Washington, DC – On Tuesday, December 11, the DC State Board of Education (SBOE) will hold its next Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) Task Force meeting at 6 pm in Room 1117 at 441 Fourth St. NW. Task Force members will convene to explore the new DC school report cards released today. Representatives from the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) will join the meeting to assist in navigating the site and respond to any questions that arise.
Today, Mayor Muriel Bowser announced the launch of the first annual DC School Report Card and School Transparency and Reporting (STAR) Framework. The new interactive data-driven website provides students, families, and educators clear and detailed information to better understand how every DC public and public charter school is performing. DC families now have access to easy, clear, and meaningful information about schools in order to make the best decisions for their children. The State Board of Education and its ESSA Task Force worked with OSSE over the last year to bring parents and families together to help create the report cards.
Members of the public may attend and observe all task force meetings, but are not permitted to speak or participate during these sessions. Individuals and representatives of organizations may submit written testimony or information for consideration by the task force by emailing sboe@dc.gov. The task force meeting will be streamed live via Periscope for those community members who are unable to attend in person. For the latest updates on the task force’s work, please visit sboe.dc.gov/essa.
About the SBOE
The DC State Board of Education is an independent agency within the Government of the District of Columbia that advises the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE), the District’s state education agency. The State Board is comprised of nine elected representatives, each representing their respective wards, with one member representing DC at large, and two appointed student representatives. The State Board approves statewide education policies and sets academic standards, while OSSE oversees education within the District and manages federal education funding. More information about the SBOE can be found at sboe.dc.gov.
SBOE Honors 2018 Teacher of the Year and Blue Ribbon Schools
At this month’s public meeting, the State Board honored the exceptional efforts of Mr. Paul Howard who was recently named the District’s 2018 Teacher of the Year. Mr. Howard has taught social studies at LaSalle-Backus Education campus for the last five years.
SBOE members applauded the outstanding leadership and commitment to student achievement exhibited by Mr. Howard. He will now go on to proudly represent the District of Columbia in the Council of Chief State School Officers’ National Teacher of the Year competition.
The State Board also honored DCPS’s Banneker High School and Horace Mann Elementary School for being selected as a U.S. Department of Education 2017 National Blue Ribbon School. The National Blue Ribbon Schools Program recognizes public and private elementary, middle, and high schools based on their overall academic excellence or their progress in closing achievement gaps among student subgroups.
The Office of the Ombudsman for Public Education provides conflict resolution services for parents and students across the city. Serving approximately 500 families per year, the dedicated staff of the office, under the leadership of Ombudsman Joyanna Smith, works on issues including: student discipline, special education, truancy, student enrollment, transportation, academic progress and bullying. The 2017 Ombudsman’s report builds upon the equity analysis provided in last year’s report by introducing a proposed equity framework for the city. This framework builds upon more than three years of collaboration with school-based, local, and national education leaders, and intervention with over 1,500 families in all eight wards.
The Office of the Student Advocate, led by Chief Student Advocate Faith Gibson Hubbard, assists District families in navigating the complex public education system. By supporting and empowering District residents, the Office of the Student Advocate strives to bring equal access to public education. The Student Advocate’s office focused this year on expanding the services our office offers in support of students and families throughout all eight wards of the city. By leveraging connections and partnerships with government agencies, schools, and community-based organizations and increasing strategic outreach efforts, the office has nurtured vital working relationships that are student and family-centric. In doing so, the office tripled the amount of families it was able to serve through its Request for Assistance line (350 families) and direct outreach engagement (2000 individuals).
Our SBOE #DCGradReqs Task Force held its seventh meeting on November 8, 2017. In case you missed our #FacebookLive broadcast, watch the replay here and read the minutes here.
Key Takeaways
Task force members split into four groups to react to a “straw man” set of requirements – proposed changes to high school graduation requirements designed to ensure the District diploma fulfills its intended purpose.
Members then suggested further edits to the requirements, indicating which of their peers’ changes they liked, disagreed with, or wanted more information about.
In the coming weeks, members will take a new version of the draft straw man out to their constituent groups and provide feedback from those conversations at our December meeting.
