Curtin: test of the learning standards
Plankey: compared district improvement plans as his district is redefining theirs
saw a common theme among districts was redefining student success
would the support that the districts are offered, is part of the conversation with districts? We don't want to compromise the district's goals in raising the standards
Curtin: we take two requirements to receive the high school diploma very seriously
CD is what we are talking about today; certainly we encourage local districts to set requirements for what displays a level of rigor locally that are truly going to tell if that student is ready to graduate from high school
they're separate, though
in no way infringes on local districts setting standards for graduation
Lombos: speak to public comment being incorporated regulations?
Curtin: regulations brought to you are the same as when they were before public comment
Lombos: so no incorporation of feedback into those regulations?
Curtin: that is correct
Lombos: given that there were over 200 comments in opposition, there were no changes?
Curtin: that is correct
Craven: there were some that asked that this be stronger, too
Lombos: I was just asking if there was any feedback
Curtin: the recommendation from the Commissioner hasn't changed based on when it went out for public comment
Peyser: want comment on the 470; the decision we are making today and the policy established back in 1993, which requires the Board to establish a competency determination
"I don't think anyone hear would represent that the 470 benchmark is a representation of mastery; unfortunately, it's quite a bit a ways from that."
470 threshold and the EPP regulation moves us closer to that 1993 goal
not having a CD is not an option
"a lot of judgment there about mastery" and the balance between mastery and minimum requirements
Stewart: that's in legislation? So that would be up to our legislators to amend?
(general nods)
Craven: West amendment on 30.03
Motion, second for discussion
West: "the reason I wanted to make sure we had a robust discussion first" is offering this in the spirit of a friendly amendment
support everything in the Commissioner's proposal "as far as it goes"
alters two things: duration of time these standards would be in place
proposal is for '26-29; amendment extends to class of 2030
has been practice to clarify practice prior to their entering 9th grade; under Commissioner's proposal, Board would need to clarify '30 in spring of 2026, which is just when the first cohort of impacted students have graduates
"given that we're going to want to have that information when they have that conversation," I think we want to extend that for an additional year
second, answers what we expect those standards to be: proposes to put that out already
raises w/o EPP to 500, meets expectations, language of mastery
Board has to have that conversation at some point
think there was "a lot of enthusiasm" from the advisory "to progressively raising it over time"
"that's what this amendment would do"
"what I took away from the advisory committee more than anything else" is the high school diploma is interpreted as signaling that students have met expectations and are prepared for college and career
amendment would not change the 470 (which includes EPP)
would have the effect of exposing an additional number of students to the EPP
"a useful way of giving them support"
appreciate that one of the elements is MassCore, Ch. 74
"very promising evidence of students enrolled in those pathways"
Craven asks for questions or comments on amendment
Stewart: appreciate that feedback from the public was not incorporated
which keeps us on the same path going forward for something where most parents don't agree that MCAS-derived measures is the most important measure of student learning or school quality
Some have made the suggestion that you expand the EPP so that kids are not just retaking
"for me the whole competency piece...how do we even claim competency on a single test? And it's not even comprehensive, as the name claims?"
"We're going further down a hole that is more and more narrow to make it even harder for historically marginalized groups"
should do everything we can...to get to better outcomes for children
should be helping students who are at the bottom or below
Craven: students impacted were born...when? they're 12
Craven: We're talking post-COVID, post-pandemic resource allocations
"And the history of resource allocation is that it has gone to the districts with the most need, right?"
(no. This is not the case.)
"this is a pathway for the districts that are in the most need to get the most resources in future fiscal competitions with the budget...is that the case, Mr. Secretary?"
