Prairie State Wire

Illinois State Board of Education, Teacher Performance Assessment Task Force met Oct. 23.

Here are the minutes provided by the task force:

I. Call to Order/Roll Call:

Dr. Jason Helfer called the meeting to order at 3:32 p.m. and asked meeting facilitator Madelyn Cullick-Rizner to conduct a roll call.

A quorum was present at the time of the first roll call.

Members Present:

Senator Tom Bennett

Dr. John Burkey

Dr. Kathryn Chval

Elizabeth Dampf

Dr. Marie Donovan

Shauna Ejeh

Representative Amy Elik

Shannon Fehrholz

Jessica Handy

Dr. Terry Husband

Dr. Lori James-Gross

Erika Mendez

Senator Laura Murphy

Jessica Nunez

Dr. Abir Othman

Claire Siejka

Jennifer Smith

Dr. Michelle Stacy

Robin Steans

Representative Katie Stuart

Kesa Thurman-Stovall

Dr. Mary Ticknor

Dr. Diana Zaleski

Ex-officio member appointed by the state superintendent of education: Dr. Jason Helfer

Members Absent:

Dr. Vito DiPinto

Dr. Andrea Evans

Lori Grant

Katrina Hankison

Gloria Helin

Bob Langman

Dr. Christie McIntyre

Others Present:

Meeting facilitator: Madelyn Cullick-Rizner

Aliyah Bryant

Bill Curtin

Jill Donnel

Leslie Ellis

Paul Fix

Emily Fox

Mari Garvonado

Sarah Hartwick

Jen Kirmes

Suzanne Lee

Allison Machek

Kellie Mucha

Jim O’Connor

Julie Peters

Sierra Ryan

Omar Salem

Fatima Salgado

Barb Tackett

Fatima Usman

Mercedes Wentworth-Nice

Jennie Winters

II. Approval of Minutes

Dr. Donovan motioned to approve the previous meeting minutes. Dr. Stacy seconded this motion.

Senator Tom Bennett - Yes

Dr. Kathryn Chval - Abstain

Elizabeth Dampf - Yes

Dr. Marie Donovan - Yes

Shauna Ejeh - Yes

Representative Amy Elik - Yes

Shannon Fehrholz - Yes

Jessica Handy - Yes

Dr. Terry Husband - Yes

Dr. Lori James-Gross - Yes

Erika Mendez - Yes

Senator Laura Murphy - Yes

Jessica Nunez - Yes

Dr. Abir Othman - Yes

Claire Siejka - Abstain

Jennifer Smith - Yes

Dr. Michelle Stacy - Abstain

Robin Steans - Yes

Representative Katie Stuart - Yes

Kesa Thurman-Stovall - Yes

Dr. Mary Ticknor - Yes

Dr. Diana Zaleski - Yes

The motion passed with 18 yes votes and three abstentions. The meeting minutes were approved.

III. Public Comment

Dr. Helfer called for public comment. Six individuals wished to provide public comment.

Fatima Salgado, a representative of Teach Plus Illinois and a teacher at Chicago Public Schools, spoke first. Ms. Salgado talked about her experience as a mentor in the Chicago Teacher Residency Program and emphasized the need for unbiased evaluations of teacher candidates. Ms. Salgado stated that it is hard for someone who has a relationship with a teacher candidate to provide an unbiased evaluation, which would mean that an additional unbiased evaluator for teacher candidates would be important.

Sarah Hartwick, vice president of Education and Workforce Policy at the Illinois Manufacturers Association (IMA) and executive director of the IMA Education Foundation, spoke next. She discussed the importance of adequately trained teachers, the role of teacher performance assessments (TPAs), and the tour that IMA embarked upon. Ms. Hartwick shared that two topics of conversation that were consistently brought up by the public during this tour were the skills gap and the gap in the number of applicants for open positions. She said that IMA believes that it is important that teachers are adequately trained and supported, and a teacher performance assessment is the key to that. Ms. Hartwick finished by stating that it is important that there is a consistent rubric throughout the evaluation process that will adequately score teacher candidates and hopefully lead them to sustainable careers.

