November Board of Ed: chronic absenteeism and accountability

 the memo for this is here 'though that doesn't give any details
Curtin: adjusting the weighing of chronic absenteeism
students missing at least 10% of their days in the school year, so 18 days in 180 days
'19 was just under 13%
have come down from high water of 29.9% in '21 to 22% in '23
rate in elementary has doubled from before 2019
high school, percent increase isn't as great, but almost 30% of high school students are chronically absent in the '23
"impact is startling" MCAS for students who were chronically absent versus those who were not
close to half an achievement level of difference 
all grade spans, all school types
Students who are not chronically absent achieve more highly
DESE is interested in increasing weighting in accountability system FOR THIS YEAR
"coupling this with...grant or seed funding to districts to work on the problem" plus a public service campaign
"But one of the levers that the Department has is the accountability system"

currently it is 10% in non-high schools; 10% WITH advanced coursework in high schools, thus 5%
increasing in both high school and non-high school
"Commissioner's belief that it is the biggest level we have"
complex discussion with a series of considerations before bringing a recommendation

• "how much of a change should we be putting on it
• criterion reference system on a how a school is doing on meeting its own targets (normative and criterion references)
• where does the weighting come from: "you only have 100% of the pie"
• there are multiple years of data: which years will weigh more heavily?
• if achievement/growth impacted: have met federal requirement that achievement + growth are majority
• impact on charter cap if it impacts achievement + growth
• nominal versus effective weighing (be careful that your weighting is really about things that are different)

AAAC meeting on December 6 for this discussion
will hear any feedback on proposed change
will have a public comment period, but this is not a regulatory change, thus length of public comment period is discretionary
Board would then vote and it would go to U.S. Department of Ed (would require an addendum in the state's ESSA plan)

West: "I think this is a good concept"
appreciate combining with additional support; disappointed that there isn't a specific proposal
"should not come from growth indicator, not achievement indicator"

Gardner: "want to express my preliminary initial support" for this
praise for putting at the forefront

"no matter what curriculum changes or grants or things we throw at schools...the kids aren't there"
"I sit many bare classrooms because kids just aren't in school"

Moriarty: thoughtful, guided by ESSA
"rife with unintended consequences"
"unfortunately there's still a broad belief that there's not a lot of agency on the part of schools"
"what it ultimately is about...this is about engagement"
"you are absent a long time before there's 'actionable truancy' going on"
"data will put someone in an accountability system...should be a very well-crafted mechanism to talk about what we are doing" to reengage families
"big challenge...it's very complicated"
"correct me if I am wrong...appeals process for accountability system"?
Mashpee, summons...child who has undergoing long-term treatment
"when it gets down to the human level..it's the only way to avoid those outcomes"
but note: that student would still be chronically absent
student who is homeless, lacks transportation
Curtin: for us it's about the loss of instruction
process of appeal is in place

Mohamed: know DESE collects teacher attendance as well: any trends?
Curtin: added impact on teacher attendance
"when you compound the attendance...number of days the student is in front of their teacher"
data that we look forward to further exploration

Fisher: clarification question: mentioned going retroactive
looking for information or for accountability level
Curtin: are we going to use last year's data at 10% still or to put more weight on the chronic absentee data of prior years
Fisher: "I do worry about judgment we make on that data, that they haven't have the resources or support"
"I worry that skews data on what that data's really telling us"
Curtin: "I agree with you...saying it's a decision that needs to be made"

Stewart: "discussion has been really helpful"
things Gardner raised "really resonate"
"the fact remains: how are we going to get students back into the schools?"
want to understand what the plan is for the state to engage with the student advisory council for example
What other policies could be considered with regard to transformation in schools
Riley: re-engage student advisory council
"have to bring that back in"
have given out dollars and districts are doing different things: what works and what doesn't 

Hills: applaud the process
complicated, substantive, engage the Board, not just vote up or down 
"laws of unintended consequences"
"what the system is used for"
"as I think of what the system is used for...moving in and out of bottom ten percent based on chronic absenteeism"
"I'm not so sure"
"unintended consequences"
Curtin: make a lot of good points, complexity, unintended consequences
not looking to flip accountability system in any way
"looking to draw attention to what we think is a critical problem"
if we think it's important "important for the accountability system to reflect that judgment"
"reflect some of the values of what we think is important"
Hills: gives example of a district going up or down based only on this indicator
Curtin: "I wish that this decision did not have the implications on the charter cap decision that it does"
"when you look at a list like that for that purpose...have to make sure we're not completely overturning to create chaos in the list"

Moreau: (who sounds like he's at the bottom of a well) substantive clear discussion
when, for how long, and mechanism to return to prior system
can't remember precisely the charter bottom 10%
Curtin: number of years and data included; we have tied through policy
other moving part to this is, proposing an external stakeholder group to review accountability system
that group will meet for the first time on December 8

West: wonder if it may make sense to separate accountability system from district ranking for charter cap
Hills: that would probably address the vast majority of the unintended consequences

Curtin: important for our school districts to hear our intention to place a weighting to place accountability on the issue
Riley: they also need to be open to change...sometimes change is needed

Hills wants to know who is on the working group
Curtin: will be happy to provide