Peyser: Student Opportunity Act will be implemented over next four years, leans towards districts with the lowest income but the highest need populations as well
"And I'm quite confident that will continue" says the man who will have this job for another four months
"Obviously the hope is those resources will lead those districts to do better, will lead those students to do better, for those below the 470 line"
Peyser: from an equity point of view puts us closer
Lombos: "I don't agree that this puts us closer to equity"
best conversations we had about MCAS was at our equity workshop
work around teacher diversification
"probably the only time I got to know my fellow board members and what they thought about MCAS"
"I have no doubt that you all are devoted to diversity, equity, and inclusion; it's just a question of how we're going to get there"
wonderful tool: equity, diversity decision making tool
"and it was presented here at the Board, many, many times" (I watch all the Board meetings; I have never seen this. It couldn't have happened at a regular Board meeting)
"I don't think we use it very well as Board members. I don't think the public knows it can be used and be transparent"
"I would love to use it because in my opinion it is not being used by the Board and here"
"I just don't agree that raising standards has to be pitted against high stakes testing"
"I don't agree, I think we should talk through and work through these tensions"
think we should "struggle through" these conversations
Craven: "Member Lombos, when you look at the data, and you filter it through these tools, what is it you see that is different than this?"
this is not really a thing the chair should do in a meeting...
Lombos: one of it is process
tool really tries to incorporate people who are actually impacted in policy development
the fact that parents and students and teachers were not really incorporated in the regulations tells me that the decision was made before the public comment went out
Craven: but the group that made the decision "was based on the diverse group of stakeholders"
Lombos: I really don't think there's that much trust...I want to get there. I don't think we will unless we work through the struggles and the tensions
Plankey: think the Secretary's point about academic success ties back into the work at the local districts about redefining what academic success means, and move away from it purely being described by a number on a page
some of those conversations we've been having at the local level
"if we were to raise these standards, and especially if we were to raise them for a longer period" would force teachers away from these other discussions
Craven arguing against a member commenting again, which is way overstepping her role as chair
"I'm also aware of the statutory responsibility to do what the legislation says"
"So the question that those things that can be discussed in conjunction"
Plankey: Stewart working with legislators on addressing this at the state level
Rouhanifard: "I feel compelled to address the rhetoric I'm hearing here, which is this notion that we're raising the stakes until it has these draconian effects on our most marginalized communities"
"when I zoom out I think of the impact of this proposal..."
470 threshold...on the record on inadvertent consequences on dialing in on schools
"a group of diverse stakeholders who are trying to draw a line"
has a "pretty de minimus impact on the number of students who don't qualify for the EPP"
"let's be clear about that: it's a marginal number who won't meet the number"
larger question is the EPP, supporting students
"the net impact is de minimus, before you get into going to the Legislature...especially when you take into account that there's an appeals process that is underutilized"
"I just feel that the rhetoric is not aligned with the impact which is a single digit increase in those who are not going to meet the 470 threshold"
Hills who does not have his mic on
"really really good analysis shown over time that the standards that we set have impact in life outcomes"
"can't just ignore the analysis that shows the correlation"
"we're doing a really bad disservice to the students we're purporting to help" if that isn't taken into account
amendment raises the score nine years from now; original proposal raises four years from now
"I understand the politics of it...regardless of how any of us perceives the politics of it.."
"it may or may not be good politics, but it's bad policy"
Craven: "it's also good to point out that over the 30 years of ed reform, the Boards have changed over time"
Moriarty: have not heard anything about the S that stands for "system" in MCAS
"this is a broad system which has as its basis our curriculum standards"
that is not what the "system" refers to. At all.
"easy for me in the sense that I want strong standards" for students to know the frameworks
"they're deceived if they're handed a credential that" represents knowing a sophomore level of math, ELA, science after four years of high school
not a lot of discussion on that, a lot speaking to the numbers and consequences are going to be
"most inequitable consequence of a student given a credential" that doesn't represent the capacity to go onto job, college, future careers
only complaint about this is that we're signally that "partially meeting expectations" is okay
West: appreciate Plankey putting forward district work on broader definition of success
see this in no way as in conflict
thinks Riley has made this a priority with Kaleidoscope initiative to foster more forms of pedagogy
okay, honestly: has anyone seen or heard anything real coming from that locally?