Fatima Usman, a first-year teacher in the village of Lincolnwood and a DePaul University graduate, expressed gratitude for the elimination of the edTPA and shared that she felt her student teaching experience was positive because of that. Ms. Usman stated that guidance she received from the college supervisor and cooperating teacher were essential to her student teaching experience and preparing her to become a teacher.

Kellie Mucha, a first-year teacher at Niles North High School said she was thankful that the edTPA was eliminated and shared her supportive student teaching experience. Ms. Mucha said that she received sufficient support from her cooperating teachers and university supervisor during her experience. She stated that the elimination of the edTPA led to a positive difference in her student teaching experience and teaching career overall and feels it will make a difference in others’ teaching careers as well.

Omar Salem, a teacher at Niles North High School and Union Professional Issues Director with the Illinois Federation of Teachers provided public comment by reading a statement on behalf of Renee Wagner, field service director for the Illinois Federation of Teachers. The statement Mr. Salem read highlighted the importance of unbiased evaluations and shared examples of effective evaluation practices from a previous school district she worked in located in the Southwest suburbs of Chicago. Ms. Wagner’s statement also emphasized that a third-party evaluator would be unnecessary, and the focus should be on the evaluators already in place.

Suzanne Lee, Associate Director and Licensure Officer for the Council on Teacher Education at the University of Illinois Urbana Champaign provided public comment last. She discussed the technical considerations of having a third-party evaluator and the importance of prolonged engagement for reliable assessments. Ms. Lee shared that it sounded like the assessment instrument the committee has been discussing would be an ongoing observation via rubric, which means that it would be difficult to bring a third party evaluator in to help assess just one time, when the others involved in the observations would be assessing the performance daily. Ms. Lee finished her statement by sharing that, otherwise, a different type of tool would be necessary if the task force includes a third-party evaluator.

IV. Old Business

Dr. Helfer transitioned into old business. There was no item on the agenda for this meeting. He summarized the steps that were taken after the October 15, 2024, meeting to gather feedback. He provided an overview of the most recent conversations with State Superintendent Dr. Tony Sanders and his chief of staff, Dr. Kimako Patterson, including the overall support of Dr. Sanders for the idea of a state-developed TPA and the possibility of presenting some draft language to the General Assembly. In addition, Dr. Sanders emphasized the importance of piloting the instrument as part of development. Dr. Helfer said that the State Superintendent and the State Board would support a state-developed TPA and would move on such a recommendation with the intention of it coming to fruition. Dr. Helfer also acknowledged concerns that a state-developed TPA measures what it is intended to measure. He emphasized the importance of the pilot to ensure the instrument is valid and reliable and that training and support is available to evaluators. He said the assessment must be developed by those with expertise in the area. In addition, Dr. Helfer brought attention to the important discussions being held about the use of a third evaluator. He asked the committee to consider a conversation focused on what the recommendation will be and if a state-developed TPA is the right instrument for all Illinois teacher candidates, as that must be decided before other next steps can occur. Dr. Helfer paused for additional comments.

V. New Business

Dr. Helfer shared additional issues that were brought up in comments. Members were provided with the draft language to review corresponding to the comments. Dr. Helfer said that an individual mentioned the importance of the professional learning plan to be tied to the work within an institution of higher education (IHE). Dr. Helfer asked for comments on refining language on the professional learning plan. Representative Stuart stated that she was not clear on the language and whose responsibility it would be to follow up with the professional learning plan. She would like to see it as part of student teaching. Dr. Donovan said she does not see the professional learning plan as consequential because as the state shifts to reform in mentoring and induction programs removing the recommendation would be in order. Dr. Helfer suggested making it clear that the professional learning plan, while useful, should not be part of the evaluation. Dr. Donovan agreed.

Dr. Helfer shared language for the recommendation piece. He said that the language that was received focused on “the consistent statewide administration.” Is it clear that there is a program evaluation that would contribute to a reliable and valid assessment? He asked Ms. Steans if this was related to what she was going to mention. Ms. Steans stated that she was going to raise something different but saw the language as sensible.

Dr. Helfer asked Ms. Steans to raise her concern. She stated that she felt it would be valuable to add the words “valid” and “reliable” to the recommendation to emphasize the importance. Dr. Helfer asked for clarification if that suggestion would appear in the second paragraph. Ms. Steans stated that yes, that was her recommendation.

