North Dakota Commission on Education Improvement
Commission Meeting Minutes
December 4, 2007
Brynhild Haugland Room
The Chairman, Lieutenant Governor Jack Dalrymple, called a meeting of the ND Commission on Education Improvement to order at 9:05am.
Commission members in attendance included Lt. Gov. Jack Dalrymple, Warren Larson, Jack Maus, Martin Schock, Jon Martinson, Mark Lemer, Doug Johnson, Paul Stremick, Sen. Tim Flakoll, Dr. Wayne Sanstead, Rep. David Monson, Rep. RaeAnn Kelsch, and Greg Burns.
Senator Flakoll moved to add a presentation regarding the Indiana Core 40 project to the day's agenda, the motion was carried and the agenda approved.
After reviewing and amending the November 1st Commission meeting minutes, Senator Flakoll moved to accept the minutes as amended minutes; Senator Kelsch seconded and the motion was carried.
The Lt. Governor introduced Dr. Allan Odden and his associate Michael Goetz from Picus and Associates, the educational adequacy consultants that were contracted by the Commission to conduct an evidence based study of North Dakota public elementary and secondary education and funding. Lt. Governor Dalrymple informed the members that Dr. Odden and Mr. Goetz had met with the Dept of Public Instruction, the subcommittee chairs, and the Association leaders the previous day to get a comprehensive picture of what North Dakota needs from this study.
Dr. Allan Odden updated the Commission on their preliminary discussions and pointed out that there are some equity issues that remain for the state but feels the Commission and North Dakota have made huge strides. Adequacy is a broad concept, and the conclusion of an adequacy study for North Dakota is not pre-ordained. As the State provides more money for education, it should expect more quality assurance in K-12 leads to high school graduates that are ready for college and for work.
The Lt Governor and Dr. Odden then laid out a timeline for the members. Dr. Odden suggested that an early initial set of recommendations be prepared by Picus and Associates. An initial rough draft report of recommendations will be presented to the Commission on March 6th. It will give the members an opportunity to see the whole proposal and then and then there will be a page by page discussion by the whole group of the recommendations and comments will be taken on what needs to be changed. Subcommittees will meet in March and the Commission scheduled a meeting for April 3rd to assemble responses. On May 7th education panels will be convened in Bismarck, the Odden team will meet with the Commission on May 8th. In June, Picus and Associates will deliver the first final draft report to the Commission. In September they will meet with the Interim Education Committee and in November present their final report to the Commission. Additionally, they will provide two appearances as needed to testify during the 2009 legislative session.
Mark Lemer wanted to know how the commission is to develop the internal expertise to guide the recommendations through the legislative session and how the Commission will turn the document that will come from Picus and Associates into a bill draft that will hold up to proposed changes during session. Dr. Odden pointed out that through all the interaction and discussion, the proposal that they deliver will eventually match what the Commission needs to go into session with. This recommendation can be turned into an executive summary. Additionally, Dr. Odden will attend 2 days of Senate and House hearings to address any additional questions. Lt Governor said that the Commission is comfortable taking to the legislative session. The Commission was reminded that Dr. Odden will attend two days of Senate and House hearings to help address any additional questions. The Lt. Governor said that the Commission must build a strong consensus and craft a bill draft that can be passed by the legislative assembly.
Warren Larson brought up that although Picus and Associates will not be making any recommendations on facilities and transportation, the Commission still should work on those issues and the Lt. Governor agreed and asked for feedback from the members. Representative Kelsch pointed out that at this point transportation is not in the state constitution and that the legislature has looked at it before. Representative Monson thought that they need to look at buildings that are older and not energy efficient. The Lt. Governor said that in the context of the adequacy study, the Commission will have to look at adequate resources to get children to school, particularly those defined as small and isolated schools. In certain situations adequate funding may have to consider transportation costs. Senator Flakoll said that both buildings and transportation are very large issues, while Mark Lemer pointed out that some school buildings and facilities may not meet a needs identified in this study. At this point, Dr. Odden said that other states with building issues have had to form a completely different commission just for that topic, and it does become very challenging. The Lt. Governor said that he and Warren Larson will work on parameters for the topics.
Representative Monson then asked Dr. Odden what will be covered in the area of teacher compensation issues. Dr. Odden responded by saying that they will analyze staffing costs by looking at the 2007-2008 teacher salaries and benefits data. The Lt. Governor said that it is important to recognize that there other methods beyond simply adjusting salaries to address teacher retention, and the Teacher Qualifications and Professional Development committee will continue to study teacher retention in general.
Dr. Odden went on to say that when Picus and Associates do their costing analysis, they will come up with a base of adequate funding and compare it to the current formula. Regarding testing, he feels there is a lot of interest in a form of formative assessment that leads to immediate teaching strategies. There was considerable discussion on the lack of the usefulness of the state's summative assessment in the junior year. There was discussion of possibly using the ACT series of tests. Dr. Odden also suggested that the members consider online strategies for testing and think beyond distance learning.
Dr. Odden then moved on to discuss professional development, saying that they will be making substantial recommendations on what works, the delivery methods, and identifying a vision for the teachers. They will also identify recommendations for teacher qualifications.
