Prairie State Wire

Illinois State Board of Education met Sept. 14.

Here are the minutes provided by the board:

ROLL CALL Chair of the Board Darren Reisberg called the meeting to order at 12:08 p.m.

Chair Reisberg announced that the Board meeting was being audio-cast live over the internet and video recorded.

Chair Reisberg asked the clerk to call the roll. A quorum was present with eight members attending via webinar. State Superintendent Dr. Carmen I. Ayala was also in attendance.

Members Present:

Darren Reisberg, Chairperson

Dr. Donna Leak, Vice Chair

Jaime Guzman, Secretary

Dr. Christine Benson

Roger Eddy

Dr. David Lett

Susie Morrison

Dr. Nike Vieille

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Chair of the Board Reisberg reminded those in attendance of the Public Participation Policy and the sign-up procedures for today’s meeting.

Kyle Thompson, regional superintendent from Regional Office of Education 11, spoke about local control. He discussed that little has changed, and many bus drivers and teachers are leaving.

Curt Nettles, superintendent from Clinton CUSD 15, talked about local control. He noted that this is not just a COVID-19 issue, but instead, lack of local control has been an issue for years. He believes that local districts can make the best decisions. He said that there are several uncertainties on how to proceed and no guidance, and he needs to see how the executive order is going to be played out.

Adam Ehrman, superintendent from Bourbonnais Elementary School District 53, discussed local control. He noted that he has been a superintendent since he was 29. He thinks that ISBE would work best by collaborating with local districts. He shared the local decisions his district made in July. He also noted there is a lot of anger from his district toward the constantly changing policies.

Brian Kurtz, superintendent from El Paso Gridley Community District 11, spoke on local control and supporting school boards. He shared that he has had several conversations with employees who want to quit, and his district was already short-staffed. He said it has been a disruptive time that has taken a difficult toll on the staff. He would like the State Board to advocate for local school boards.

Todd Hellrigel, superintendent from Midwest Central CUSD 191, discussed diversity and local control. He expressed that the students and the state are both diverse. He is frustrated that local districts cannot do their jobs and have no power at this time.

Casey Adams, superintendent from Altamont CUSD 10, spoke on local control and the impact of mandates. She shared that the top-down leadership has disrupted her work during her first year as a superintendent. She noted that staff are frustrated and are fleeing the education sector. She is still waiting for guidance and wants to prioritize education.

Robert Bardwell from Eureka District 140 discussed ISBE messaging and his support for local school districts. He talked about Dr. Ayala’s weekly messages, and thought she was minimizing a group of districts that were struggling. He believes the issue is more than masking. He asked what the State Superintendent and Board members are willing to do, and he requested their help and understanding.

Jeff Hill from Morton CUSD 709 discussed local control. He read a statement on behalf of 80 districts and noted it will be shared with local news sources later that day. He expressed that top-down decisions are not OK and believes that this has been an issue for a long time. He asked what the point of local school boards is if they have no power and shared that governing by executive order is not OK and it is not what they teach their students. He is frustrated by the decision-making in Springfield that he believes has caused several issues.

Seth Schule from Cowden-Herrick Schools discussed local control. He shared that although there was a meeting with ISBE and the Illinois Department of Public Health in June, no guidance was given. He noted that as soon as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention shared its guidance, ISBE followed it. He asked why ISBE asks for the superintendents’ advice in the first place and is frustrated that local districts were not consulted at all. He requests more support in managing how districts comply. He would like for parents to make decisions.

Shane Gordon, superintendent for Bluford USD 318, spoke about mandates. He shared that the conditions are worse now than in August. He noted that there is a disconnect between what is being done and the reality of the situation. He said that all he and his staff are doing is trying to comply with mandates. Instead, he would like to focus on educating kids.

RETREAT OPENING ACTIVITY

Dr. Ayala led the Board in a retreat-opening activity. Each Board member and executive staff member wrote positive messages and words about their co-workers. Dr. Ayala expressed her appreciation for the team and the activity.

Dr. Leak liked that the activity gave the Board an opportunity to share thoughts about each other as people. She noted that they do not always have the chance to share these remarks.

Mr. Eddy appreciated the chance to participate with others who care. He believes that the Board members and ISBE staff care about children and their education.

Dr. Benson loves the diversity of the group and how they approach things. She appreciates all the conversations the Board has had that have allowed her to rethink many subjects.

Mr. Duffy and Dr. Vieille both added that they are appreciative of the activity as new members.