No further comments on the language or the suggestion from Ms. Steans were reviewed by Dr. Helfer.

Dr. Helfer presented another comment about the pilot. A projected pilot timeline was shared. To preface, he provided context and rationale. The suggestion is a pilot timeline three years in length with an implementation date of September 1, 2028, to provide time for piloting, refinement, and verification of the reliability and validity of the assessment. Dr. Helfer asked if it would be acceptable to this committee to add language to the report that the pilot date could be extended to September 1, 2028. Dr. Stacy shared that as a higher education representative, she has a question about which semester the student teaching requirements will be implemented, September is after the fall semester has begun, so clarification on which semester would be needed. She would recommend an August 15 implementation date as it would make that clear.

Ms. Handy asked a question about the pilot and whether IHEs are required to participate. Her understanding is that they are not required to participate in a pilot but would need to go back to edTPA on September 1, 2025, if not participating. Either way, they would be doing one of these. She wanted to make sure there was no concern about having enough institutions participating in the pilot. The committee members did not have concerns about the pilot having sufficient participation.

Dr. Helfer asked for comments from other members starting with Ms. Steans. She suggested an edit to language to Phase Four to ask for follow-up data.

Representative Elik expressed concern with the September 1, 2025, timeline for institutions to decide to participate in a pilot or to return to the edTPA. She suggested pushing the date to September 1, 2026, and acknowledged that it would be a legislative change. Dr. Helfer stated that he will memorialize the comment for the committee.

Representative Stuart reiterated the importance of IHEs participating in the pilot and having representation for the different types of institutions in the different regions of the state. She also stated that she sees the need for legislative change as the hard date of going back to the edTPA by September 1, 2025, is in legislation and the language to clarify this is true unless taking part in the pilot should be added.

Ms. Steans clarified the language does not call for the edTPA. The statute calls for a TPA that could be defined in rules as the pilot or the edTPA, so that is a regulatory decision and would not require a legislative change.

Dr. Chval called attention to the time needed to develop the instrument but also the training that would be needed for implementation. She asked if the training piece is included in the timeline for implementation by August of 2025. Dr. Helfer noted the concern for consideration.

Dr. Helfer shared the draft legislative language again and mentioned that it is not necessarily within the scope of the task force; however, the language is something to consider with Superintendent Sanders as the new General Assembly begins.

Dr. Helfer transitioned and addressed the open-ended question about the role of the State Educator Preparation and Licensure Board (SEPLB) in the work of the task force. He explained that SEPLB currently oversees the annual authorization of educator preparation programs and collects pilot data. Dr. Helfer suggested including language for transparency and accountability.

Senator Bennett asked if SEPLB could serve as the advisory board for the task force. Dr. Helfer clarified that the licensure board is not in the business of assessment development, which is the role of the Teacher Performance Advisory Council. Ms. Steans suggested increasing the number of people with assessment expertise on the advisory council.

VI. Next Steps

Dr. Helfer transitioned to discuss feedback from the draft. Dr. Helfer shared that feedback received at this meeting would not be included in the draft yet but would be in the coming days. Dr. Helfer emphasized the importance of memorializing issues and ensuring accountability. Representative Stuart requested that the report and recommendations be considered together.

Dr. Helfer explained the process for the next meeting, including the need for a motion to untable the previous motion and vote on the report. He highlighted the importance of reading through the report and ensuring it reflects the committee’s work. Dr. Helfer confirmed that the report can receive approval even if a recommendation within the report is not agreed upon. De. Helfer stated if that is the case, the task force report will be submitted to meet the deadline and indicate that a recommendation was not reached. Dr. Helfer confirmed that members would receive the draft report shortly and could provide feedback by noon the following day. Dr. Helfer noted that the final report would include page numbers and correct appendices. Dr. Helfer asked for any last-minute feedback by noon on Oct. 24, 2024.

Dr. Helfer addressed issues with some members who had not received the draft report. He promised to investigate and resolve the issue.

VII. Adjournment

Dr. Helfer asked for a motion to adjourn the meeting. Dr. Chval motioned to adjourn. Representative Stuart seconded the motion. All members present unanimously agreed to adjourn.

The motion was passed.

The meeting was adjourned at 4:52 p.m.

https://www.isbe.net/Documents_TPA/102324-Minutes.pdf