Tell us what you think of our progress so far! Please take a look at the updated draft straw man and tell us what you like about it, what you dislike about it, and what you would change. Please submit all comments by emailing sboe@dc.gov or by filling out an online form here. We also encourage you to join our Facebook discussion group here to make your voice heard.
The next #DCGradReqs task force meeting will be held on December 13, 2017.
The SBOE ESSA Task Force, led by Ward 4 representative Dr. Lannette Woodruff, held its fourth meeting on November 7, 2017. Representatives from the Office of the State Superintendent of Education (OSSE) provided an update on feedback received from recently held community focus groups on a new school report card. Dr. Lillian Lowery of The Education Trust delivered a presentation to task force members on equity.
On November 16th, SBOE staff members headed out on a #SBOESelfieTour to visit schools across Wards 7 and 8 to help spread the word about our #ESSATaskForce and the new DC report card. Check out which schools they visited here. The next ESSATaskForce meeting will be held on December 5th.
At this month’s public meeting, the State Board heard from two members of the DC Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics Network’s Backbone: Marlena Jones and Maya Garcia. The State Board supports Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics or STEM and recognizes that these subjects are vital components of a 21st century education. The Network updated the Board on their work and provided some opportunities where the Board and public can become more involved.
SBOE OSSE’s ESSA Draft Proposal
102 5th St. NE, WDC 20002
Dear members of DC’s state board of education,
I am Valerie Jablow, a DCPS parent. I am sending you all this via email because it is the only way I can get timely feedback to you on OSSE’s response to your recommendations on ESSA. I urge you to vote NO on OSSE’s ESSA proposal.
Yesterday afternoon, I found out about OSSE’s response to public comment on its ESSA draft proposal.
I didn’t get to read that response until this morning, while eating breakfast and trying to get my kids out the door.
Then I read that OSSE would promulgate a new draft plan by the end of today, which I have not yet seen.
How do you keep up?
Perhaps more importantly, how does any parent, teacher, or administrator keep up?
Back in November, I and other parents of public school students in DC testified before you about the horrible effect of a test-heavy emphasis in accountability on students and schools in DC.
In February, when the superintendent of OSSE and her chief of staff held a public meeting in Ward 6 on ESSA, they touted the feedback they had already received in 50 meetings with 100 different groups. And they repeatedly said that teachers, principals, and parents wanted the heavy-test emphasis of its draft proposal.
Jaws dropped in the room that night. Who were those people who wanted testing to dominate accountability? Certainly not anyone we knew in our schools!
Thus, several weeks ago I made a FOIA request of OSSE, for a list of meetings, participants, and feedback received in all its meetings on ESSA from such groups and individuals from January 1, 2016 through the end of February 2017.
Right now, the best evidence we have for such feedback is OSSE’s response document from yesterday—in which “many” and “some” commenters are said to have said something, all of which is not necessarily reflected in what OSSE is now proposing to do with ESSA!
Thus, I hope that my FOIA request will allow me and others to find out what the Chesapeake Bay Foundation had to say about ESSA in DC public schools—as well as the other organizations whose staff met with OSSE on ESSA implementation for more than a YEAR, while all of us DC citizens (who, unlike the Chesapeake Bay Foundation, actually have children and/or taxes in this game) had only 33 days to comment on the proposal. (Which is three days more than the federal minimum of 30 days for public comment–and a few days more than the DCPS chancellor got.)
Perhaps the most radical thing in OSSE’s draft calls for schools being taken over by other operators when their test scores do not go up after 4 years (p. 59).
As you know, even with the changes it is proposing, OSSE is still placing a heavy emphasis on test scores and attendance. At the same time, there is nothing in OSSE’s accountability framework that penalizes schools whatsoever for high suspension and expulsion rates.
So what is to stop a school from suspending and expelling its way into higher attendance rates or higher test scores?
Nothing.
And where will those students go when they are expelled or encouraged to leave?
To their by right schools!
So what does OSSE’s proposal do to take this differential into account and its effect on the scores of receiving schools?
Nothing.
This is what you are voting for with OSSE’s policy here.
As you know, our city creates new charter schools whenever and wherever, without any regard for the effect on existing schools, neighborhoods, or unfilled seats.
