September 14, 2010 Board Meeting Minutes

MINUTES
SPECIAL MEETING/TRUSTEE WORKSHOP AND REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF
BLAINE COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT NO. 61
TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 14, 2010 - 4:30 P.M.
DISTRICT OFFICE

I.        Special Meeting/Trustee Workshop

Dr. Lonnie Barber presented an in depth view of the Blaine County student achievement data from the 2009/10 ISAT (Idaho State Achievement Data).  The presentation included an overview of AYP (Adequate Yearly Progress), which is a measurement benchmark set by the State of Idaho as it pertains to the ISAT test.  This overview included an explanation of AYP, and how it impacts schools in Idaho.

Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) – Background Information

Adequate yearly progress (AYP) is the measure by which schools, districts, and states are held accountable for student performance under Title I of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (NCLB).  AYP, however, is not a new concept; it was introduced into federal law in the 1994 reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act.  

The number of schools likely to face sanctions in upcoming years is significant.  

Under NCLB, AYP is used to determine if schools are successfully educating their students. NCLB requires states to use a single accountability system for public schools to determine whether all students, as well as individual subgroups of students, are making progress toward meeting state academic content standards.  NCLB's ultimate goal is to have all students reaching proficient levels by 2014 as measured by performance on state tests (Keegan, Orr, and Jones, 2002).  The standards are required to be tested yearly in grades 3 through 8 and at least twice for high school students.  The results are then compared to prior years, and, based on state-determined AYP standards, used to determine if the school has made adequate progress towards the proficiency goal (Department of Education, 2001).

According to the law, states have the flexibility to define this yearly progress, but it must include the following elements:

• State tests must be the primary factor in the state's measure of AYP, but the use of at least one other academic indicator of school performance is required, and additional indicators are permitted;

• For secondary schools, the other academic indicator must be the high school graduation rate;

• States must set a baseline for measuring students' performance toward the goal of 100 percent proficiency by the spring of 2014.  The baseline is based on data from the 2001-02 school year;

• States must also create benchmarks for how students will progress each year to meet the goal of 100 percent proficiency by the spring of 2014;

• A state's AYP must include separate measures for both reading/language arts and math.  In addition, the measures must apply not only to students on average, but also to students in four "subgroups": economically disadvantaged students, students from major racial and ethnic groups, students with disabilities, and students with limited English proficiency;

• To make AYP, at least 95 percent of students in each of the four subgroups, as well as 95 percent of students in a school as a whole, must take the state tests, and each subgroup of students must meet or exceed the measurable annual objectives set by the state for each year (Department of Education, 2001).

The No Child Left Behind Act requires states to hold schools and districts accountable for making AYP toward all students reaching proficiency.  If a school or district fails to make AYP for two consecutive years, it must be identified for improvement.  While states are required to develop rewards and sanctions for all schools, the law specifies a number of consequences for those schools receiving Title I funds, beginning with notifying parents of students who attend the school in need of improvement, providing all students in the identified school with the option to transfer to another public school within the district, providing "supplemental services," such as tutoring, to students attending low-performing schools, and providing assistance to the school or district identified. Additional sanctions are added if schools or districts identified for improvement continuously fail to make AYP for several years.

The number of schools likely to face sanctions in upcoming years is significant.  In the United States, there were at least 19,644 schools that did not make AYP in 2003-04, and at least 11,008 schools were identified as in need of improvement (Quality Counts 2005).  Many analysts expect the numbers to increase as the percent of students required to be proficient rises each year until 2014 when all students are expected to be proficient.

Some states report large numbers of schools that are not making adequate yearly progress, including some schools considered high performing by other measures, causing considerable public confusion and concern.  The numbers of schools not making AYP vary greatly from state to state for a number of reasons; mostly pertaining to differences in states' tests and accountability systems, rather than their quality of education (Center on Education Policy, 2004).