Report of Curriculum and Class Size Subcommittee
Senator Flakoll began the report saying that Indiana's Core 40 model drew intense interest in the Legislative Education Committee. He then asked Anita Thomas from legislative council to testify about the details of Core 40 (presentation on file). Anita reviewed the comparison of North Dakota required units against Indiana's units (presentation on file).
Mark Lemer asked if there could be more clarification the integrated math series in the Core 40 requirements. Paul Johnson, Superintendent of Bismarck Schools, responded by saying that the math is taught as math concepts with problem solving and skills application methods. These are designed for those students who aren't "pure" math learning students. Representative Monson said that we could also look at some kind of mathematics integration strategy through our science classes and Career and Technical Education classes.
Representative Kelsch noted that she has been following the Indiana process closely. North Dakota set the stage to add credit requirements in the last session. She noted that the Legislative Education Committee will be reviewing curriculum issues with North Dakota University System. One concern is that we will have one set of standards for in-state students and another for out-of-state students. She feels that our Universities will have to apply the same entrance standards for everyone.
Mark Lemer thought that the Core 40 model is good because it raises the rigor of classes but lowers the total number of required units, and Doug Johnson agreed. The Lt. Governor asked what the impact of a third year math requirement would be and Martin Schock answered by saying that it would mean the need for additional space and teachers. Representative Kelsch pointed out that this is where they need to look at online options. She also noted that the alternative technical diploma option that is offered in the Core 40 is designed for those students that want to go into a trade. This is exactly what trade employers are looking for. Jack Maus pointed out that the benefits of the two diploma options that the Core 40 offers would really need to be discussed with the public. Representative Kelsch stated that Indiana's State Superintendent, Dr. Reed, felt that the concept was very popular among students and parents. Dr. Sanstead felt that the dual diploma system rewarded those who are technologically handy and gives them an honors diploma.
Dr. Sanstead then mentioned that chiefs of schools are concerned on a national level with curriculum requirements. Microsoft is working on a nationwide approach for electronic classes, and the Dean of the Nursing at UND has suggested the possibility of a virtual academy.
Senator Flakoll then concluded his report by saying that they are still examining the possibility of requiring an online credit to prepare students for a college environment.
Report of the Assessments and Accountability Subcommittee
Paul Stremick began his report by saying that the Department of Public Instruction had made its decision on the RFP for an assessment vendor. Dr. Sanstead said that DPI would extend its contract with the current vendor for a year until Picus and Associates has completed its study process. Paul said that he felt that this was a good decision because it allows the Commission to have input in the RFP decision.
The Lt. Governor asked if it was possible to integrate the state and ACT assessments and what would the possible result be if we require and fund the ACT tests. Paul Stremick felt that is would be possible to insert the ACT tests into the years that don't have assessments. Dr. Odden pointed out that a tracking system would allow a lot of analysis of student gains, help target professional development, modify curriculum, and look at best practices. Representative Kelsch noted that there are concerns from people that this kind of system would be used as a punitive tool, so we would have to develop it as a tool for professional development and instructional strategies. Greg Burns agreed with the idea of a tracking system and pointed out that he felt it would help address the issue of too many assessments. Senator Flakoll said that if results can follow a student, it would help identify curriculum needs and would also help identify remediation rates for school and school districts. Dr. Odden said that he would encourage this linking process to see how children are doing. Representative Kelsch pointed out that the Longitudinal Data Systems Committee is working on this issue right now.
Report of the Teacher Qualifications and Professional Development Subcommittee
Doug Johnson reported that he and Dr. Odden talked about teacher re-licensure such as portfolios for the smaller school districts and the lack of professionals in counseling and library science. They also talked about addressing the issue of increased teacher re-certification, that it cannot be done all at once, and that a strategy needs to be feasible both in implementation and fiscally.
The Lt. Governor asked if it would be possible to address the coaching of teacher's concept by putting a mentor out in every REA to mentor new teachers. Jack Maus responded by saying that that he felt this would be a feasible strategy. Greg Burns felt that mentoring is a sound strategy on a regional basis. Paul Stremick pointed out that ESPB had a successful model, and DPI has $5000 for each REA to provide mentors. Representative Kelsch said that the University System might be able to partner with the effort. Doug Johnson added that the ND LEAD center would be working on a mentorship for school administrators.
Pre-K Now/Holland and Knight
The Lt. Governor then reviewed the conference call the Commission had with Pre-K Now and Holland and Knight. It was a productive call but the issues surrounding pre kindergarten are complicated. There are several different areas that have to be examined such as Head start, Title 1 programs and special education money. Mark Lemer asked if Picus and Associates will be recommending on pre kindergarten. Dr. Odden replied that the area of pre kindergarten was out of the parameters of their study, but he would share information on what other states have done. At this point, the Lt. Governor announced the formation of a smaller working group to look into the possibility of a pilot program and possible integration into the formula. Mark Lemer thought that the focus group should consist of Headstart and private providers in addition to Commission members.
Schedule
The next Commission meeting dates will tentatively be March 6th, April 3rd, and May 8th. A progress report from Dr. Odden should be available a week in advance of these meetings.
Senator Flakoll then asked Jerry Coleman from DPI to get the Commission the following data: 1) The change in the mill levy collections on a per pupil basis; 2) the change in the average general fund mills; 3) how many schools will lose state dollars due to a lack of local effort.
The Lieutenant Governor then adjourned the meeting.