Chair Reisberg thanked Dr. Ayala for the activity. He also noted that he is grateful that the team is committed to the work.

PRESENTATIONS – STRATEGIC PLAN: STRATEGIES AND METRICS

Dr. Ayala, Education Officer Dr. Ernesto Matias, Financial Office Robert Wolfe, and Research and Evaluation Officer Dr. Brenda M. Dixon presented on the Strategic Plan.

Dr. Ayala said that the Strategic Plan is a necessary roadmap. She shared the six updates that need adjustments since the Strategic Plan is a living document that needs to be updated at times.

Dr. Matias presented on Strategy 1.1.

Chair Reisberg asked about the forecast five years from now and asked about the sustainability of the initiative. Dr. Ayala said that districts are already looking at making things sustainable through emergency dollars and replacements. They are putting things in place and making sure the projects do not disappear when the funding is gone. Dr. Matias mentioned the blending and braiding training for school leaders that also discusses sustainability efforts.

Chair Reisberg asked about the Learning Technology Center (LTC), and if school districts are using this for support. He encourages ISBE to tell positive stories where the agency is helping as much as it can. Dr. Ayala agreed and mentioned that the LTC survey will help with this initiative. Dr. Matias mentioned that his team is meeting with Regional Offices of Education for ongoing professional development, which is another good initiative, and mentioned there are upcoming great projects as well. Dr. Leak added that the LTC is a great opportunity and a great resource that she hopes can expand.

Dr. Benson mentioned that data is piling up that can help make decisions and also noted that the agency should think about how to balance the information.

In terms of collecting data, Mr. Eddy wanted to know about the dollar investment in hardware and upgrades and quantify the dollars that it would take for sustainability. He also wants to see a demonstration on how the devices support learning. He believes that data collection is essential for the project and knows the hardware costs a lot of money. Dr. Leak added that there is a refresh cycle for devices in place that has to occur, and that also includes funding for software and service and upgrades. She would like ISBE to provide support to local districts with these efforts. Mr. Eddy added there are many devices and maintenance issues, so the support personnel need to be there too.

Dr. Matias discussed Strategy 1.4. Dr. Leak confirmed that this metric will not be seen until 2023. Dr. Matias explained that it might even be 2024 since there will not be complete informed data until spring 2022. Dr. Dixon confirmed this is an accurate timeframe. Dr. Leak said that there are not going to be significant numbers to validate this particular year as a starting point since so many districts had students who did not test in 2021. Dr. Matias agreed, and he shared that IL-EMPOWER is strengthening what is there now.

Mr. Guzman added that with the absence of the standardized accountability data, he believes that the relationships with EMPOWER schools and partners is going to be crucial, and the oversight from ISBE is really important. Dr. Matias said that Dr. Dana Kinley is moving forward with the Board’s recommendations. He knows that there are large gaps occurring and there is an effort to minimize these gaps as much as possible. Mr. Guzman added that it would be helpful to know if there is other data that is locally collected by districts that are responsive to their needs.

Dr. Dixon discussed Strategy 1.5. Dr. Leak asked how many districts have signed up, and Dr. Dixon said she is not sure of the exact number. Mr. Eddy asked what the teacher commitment is. Dr. Dixon said that it is a volunteer opportunity that is no longer than 90 minutes. Ms. Morrison asked if there are particular times for the sessions. Dr. Dixon confirmed this is correct, and they are recorded. Ms. Morrison asked if any of the times are after school. Dr. Dixon confirmed there are, and there are also some administrative sessions during the day. Ms. Morrison asked if the administrative and teacher content is the same. Dr. Dixon said that they are for the most part. Dr. Leak noted on the website it is listed from 10 a.m., noon, and 2-4 p.m., so during the school day. Dr. Dixon understood that there are some that start after 3. Dr. Ayala confirmed that they will need more sessions later in the day.

Mr. Eddy was interested in trying to break down the number of third-grade teachers in the state. He thinks that maybe 20% is a good goal, but he wants to know many teachers that is. He knows that it is hard for teachers to find 90 minutes right now due to their many responsibilities. In terms of incentives, he mentioned that maybe they could get a certificate of merit. Chair Reisberg also asked if there is an indication of how many people have done the training. Dr. Ayala added that a badge is a good idea. Chair Reisberg asked if the training is specific to the Illinois Assessment of Readiness. Dr. Dixon confirmed this is correct. In terms of interim assessments, Chair Reisberg was also curious if there are other goals or professional development for these teachers.

In terms of days, Mr. Eddy suggested looking at commonality of dates for professional development offerings.