There is some debate as to the wisdom or ability of the federal government to hold schools, districts, and states accountable for student achievement using AYP.  According to some reports, AYP will significantly challenge district and state accountability systems (Joftus et. al., 2002; Center on Education Policy, 2004).  In fact, several states have voted to put their own education policies ahead of the NCLB and AYP standards.  In April, 2005, Utah Governor, Jon Huntsman Jr., signed a bill requiring schools to first and foremost follow the state's U-PASS testing system, which itself has AYP standards, before conforming to NCLB guidelines (Sack, 2005).  Other states are may follow in Utah's footsteps and redefine progress based on their own preexisting standards systems.

Proponents argue that the federal government must take an aggressive role to raise student achievement overall and to close the gap between groups of students that traditionally succeed in school and those that tend to struggle.  AYP proponents insist NCLB addresses this goal by setting consistent goals for all schools and students and by ensuring that districts and states take responsibility for helping struggling schools (Wiener, 2003).  Critics, although not arguing against the intent of the law, argue that the testing, data systems, and elements needed to implement NCLB and AYP are expensive and that the federal government is not paying its fair share of these costs (Orfield et al., 2004).  Additionally, some critics argue that achieving 100 percent proficiency by 2014 will be extremely difficult and expensive, if not impossible, and sets schools up for certain failure (Cronin, 2004; Center on Education Policy, 2004).  Having all student subgroups up to par – including special education students and English-language learners-is of particular concern.

Dr. Barber presented both an aggregated and disaggregated look at the most current Blaine County School District’s performance, both by district, grade and category for the Board of Trustees and audience.  A discussion was held on where Blaine County School District achievement data ranks compared to the 31 largest school districts in Idaho, and regarding the disconnect between AYP and school performance.  This disconnect was demonstrated when Dr. Barber gave details about the two categories that prevented the School District from making AYP.  In both of the two categories in question, Special Education Reading and Math, Blaine County was a leader among Idaho’s school districts.  Blaine County’s Special Education Reading was actually 81% proficient, which ranked the District first in the state, and 70.2% proficient in Math, which ranked Blaine County Schools third in the state (compared to the 31 largest districts in the state).  Dr. Barber also emphasized that of the 31 largest districts, none of them made the state’s benchmarks for AYP.  

When the Trustee Workshop concluded, Board Member Paul Bates made a motion to convene to Closed Executive Session.  The motion was seconded by Dan Parke and passed unanimously.

II.       Closed Executive Session

Following the Board’s discussion of Closed Session agenda items “a” and “b”, Board Member Steve Guthrie made a motion to convene to Regular Open Session.  The motion was seconded by Paul Bates and passed unanimously.

III.      Return to Open Session

Board Member Paul Bates then made a motion to accept the settlement agreement between a former Blaine County School District employee and said District.  The motion was seconded by Dan Parke and passed unanimously by roll call vote:  

Dan Parke:  Aye
Paul Bates:  Aye
Steve Guthrie:  Aye
Julie Dahlgren:  Aye  

No official action was taken regarding Closed Session Agenda item “b”.

REGULAR SEPTEMBER BOARD MEETING

Board Member Steve Guthrie made a motion to amend the current Regular Agenda with the addition of the following Information/Action item:  

Permission to participate with City of Hailey in the cost of running water and sewer lines up to $11,000.00  

The motion was seconded by Dan Parke and passed unanimously.

I would like to share my thoughts with the Board about a person I value as a friend, co-worker and an all around great guy.  Salvador Valencia has so many great qualities that I would have to take more than a moment or two of your time to list them all.  I just really want to let you know what a difference he has made at the District Office.  

It’s not often that a person from another department comes to your building, spends a short amount of time, and makes such a positive impact on the staff.  Not only has he painted almost every wall of our building (and by the way, he is an amazing painter!), he stays after hours without complaint in order to get the job done without impacting the staff.  You should also know that much of the office color palette came from Salvador’s artistic ideas.   

