The Board of Ed meets in January: accountability

 and the backup is here

Riley: coming up on sixth anniversary
"we've been through some things together...we've had some really tough votes before"
COVID votes, were split
"I've lost some votes"
"My job is to bring forward what" is important
"I just think this topic is worth" coming forward
would ask that the presentation be allowed to proceed
whatever Board decides "we're totally fine with it"

chronic absenteeism "has skyrocketed"
one of the most improved states in the country last year
1 in 4 kids are chronically absent

argues that this is part of "a comprehensive program"
given out "I think $3M" in grants (he's been saying $4M before; either way, it's $10K a district)
technical assistance
advertising

"we'd just like to tell you why"
White House urged bold action on this; wanted it added to accountability if they don't have it (we do) or "to do more" (did anyone else say that?)

"everything I've done as an educator is Maslow before Bloom" 

Curtin: 
there are two changes that are being proposed:

• adding a year to the data used in chronic absenteeism
• increasing the weight of the indicator

comments have "given us a little bit of a pause" in the magnitude and how long

on years: 
traditionally, DESE has included multiple years whenever possible
better sense of performance trends over time
plan since 2018 was to add years as it rolled out
due to the pandemic there are currently only two years ('22 and '23) available; 40/60 is the weight

the proposed measurement on the use of years is

• school percentile is '22 at 15%; '23 at 25%; '24 at 60% (that's measuring schools against each other)
• target percentile is '22-23 at 40%; '23-24 at 60% (that's a measure of change; how schools are doing compared to how they were doing)

on weighing:
"to highlight the importance of this emerging post-pandemic problem"
"part of a comprehensive effort" including a "public service campaign"
grants, "templates of letters" for districts to send out

the proposed measurement is to increase the weight ONLY in the criterion-referenced part (thus on targets, not how schools are compared to each other)
"no school in the Commonwealth has a target of 0.0"
"We are looking for improvement; we are not looking for elimination of the chronic absenteeism rate"
normative calculation stays as is and thus will have no impact on school percentiles and on the charter cap calculations
with this change, an additional 6% of schools would have moved up into substantial progress towards targets or meeting/exceeding targets last year
current rates indicates continued improvement from last year
"this is usually the high point of chronic absenteeism" 
"past data tells us which direction this is going to go and allows us to" consider what impact this will have
"there are kids counted right now who don't have to be considered chronically absent as the year goes along"; as the year goes along, number of days of school gets larger; if they don't miss more days, their percentage missed gets smaller
"I understand" one of the complaints is when this proposal is before you
"I can tell you that we're bringing this a lot earlier than we've brought other proposals"
and I totally can't see this slide but it's this info:

There's a big section here that's designed to walk through how this is a 9% change here, which if I could see the slides I might be able to follow better

Craven: "But Rob, that's still almost double"
He agrees it is.

Curtin: timebound; proposed only for 2024, would need to be discussed for 2025
"magnitude is important and responsive" but "not an enormous change"

West: the policy reverts to the default, absent action by the Board next year?
Curtin: no, have to return to this

Fisher: "for me, I'm really struggling with this for multiple reasons"
"this feels like we're getting ahead of ourselves a bit"
want to see assessment, research results then accountability
want to know if it's the culture, the curriculum, is transportation a problem
"to borrow the words of our Miliken: one size fits none"
"this jump into the accountability system is one size fits none"
my question then is why
"if we change the accountability system, we're not actually changing the problem"
"It feels somewhat performative rather than action and solution oriented"
using resource to get at core 
Craven argues with her (this is so off base) tend to use accountability system that drives behavior
I'd like to have you expound on that
Fisher: agree that it is one of the only levers we have to shift behavior
for me, this assumes that schools and districts don't want kids in seats
"I have more faith in our districts"
Commissioner (interrupting as he was not recognized): "there's an implication that this is somehow punitive"
"I think it's the opposite"