local level is exactly where that effort should take place (interesting to hear this very small-c conservative argument being put forward here)
Canavan: company employed thousands in entry positions
what I experienced represents what Papay has presented
"quite a few Gateway cities within a drive of where my office sits and where my office sat"
support
Riley: proposal put forward is a measured proposal
believe in raising the standards and improving the process
playing catchup; psychometric drift
put a sunset provision on it because I wanted to see the impact of the pandemic
I know kids have been impacted by the provision
innovative science assessment; have to be better in the future
Not sure we've taken time to evaluate what the pandemic impact is on our kids
"we will likely need to change what we're doing" moving forward
Craven: "we have every opportunity to have that conversation at every board meeting going forward"
so she effectively also just argued with the Commissioner as well.
Every member who was arguing against the proposal or the amendment was argued with by the chair. That's not the chair's role!
motion as amendment passes
Peyser: not purely technical, there's a substantive component
reset the base for how we're performing as a state
Curtin: haven't issued full accountability reporting since 2019
main requirements around accountability from fed are in place
did request flexibility that was provided
in June meeting, Board approved regulations that allowed enactment of what U.S. Ed allowed to do
there are federal requirements in ESSA that requires an accountability system for all schools
state requirements now will set the baseline for the future accountability reporting using data from 2021-22
will publish all district, school, student group performance data
will use 2022 to reset baseline for future accountability determination
"given all the uncertainty that has happened in the past several years"
next year, will be running the accountability system with 2022 as the baseline and set targets for 2023 and beyond
what is the intention?
using two years of data: 2022 and 2019
will not publish target or target results; will not publish overall need for assistance, as in most cases, this is driven by progress towards targets
there have been no changes to statutory authority of Commissioner or Board
on public comment: concern over chronic absenteeism, particularly this year during pandemic
"have made an adjustment" in consideration of year
normal threshold is 10% of days; had a high rate, partly as a result of "our own rules"
publish 10% number but for accountability system will use 20% threshold in response to pandemic and what have heard from school districts and public commenters
comment "reflect"
"level of disengagement" a given student is
"is an invitation is" to dig into
"not something I want to see" to wish to avoid
"not a trivial issue, not at the margins, I believe"
Hills: what would be different in future cycles on accountability
Curtin: next year will need to which years to include
will need to come back on that regardless
Hills: request: reference based on comments from Board members
Have no philosophical view on growth
Board was a comment from Stewart and a response from West
"but take us along as a Board with you"
"I don't understand the issue enough, and I don't even understand what I don't understand" about the issue
West: will use growth data using 2021 as the baseline?
Curtin: will return to earlier process
West: in analysis in growth and levels, hope will consider not averaging with a weight, but reporting separately as they tell you very different things
thinking about how to present them in a way that makes them separable
Riley said we may be understating the impact of the pandemic on students
would it be possible to look at change in scale scores from 2019 to 2022, "and just say 'look, this is what happened'"
say this is where we have challenged and this is where we've taken them on
Curtin: as we think of discussion of this year's MCAS results as they become available, will be instructive to look at not only 2021-22 but also 2019-22
Stewart: glad we're going to hear more about growth and achievement
would like to understand where we are with districts using MCIEA
would like to understand that better and see about expansion
Vote carries
Have an executed FY23 state budget
consistent with where we've been the last couple of years prioritized funding for K-12 sectors
primarily through state aid: $6B, growth of a little under $500M
SOA carrying much of that
There are also increases in other accounts
would also highlight commitment to fully funded universal free lunch program
number of other highlights: career tech, school to work, adult basic education
"busy as a state agency implementing state budget across all program staff"
"we are approaching the end of ESSER I"
at about 97% claimed rate; fully expect between state agency and districts to spend
ESSER II: 51% (was 41%)
ESSER III: 17% rate but those are good until September 2024
At a high level rate, we're very comfortable with where we are on spending
working every day to clarify where we are on use of funds
Circuit breaker ($441M) is separate...
just want to understand full spending
No comments:
Post a Comment