There were so many times Salvador was asked to do other things as he was painting, like moving furniture, putting furniture together, helping with decorating or taking trash to the dumpster.  Not once did he show frustration with so many interruptions.  Salvador always smiles and says, “Sure; I will do it right now.”  

Salvador is probably the only person I know who never complains about anyone or anything.  I only wish I could be so noble.  I have had the pleasure of knowing him since he trained with me as a school bus driver.  The first time we went driving together I knew the District hit the jackpot!  We think of Salvador as part of the District Office family and I am so happy and proud to call him a friend.  

Thank you Salvador, for transforming our office into a beautiful space we love to come to each day.  The District Office is a special place to work; it feels even more special due to Salvador’s efforts.  

Darlene Kisler, Administrative Assistant
Blaine County School District Office

Regular August Board Meeting – August 10, 2010

Please click here to view the August 2010 Financial Reports.

Classified Staff – Exiting  

Lucia Loera – ENL Paraprofessional, Woodside Elementary School
Lorri Prescott – Secretary, Wood River High School

Classified Staff – Recommending for Hire

Paul Morgenthaler – Bus Driver – Regular Route, Transportation Department

Certified Staff – Recommending for Hire

Tracey Munk – 1.0 FTE 5th Grade Teacher, Hailey Elementary School
(Category 1 Contract)  

Anna Auseklis – 10. FTE Roaming Guest Teacher, District-wide
(Category 1 Contract)

Board Member Dan Parke made a motion to approve items “a” through “e” of the Consent Agenda.  The motion was seconded by Paul Bates and passed unanimously.

IX.    Public Comments

First, I would like to thank the School Board for having a start date after Labor Day this year.  I think the start date after Labor Day makes all the sense in the world.   

You may have read in the newspaper about the County’s debate on hiring a Human Resources manager and the split on whether to do so.  The fact is that the County has over an $8-million payroll; it doesn’t match yours, and close to 180 employees.  I feel it’s high time that we do that and one of the roles played by an HR manager has to do with employee performance evaluations which leads directly to compensation and that type of thing.   

What I’d like to comment on goes well beyond that, and it’s not my intent to be provocative.  Teacher performance evaluation is one of the most controversial subjects in America today.  I handed out an article to the Board from the Twin Falls Times-News, which is essentially a write-up on a study done by the Los Angeles Times, an analysis performed by the Rand Corporation, based on its evaluation of teachers in the Los Angeles School District.  I’m really presenting this just because I think it is of interest, and it’s meant to be thought provoking and provides some information for your thinking.  The premise is as follows, and I’m going to read selectively, and please don’t get too tweaked by what I say because every little point could be construed as controversial, but I’m just trying to give you the briefest of overviews.  

“Year after year, one fifth-grade class learns far more than the other down the hall.  The difference has almost nothing to do with the size of the class, the students or their parents.  It’s their teachers.  

Though the government spends billions of dollars every year on education, relatively little of the money has gone to figuring out which teachers are effective and why.  Seeking to shed light on the problem, the Times obtained seven years of math and English test scores from the Los Angeles Unified School District and used the information to estimate the effectiveness of L.A. teachers.  The Times used a statistical approach known as value-added analysis, which rates teachers based on their student’s progress on standardized tests from year to year.  Though controversial among teachers and others, the method has been increasingly embraced by education leaders and policymakers across the country, including the Obama administration.”   

And of course, this article goes through the pros and cons of this approach; it’s obviously a scientific based approach and we don’t have the time to discuss it, but it even goes back and interviews those teachers that were rated effective and those teachers rated not effective and asks them why.  It highlights how the presumptions that we all make become assumptions, and those assumptions we make on teacher performance don’t necessarily hold up under statistical scrutiny.  Many parents fixate on picking the right school for their child; it matters far more which teacher their child gets.  

