Let's talk about the September Board of Ed meeting

The Massachusetts Board of Elementary and Secondary Education resumes monthly meetings tomorrow. You can find the agenda here. 

It's the train in to Malden for me tomorrow.

The big news of tomorrow will be statewide--and thus district and school--MCAS scores, which will be released at the meeting ('though I'm certain that there is embargoed information around which will go to print and post tomorrow). The memo from the Commissioner notes: 

The 2023 district and school accountability results represent a full return to DESE’s accountability reporting practices for the first time since 2019. The U.S. Department of Education provided flexibility to the states from 2020–2022 due to the pandemic.

 I would bet you a hamburger that this means that we'll hear both the term "learning loss" and the Commissioner patting himself on the back regarding "sending students back into the classroom," despite there still not being evidence that this had much to do with where kids are now. 

Preceding that per the memo on item 3, for reasons that one can surmise have to do with the proposed state ballot question to end the use of MCAS as the state high school competency determination:

Department staff will present a historical overview of the Massachusetts Comprehensive Assessment System (MCAS), including how the assessment has evolved since its origination in the 1993 Massachusetts Education Reform Act and why it is a critical tool in understanding the achievement of students in Massachusetts

...which looks a lot like the Department taking a position on a ballot question without having direction from their overseeing Board, which strikes me as being well outside of purview? Is this legal/kosher/ethical? And should it be done? And will anyone raise this question? 
This is of course particularly interesting given that it is actually the BOARD ITSELF that has the authority to determine if the MCAS is used as the competency determination. The law doesn't specify the MCAS as the competency determination; it simply happens to be the "comprehensive" measure that the Department created and the Board has agreed to in order to fulfil that section of the law. 

..which yes, means that we don't actually need a ballot question, though I'm not arguing about that in this post...

The memo continues: 

Following the overview and discussion on the evolution and importance of MCAS, Board Vice-Chair* Hills will present on MCAS in relation to the Competency Determination. 

Having a member of a Board "present" to that Board is irregular, and given that the background of Mr. Hills regarding education is simply as a member of the Newton School Committee, why the Massachusetts Board--a Board that has multiple members who actually specialize in education, served by a Department full of people for whom it is their life's work, in a state with myriad experts in education in every aspect--is allowing this on their agenda escapes me. Enthusiasm is not a replacement for expertise. 

Preceding that--and why this order also escapes me!--is the Board's vote on updating, at long last, the state standards for health and physical education. As expected, this gathered a significant amount of public interest, and my sympathies were with those in the Department who had to collate all of this on reading this: 

Approximately 2,910 of the emails/mail received expressed opposition to the revised draft.  Approximately 2,780 of the emails received were a form email that consisted of the same text, some included additional personalized comments from the sender(s).  In addition, some individuals sent this email multiple times.

Let's be very clear that this does not constitute 2900 people in opposition. Of those who took the time to take the survey--MUCH more in depth involvement than clicking "send" on a form email!--a majority were parents and more than half were in support of the update to the standards:

Most survey respondents that reviewed and provided feedback on the specific standards by grade span and practice agreed that:

• the standards outline essential knowledge and skills for the included topic(s) that students should be able to demonstrate by the end of this grade span; 

• contribute to a student’s ability to develop the respective skill or practice; and 

• reflect reasonable expectations for student performance for the included topic(s) at the respective grade span.

And don't let anyone tell you otherwise.
Expect some more fearmongering public comment tomorrow, no doubt, and probably of dubious accuracy, if MFI continues to be involved in writing it. 

Now that we have an FY24 budget, the Board will receive an update on it.

There is also what the agenda is calling a "follow up to the Commissioner's evaluation" which is actually a proposed salary increase, which remarkably contains NO NUMBERS! Not even a percentage! You cannot make this stuff up.

And in what was a later--though not late--addition to the Board, the Board is being asked to approve technical amendments on student discipline regulations. 

Not up for action, but for information, note the agenda has the charter school timeline for this year. approval of loans beyond charter school duration, grants approved by the Commissioner, and some information about virtual schools. 

Starts at 9 am tomorrow! 

________

*one should also note that the election of the vice chair happens at this meeting. Thus properly, there is no vice chair on this agenda, and Mr. Hills is mistitled.