Dr. Leak added that it will be crucial that superintendents know that this is happening. She suggested a catalog with different topics could be nice, especially including niche topics like clinicians.

Ms. Morrison asked if this is connected to the ELN network and asked if they could share it with that network. Dr. Dixon said she will look into it.

Dr. Ayala presented on Strategy 1.6.

Mr. Wolfe presented on Strategy 2.2.1. Dr. Leak asked about the timing, and Mr. Wolfe is hoping it is ready in the spring.

Mr. Wolfe presented on Strategy 2.2.2.

Dr. Ayala next shared a chart with all the strategies. Dr. Leak suggested focusing on Strategy 3.1. She emphasized that it is hard to get educators right now, and the team needs to circle back to see what else it can do.

Mr. Eddy brought up percentages and asked how many actual people these percentages represent. Dr. Leak noted that there were numbers looked at in the beginning, and Mr. Eddy mentioned that percentages are harder to personalize.

In terms of Strategy 3.1, Chair Reisberg mentioned increasing the overall number of students in educational preparatory programs.

Dr. Ayala presented the equity principle. Sergio Hernandez, director of Family and Community Engagement, shared the Equity Impact Analysis Tool. He also noted where the tool can be used within the agency. Last, he showed the training post-evaluation results and the timeline of how the equity impact analysis tool is used.

PRESENTATIONSEQUITY PRINCIPLE

Mr. Eddy brought up an example of a legislative proposal. He confirmed that there is a six step question analysis assigned to it. Mr. Hernandez added that the goal is to use any aspect of the tool necessary for the legislative proposal. Dr. Ayala added the example for the Board memo template, and now the six questions will be embedded in the Board memo template. Mr. Eddy said that these are great questions for legislation since some of these questions were not considered before. Mr. Hernandez added that everyone is at a different stage of their equity journey, but the tool helps ISBE make sure proposals are intentional and explicit.

In terms of the post-evaluation training, Mr. Eddy asked for a read on the results. Mr. Hernandez said work continues since individuals are in different places. Chair Reisberg asked if it is a lack of comfort where the equity team is going or is it workload. Mr. Hernandez said both, and there needs to be opportunities to provide spaces for these conversations, that it needs to be sustainable, and he would like a paradigm shift in the department.

Chair Reisberg asked about the wording of racial equity versus equity. Dr. Ayala said that equity is not just about race, but instead about creating an inclusive space. She shared that the team looks at all elements and gaps and how the gaps are closing. She also noted the team must look at who is not at the table. Mr. Hernandez spoke about the book study and how it has helped. Dr. Leak added that race is not culture, and she finds it important to not lump children based on the place where they live. Dr. Benson appreciated the team using the word “intentional” in their work. Mr. Hernandez added that the work humanizes people’s lived experiences.

Paula Powers, principal consultant for Special Education, presented on the equity journey continuum. She shared the equity project goal, the continuum’s journey to date, and the equity journey continuum mini pilot. She next showed a draft of the equity journey continuum and shared the next steps for the equity journey continuum project. Dr. Ayala explained which parts are public facing and which are private for each district.

Dr. Leak asked if the student group is still 20 students. The answer was yes.

Mr. Guzman congratulated the team. He asked if the cutoffs are clear, particularly what the large, moderate, and small categories mean. He also asked how ISBE can help in terms of resources, especially with chronic issues. Dr. Ayala noted it is part of the strategic work, and Dr. Matias’s team is creating a tool that districts can utilize. The tool helps district evaluate which organizations and consultants can help. Dr. Matias also added the tool helps rural communities and will be piloted this year. Dr. Ayala noted that the achievement gap has been on the Report Card for years, and it has not moved. She believes that bringing it to the forefront and making it transparent will help.

Dr. Lett asked if districts are receiving an equity score. The answer was no, and Dr. Ayala explained there will be a shading on the continuum to show where the districts are. The only people who will be receiving numbers are at the district level. Dr. Lett said that is still public information, and the media could make comparisons on their own. Dr. Ayala agreed this is a possibility.

Mr. Eddy asked about the shading. Dr. Ayala said it is about the cutoffs. Mr. Eddy confirmed that the shading is not a rating. Dr. Ayala confirmed that is correct. Mr. Eddy asked if the shading goes on the report. Dr. Ayala said this is correct, but it is an aggregate. Mr. Eddy confirmed that it is a continuum and not a score, and Dr. Ayala said that is correct.