I’ll just close with this.  Value Added Analysis offers the closest thing available to objective assessment of teachers.  I would encourage you to read this; it’s very thought provoking.  I don’t know what it would take to implement such a step; I don’t even know if it’s possible to do on an individual school district basis, but I find it fascinating and I wanted to share it with you.   

(Board Member Paul Bates asked Mr. Schoen if there was a particular reason for his comment.)  

I do not have a concern; I’ve been very happy with my children’s teachers.  The point is that this is setting is appropriate for me to bring this to your attention and I think that this, being a progressive school district, is worthy of your consideration.  I think that Blaine County School District is a leading school district in the state and it’s to the extent that we can raise the level of debate on the topic of teacher performance evaluation and how we hire our teachers.  This is one of the best school districts in the state, and that’s why.  Thank you.

Mike reported the day-one through day-four average daily attendance/enrollment numbers for the new school year as compared to 2009-2010.   

Please click here to view the 2010-2011 4th day numbers as compared to the 2009-2011 4th day numbers and end of year 2009-2010 totals.

Please click here to view NSPRA’s PowerPoint Presentation to the Board, Cover Letter, Executive Summary and Communications Audit Report.

Please click here to view Dr. Barber’s 2009-2010 and 2010-2011 Goals.

Please click here to view Patty McLean’s Curriculum Report outline and supplemental information.

Bellevue Elementary School is up and running for the school year!  

A few of the subcontractors are finishing up the contracts.  The heating systems will begin the process of bringing all of the systems up on Wednesday to make sure everything is working.  McKinstry will be commissioning the building beginning next week for approximately two weeks.  The electricians will be in the building during the District’s October Inservice to install the remaining light fixtures.  

Carey School will begin in about two weeks.  The Fox Acre campus will begin in early January and Hailey Elementary School will be completed during the summer of 2011.

XV.      Board Chair Report – Julie Dahlgren – Information

Board Chair Julie Dahlgren reminded everyone that four candidates will be interviewed by the Board at a Special meeting scheduled September 28, 2010 at 4:00 p.m. in the Blaine County School District Board Room.  

The meeting will be held in public and all four candidates interviewing for the Zone 3 Board vacancy position will be able to begin the meeting with an opening statement.  The statement is voluntary and should last no longer than three minutes. Board Clerk Laurie Kaufman will ask the Board's questions following the opening statements; again, answers should be kept to three minutes.  There will be approximately twelve questions asked giving each candidate a chance to answer first; there will be no advance notice of questions.  The Board will deliberate in public following the question-answer period and a decision should be made by the end of the meeting.

Board Chair Julie Dahlgren announced that the Idaho School Boards Association Annual Convention will be held in Boise this year; a wonderful professional development opportunity for the Board.  The General Session Keynote Speakers are former NASA Astronaut Barbara Morgan, and Attorney General Lawrence Wasden.  Our own Colla Voce will be part of the Student Entertainment at the Convention!

The City of Hailey, Mayor Davis, approached the School District two weeks ago regarding the Fox Property that was annexed into the City in 2000.  When the District purchased property from various property owners, the City of Hailey was requested to annex those properties into the City.  This annexation forced four residences to be annexed into the City without their approval.  The City gave those property owners ten years to connect to City water and sewer services.  The City is asking for the School District to participate in the cost of running the water and sewer lines into the main access of that property to allow those residences to connect to city utilities.  The City said the cost share should have been part of the annexation agreement between the City of Hailey and the School District, and since it was left out, would we consider sharing in the cost up to $11,000.  

Board Member Paul Bates made a motion to grant permission to participate with the City of Hailey in the cost of running water and sewer lines up to $11,000.  The motion was seconded by Steve Guthrie and passed unanimously.

Please click here to view the Office of Energy Resources Request for Proposal and McKinstry’s PowerPoint presentation to the Board. 

Please click here to view the Bellevue Elementary School Multi-Purpose and Classroom Addition presentation to the Board.