Gardiner: I still keep coming back to one key thing, and that is that I feel that we are failing to recognize that the key stakeholder is the individual student
why aren't you coming to school: these are tangible efforts we can make to get our students back in school
went to student advisory and asked "what brings you to school each day"
social connection and visible interest were the two things cited more than others
support from teachers and guidance counselors; personal relationships
interest in academics and extracurriculars
"ultimately that is what I believe we should be putting our time and our effort"
energy would better be put into interest in what they're learning and connections with others
"even if we get families and parents engaged in this, kids aren't going to listen"
kids need to themselves feel confident in their decision to go to school 
Riley (again, jumps directly in without being recognized): I actually think it's a net positive

Mohamed: what are the consequences to schools
can you shed some light on why rolling into accountability system
Riley: already in the accountability system
get out in front of some federal directives that may be coming down the pike in the future (the classic blame someone else)
"just want to spur on"
Curtin: for schools that end up with really low percentiles; could result in a federal designation; lower could be named underperforming
"public reporting enterprise" to parents and others
Mohamed: curious about the decision to roll it up into accountability
"it seems to me that you also...how...do schools receive a separate metric on absenteeism?"
Curtin: yes, can dig down and we publicly report by student group

West: I've been thinking about the argument that I would make for this change
goes back to what happened during the pandemic; new set of norms around attendance emerged
Some was healthy, like staying home when ill
state policy makers indicating that it was less important by closing schools
focus a lot on people's beliefs on how important it was to attend schools
a new set of norms around attendance has emerged
"I think what the Commissioner is trying to do with this move among others...is to change norms"
"I don't know if this will work...but it's consistent"
"I understand the proposal...I'm inclined to support them in that judgment"

Hills: "I struggled with the policy part of this for awhile"
"I'm not able to sit here and say that the policy implications of this are wrong"
"there's a lot of analysis behind the top line numbers which I'm not seeing"
"I'm not in favor of chronic absenteeism"
"why increase it by this amount within the accountability system"
just for this year, and it's the middle of the year
"at some point it seems to me that we're doing harm to the accountability system"
"I'm just telling you that's not the way we should be rolling here"
"I have an issue with the process. I won't belabor this."
"I don't love the idea of getting an email late in the year after the December meeting was cancelled" 
"and that's the point at which I found out that public comments were open for like two weeks"
"the more we stray from typical practice, the more we cheapen...the outcome"
"I'm not in favor of the policy; I did want to comment about the process itself"
Riley: "I think the unexpected cancellation of the December meeting was problematic"
"and you did say bring us along"
"this is the earliest we've brought something forward"
Craven: we didn't have the materials at the December meeting

Craven: we're basically doubling on the non-high schools and tripling on the high schools
(I think that's backwards)
"to me this goes back to...if you want to change the accountability system"
if we want to use them to drive behavior, some go to reward districts that have adopted a science of reading based curriculum?
"is this the only thing?"
"to me the problem isn't one of local control" 
the genocide law wasn't imagined to talk about Israel as a genocidal state
"gee, these districts that think they don't have a problem with literacy"
"I'm going to put on the table to..curricular matters...it could be reflected as a curricular matters"
why limit ourselves today?
Riley: "you're speaking my language here"
"I have been worried here about local control"
"we probably need to give our districts some time"
"I love the idea of being a little more directive on" literacy curriculum
West: there are metrics that have been met with accountability
"I'm with you; there are other changes I'd like to see on the accountability system"
Riley: this is a longer deeper conversation

Curtin: currently there is a task force that has been formed on revising the accountability system
"the changes you're discussing, Madam Chair, can't happen in a one month period of time"
"This is a zero-sum game; there's only 100 percent"
the task force is starting from scratch on thinking about thinking about things
Craven: I don't want to be stuck with the Board is stuck with making changes only when another body comes back
"we're already in it now"
"you can't change it...the curriculum materials are the same thing, and from what I understand, we don't even have a Roman census of what's out there"
Riley: people will say we don't have the money
Craven: but apparently they didn't need it for liberated ethnic studies
Riley: shines a spotlight on the good work that districts are doing and further propels them further 