Chair Reisberg confirmed that each slide is distilled into one line and mapped out, and that was correct. Chair Reisberg mentioned that one challenge is that if everything is distilled, communicating that in an understandable way will take effort. Dr. Ayala agreed, and she added that a narrative piece comes with it and districts can create a story within their three goal areas. Mr. Eddy loved that districts could tell their stories.

Mr. Eddy asked about the 5Essentials Survey and what is the state average return of surveys. Dr. Ayala will provide that information to him. Dr. Ayala added that districts are required to give a climate assessment. Ms. Powers added there are alternate surveys that are approved to use by ISBE. That data is collected, and her team will align it with the 5Essentials Survey and information will be processed. Mr. Eddy is interested in districts that do not meet the minimum. Ms. Powers said she can provide that information, but it is a small number.

Mr. Eddy asked about the large, moderate and small markings on the graph, and it was confirmed they are the cutoffs.

Chair Reisberg brought up his concerns in making the Report Card more concise. He is worried that making the four elements into one rating could simplify it too much.

Dr. Lett asked if there is a continuum for the three scores. Dr. Ayala stated that there is a shading for each. Dr. Lett confirmed that the subcategories will not be on the Report Card, and Dr. Ayala said that is correct and that information will be given to districts. Dr. Vieille asked how the Report Card would look and wondered if it could look distorted. Dr. Ayala noted that it could, and the team is looking forward to feedback and if districts want more information.

Dr. Dixon provided an overview of the Research Department. She discussed the organizational structure of the department, the core projects, and the current research questions.

Dr. Leak asked about the statutory language and is it foreign language instead of world language. Dr. Dixon said she was not sure and will make a note of it.

Ms. Morrison asked about the elevating educators project and the score. She liked the questions there. She asked if there is a way to incorporate an analysis between salaries and teacher retention, and if there is a connection to geographic issues. Dr. Dixon paraphrased the question and said she will share with the Research Department.

PRESENTATIONISBE RESEARCH DEPARTMENT OVERVIEW AND RESEARCH QUESTIONS

Ms. Morrison asked if the new mentoring program for initial teachers is something that ISBE is funding. The answer was yes, and she shared that these questions are not finalized yet and was a part of a brainstorming process. Dr. Matias brought up the flexibility with student teachers coming in, and now the team is curious about how these new teachers did. Dr. Dixon added that this is a multiyear process, and in the first year they need to locate teachers and their students. Then they would like to follow teachers and students. Dr. Vieille asked if there is research on the effectiveness of mentoring from teachers. Dr. Dixon said they will take that into consideration.

Chair Reisberg hopes that the Board is making investments based on research and information. He would like to know qualitatively if teachers feel more supported, even if the evaluations are not completed. He also added that there are substantial investments made through the Elementary and Secondary School Emergency Relief (ESSER) Fund and would like to add a focus area to the Research Department where the team gets a sense of how the investments are working. Last, he asked if there is a chance to outsource to other organizations to help with research questions the department cannot answer. Dr. Dixon noted it is already working with partners with neutral positions. She added that their team is small but is working hard to answer as many questions as possible with outstanding quality.

Dr. Ayala commended the research staff for its work.

Dr. Ayala noted at the May 19, 2021, meeting, she made a statement that there had been no conversations with vendors. She clarified at this meeting by saying that after the completion of the Board report but prior to the presentation to the Board, the team received unsolicited communication from a vendor. ISBE informed the vendor they could not respond to the email because it was in the midst of a procurement process. She shared that the report to the Board was not changed after receiving that email.

Dr. Ayala shared that the Assessment team has been taking in the feedback from the Board since May and would like to give an update and share its plan moving forward.

Dr. Dixon and Dr. Sean Clayton, director of Assessment, provided an update on assessments. They introduced two colleagues from the Center of Assessment, Dr. Chris Domaleski and Dr. Brian Gong. Dr. Domaleski and Dr. Gong discussed their objectives, the background information, the opportunities and challenges, and proposed next steps. Next, Dr. Clayton showed a 10-year projection with current assessment costs and proposed assessment costs.

PRESENTATIONSASSESSMENT UPDATE

Ms. Morrison thanked Dr. Domaleski and Dr. Gong for their involvement with the initiative. She commented that she hopes their outreach is intentional and that they are speaking to Grade 3-8 classroom teachers. She is aware that there is confusion out there, but she knows the teachers are the ones who have to administer these assessments. She would like their voices to be louder as stakeholders gather information.