Please click here to view Rex Squires’ memo regarding surplus property (Bus #13).  

Board and Madam Chair, I’d just like to say that in the spirit of the Communication Audit, I would like to ask that you offer public comment for the Special meeting on September 28th; and would you do that at the beginning and the end or either?  I did contact the Idaho School Boards Association to check if that would be allowed.  If you’ve had experience with appointments before where there’s maybe been a conflict of interest that you wouldn’t be aware of.  For myself, I’m not aware of all the candidates, but maybe something you hear during the interview process alerts you to the fact that there might be a conflict of interest or something like that.  The Idaho School Boards Association did tell me that it’s up to the Board; that it’s not a matter of record, and so the Board can decide tonight whether they will allow public comment at the beginning and the end of the Special Board meeting.  I thought in the spirit of the Communication Audit, where he also mentioned consistency; that perhaps it would be good for you to offer public comment at the beginning and the end because that is what you are already doing and we’re very grateful for that.  I’m grateful to be able to come up and ask you for that.  Thank you.

That’s great. There certainly was, I think, excitement from everybody on the opportunity.  It’s just an educational process in getting that information to us so that we can move forward and make the proper decisions.  

My name is Lyman Drake.  I’m a member of the Board of the Educational Foundation but I’m speaking as a private citizen tonight.  I want to speak very briefly about the Communication Audit.  I think it is a very important initiative that can bring powerful benefits to the community and the District.  I want to, first of all, thank Dr. Barber for recognizing that there were communications problems and for seeking professional assistance in identifying them and studying ways to deal with them.  I also want to thank him for being so eager and willing to make the results public.  I realize that not everything that appears in the audit is pretty, but it’s an indication for the desire of transparency in the District’s operations.  Transparency is essential for trust, trust is essential for effective communication, effective communication is essential for building political support, and building political support is going to be essential for the implementation of the Strategic Plan.  That is the chain of connection that I see in the whole process.  

I also want to thank the Board for showing support in authorizing the Communication Audit and again, agreeing to the whole process and including making it public.  This provides the springboard for some powerful changers in the way the School District relates to the community.  My hope is that at this stage, we know that the Audit includes not only a description of the situation, but it provides a blueprint, or a draft of a plan for dealing with it and for developing an effective communications program.  My hope is that the District administration and the board will pursue that thoughtfully but aggressively to carry out whatever recommendations of the plan seem appropriate and they will give it some serious attention and move forward with it.  Thank you.

Thanks for hearing from me a second time tonight.  First of all, I learned a tremendous amount here tonight.  This thought occurred to me while listening to Patty McLean’s presentation with the focus on English language learners and the Hispanic community.  There is an organization in our midst that is challenged to continue its work and that is La Alianza Multicultural Center.  Essentially their cash balance is declining.  They provide key support to Hispanic families and other cultural groups in the community and are really worthy of support.  They provide family support in the community and I think they are a good part of the School District.  

On the Communications Audit, I was part of one of the focus groups, how do you process input that you get from the outreach, how do you feed that information back to the community so that they know they have been heard and it’s actually been a useful process?  That is one of the challenges.  I wish I could participate in this with you because we have the same challenge.  I ask myself how do we go directly to the public with our message.  Just going to social media is not enough.  

In answer to Paul Bates’ question from my earlier presentation, he asked why I brought up this question of teacher performance.  I realize that it is a hot topic, it’s a national topic; and so there’s curiosity about it.  I guess I brought it up also in part, because I’m wondering how it’s done; I wonder how does the School District go about choosing the best teachers and ensuring that the teachers continue to be their best.  I guess that is something that I would ask for; communications about this process is managed.

There being no further business to discuss, Board Member Dan Parke made a motion to adjourn the Regular September meeting.  The motion was seconded by Steve Guthrie and passed unanimously.   

The Regular September meeting of the Board of Trustees of Blaine County School District No. 61 adjourned at 8:55 p.m.