Moriarty: I love this conversation, talking about the things I care about so much
biggest concern I have is if we vote this down now is it's the last conversation we'll have
"I like a stable accountability system"
two sides of that: sometimes stability is staleness; stability is something that when people are operating a district and are planning, want to know what's going to happen 15-16 months out
really sympathetic to those concerns
"and yet, we vote it down and stop having those conversations"
"I don't see the value in the tweak, I don't see the gain in the tweak"
Riley: I look at this as a third rail issue
"I feel like there is a bounded message"
"and then we can continue the conversation going forward"
"If I'm reading the room, it's looking like this is not going to happen"
but doesn't want the conversation to end there
Riley: "Guys, look, I work for you, and I'll respect whatever you decide. I think we have to talk about curriculum. I do think we have to talk about English learners need five to seven years to be proficient and yet we count them much earlier than that. I'm flexible. I wouldn't be doing you a service or myself a service if I believe in it, if I didn't bring it forward"

Rocha: not as concerned with percentage, I am concerned that I am not understanding why
suggestion of winter blues, need more mental health services (students going to school more consistently after winter)
what are the elements, what else is in the conversation that going to push me there
Curtin: my point in sharing the data was to share that we're ahead of where we were last year
"from here on into the end of the year, that comes down"
Rocha: what is the urgency then, it's still coming down
Curtin: can still move
West (unrecognized): and it's still much higher than before the pandemic
Curtin: targeted discrete timebound change"
Rocha: students are prioritizing electronic connection rather than in person connection
"I need more meat, even though I'm vegan"

Riley tries to cut off conversation, though not all members have spoken

Stewart: seed money?
Riley: gave districts grant money at the beginning of this year for communication, acceleration academies
Stewart: with five months to go, I am included to support this, because there is an opportunity to build in a way that is supportive to schools themselves
there was just a scramble as a comparison of motion language was exchanged; the change on years is possibly going forward for a vote on its own?

West: two potential changes here, one of which is weighing date over multiple years, think we should make sure to do that
Craven: yes, but the motion isn't written that way
Hills: think the focus on talking about this; my own view is I'm not prepared to vote on this one way or another; I literally don't understand the implications. Open to taking up at February meeting
Craven: we could even have another meeting in the interim
Riley: what's your thought (to Curtin)
Curtin: has been talk of tabling right now, there's nothing to table right now, as nothing's been moved
they are distinct
establishing the weighting of the 2024 data; we need to up or down that first one
Craven: "can I go back to my plaintive cry from being at the State of the State?...I know the chance of getting a large amount of dollars"
would like to add to the discussion curriculum
"if you're going to do this much...why not have the districts...tell us what's in the curriculum"
Riley: I think it's been set, absent a law, to be an expansion of our GLEAM grant
help with curriculum, professional development, support
versus, everybody has to do it
Craven: "give me a couple of percentage of points"
if you answer it, you can get them
we did this with the MSBA!
Moriarty: we can't make laws on our own, we don't have statutory authority
Craven: this department could not under a FOIA collect what curriculum they're using
Curtin: collect a lot of data under Commissioner's authority
I do think that's different than what's going to be incorporated into the accountability system right now

Curtin: motion before you incorporates three years of data, but otherwise this stays unchanged
on the 

To the question of postponing the decision to add a third years, Curtin says he's not sure what other information can be provided
Moriarty wants to table the years being added
Fisher moves to take the vote on the chronic absenteeism weighing, and Gardiner seconds
Craven asks if it could come back with other percentages next months instead if it is voted down
and they're telling Fisher that her motion doesn't exist
Hills makes a motion to decline the change in weighing change in the accountability system
and there's a really dumb conversation about if the language exist or not
They've noted that they can vote the original vote and then can vote just the addition of the third year after that
Hills: bear in mind that the reaction to the Board about these two issues is very very different; let's think long and hard about continuing on a path with this much pushback from the Board
Gardiner makes the original motion

MOTION FAILS 7-2

On JUST adding the third year:
motion passes

and they postpone the budget report
ADJOURNED