Mr. Eddy is interested in the competing interim assessment challenge, since it is known that teachers have used their assessments for years and trust their data. He also does not see a U.S. Department of Education (ED) review in the timeline, and asked when the ED weighs in. Dr. Ayala said that has to be a comparability study where the team has to show that the new assessment is comparable and just as rigorous as the current assessment. Dr. Dixon confirmed this is correct, and there will be a pilot year where they collect data before the department reaches out to ED.

Mr. Eddy asked about the timeline. Dr. Dixon shared that the developer will work on the assessment next year. In 2023-24, it will pilot and then the assessment will be given to ED for review. Mr. Eddy confirmed that ED does not have a part in the process until later. Dr. Dixon confirmed this is correct but shared that the team knows what the federal requirements and guidelines are when designing it.

Mr. Eddy asked if there is a way to solve the competing interim assessments. Dr. Gong shared the designs, which include the along-the-way assessments to produce information that is combined with the short end of the year, have the along-the-way be the statewide mandated ones, allow districts to choose from a vetted list, or have the end-of-year assessment stand on its own. Mr. Eddy said the team can get data back from summative assessments, and he appreciated the answer.

Mr. Guzman added that the strength of the RFSP will be based on who the team engages with. He encouraged the team to be more robust in collaborating with as many organizations as possible for feedback.

Dr. Ayala noted that the initial request made in May was the big picture, so now there are so many more steps that need to happen before the RFSP is developed. She shared that there is no option of not having a state assessment. She said that the current state assessments could be kept, or they could look for solutions. She added that her goal is to provide immediate results, reduce testing time, and make it cost-effective. When working on the initiative, the team members asked how they can connect the formative and summative together. She said they are moving forward but recognize it will be a long process.

Dr. Leak asked about the field-testing year and specifically asked if districts that are field testing also have to take the current state assessment. Dr. Ayala confirmed that that they do have to take the current state assessment.

Ms. Morrison added that it is important to move through the stakeholder engagement immediately and use that information to make informed decisions moving forward with the RFSP. Dr. Ayala said that this necessitates time and resources.

Chair Reisberg had a financial question about the next two fiscal years. He asked whether it is the sum of current costs and proposed costs for FY 2022. It was confirmed that it is two years for paying for AIR costs and preliminary costs. He asked if federal dollars will be needed for the additional costs, and this is something that he wants the team to consider since budget hearings are coming up. Mr. Wolfe said that he is exploring opportunities to look at set-asides from ESSER funds and plans to use stimulus dollars.

Dr. Ayala discussed the annual Board agenda planning. She shared that there will be three Report Card presentations.

Mr. Eddy asked if proposed legislative changes could be discussed before the spring legislative session. He is interested in the tracking of the key legislation. Dr. Ayala shared there will be a legislative update at that time. Mr. Eddy is also interested in the key initiatives for that team.

Dr. Leak asked when the assessment update would be. Dr. Ayala shared it would be in December.

Dr. Leak asked whether in March if the Board is going to the Rockford district, and it was confirmed that was correct.

In terms of Macomb, Chair Reisberg shared that the visit has been postponed twice due to the pandemic. He wants to make sure that the Board’s visit is not a public health issue, and he is comfortable with plans to go there in October. Dr. Leak said that as long as the school districts are talked to about the procedures and current conditions, it should be a safe trip. Board Services Coordinator Kirsten Parr shared school visits and small groups are still being planned. She said that the social distancing within the rooms is adequate. Her concern is the public participation, which she will plan for with the district.

PRESENTATIONSANNUAL BOARD AGENDA PLANNING

Dr. Lett asked about the purpose of the two-day event versus the one day. Chair Reisberg said in the past there were a lot of events and the trip is long for many Board members and staff. Dr. Leak brought up possibly making it one day since some activities may not be possible due to the pandemic. Chair Reisberg said that the Board should wait for more details from Ms. Parr. Ms. Parr added planning is being done based on the March 2020 agenda.

Dr. Lett said it could be nice for the district to give a 20-minute presentation about something that is going well there. He shared that it could keep the Board in touch with the district.

Ms. Morrison added that while members are looking at data, there could be an opportunity to expand that data, especially data for what students do after they leave high school.

Ms. Morrison also brought up the elevating educators project and possibly bringing everything together for that project.

MOTION FOR ADJOURNMENT

Mr. Eddy moved that the State Board of Education adjourn the Sept. 14 Board meeting. 

Dr. Leak seconded the motion, and it passed with a unanimous roll call vote. The meeting adjourned at 4:35 p.m.

https://www.isbe.net/Documents_Board_Meetings/914-152021-Agenda-Minutes.pdf