As a result, DCPS is losing about 1% per year of “marketshare,” because growth in DC public school seats does not match growth of overall enrollments or of our student population. Just next week, for instance, the charter board will hear comments on proposals by two charter operators—KIPP DC and DC Prep—to create five new schools and 4000 new seats. The board will vote on those proposals in April. The board has also received applications for eight new charter schools beyond that, which it will vote on in May.
At the same time that the charter board is considering 13 (!) new schools, DC has more than 10,000 unfilled seats at existing public schools. (Data from 21st Century School Fund, using current audited enrollment numbers and MFP.)
So what will happen ten years from now, when these ESSA rules are up for re-assessment?
Absent any change from city leaders in our public school governance, DCPS will certainly be the smallest school system. This means more DCPS closures.
And absent any change in this OSSE policy, it means that some schools in DCPS will just become a place for kids off’ed from other schools, as those other schools chase better attendance and higher test scores—and thus create an even faster metric by which receiving DCPS schools will be taken over or closed altogether, because there is no accounting for this dynamic whatsoever in this policy or any city governance of our public schools.
This is what you are voting for with OSSE’s policy here.
One of the aims of OSSE’s ESSA policy is to provide a way to compare schools fairly and to have a common system of accountability between them. But this betrays a facile notion of how our schools actually work.
As you know, one school system in our city is bound to uphold a RIGHT to education. That is DCPS. The other system, charter schools, is not bound to uphold that RIGHT. That immediately differentiates the two sectors in a way that cannot be compared. It doesn’t mean one is better than the other—it simply means that they are different by design. Why wouldn’t you have a system of accountability that takes that difference into account instead of actively denying it even exists?
Moreover, there is nothing common between those two sectors in expulsion rules; suspension rules; facilities requirements; curricula; teacher training; and teacher retention rates—all of which are important not only to student achievement, but also in accountability to the public. OSSE’s proposal doesn’t acknowledge any of this.
In fact, OSSE has made some rather huge assumptions in its draft proposal, which distort true accountability.
To wit:
That student satisfaction = school success = higher attendance rates. (See p. 5 of the response document.) What evidence is given to show attendance is 100% (or some other percentage) in the control of each school? What evidence is given to show that student satisfaction means the school is “successful” and that students will attend at higher rates? Indeed, what is “success” in this scheme if not mainly high test scores?
That one of the purposes of the new rating system is to facilitate school choice by parents. This is perhaps the most grotesque distortion of ESSA possible. The point of school accountability is not to facilitate school choice, but to help students and to help schools help them. What assurance is here that parents and teachers will be able to use these test results and other criteria measured to help students learn better, except only in a punitive way, to avoid censure or takeover? Facilitating school choice should be the LAST thing that anyone is concerned about when it comes to helping our kids learn!
These assumptions and distortions are what you are voting for with OSSE’s policy here.
Finally, a note about compromise.
OSSE characterized its response yesterday to you and the public as a compromise.
But you, collectively, put together ten recommendations on OSSE’s draft proposal as a compromise before that—most of which have not even made it into OSSE’s response document.
So how much of a compromise was OSSE’s response yesterday—and for whom is it a compromise?
Here is a more concrete example:
OSSE’s rationale for not measuring high school growth is that different groups of high school students take different PARCC math tests and that it distorts scoring when those scores are combined.
OK. But right now, OSSE groups together middle school accelerated math test scores with regular math test scores and blithely spits out a number for both achievement and growth. That practice does indeed distort test scores—but OSSE has determined that’s OK with middle schools.
What sort of compromise is this?
I can attest that OSSE’s practice with those middle school scores has actively hurt my DCPS middle school, because a relatively large portion of its student body takes those accelerated math tests—whereas most other middle schools avoid those tests or have only a small fraction of their students take them.
So, instead of giving up on measuring high school growth or accurate middle school reporting, how about reporting data more responsibly (i.e., separate out results for accelerated tests)–or just using a different measure of math achievement than PARCC?
For all these reasons, I ask you to please not accept what OSSE is offering now. It is only a compromise of our ability to have rich, nuanced, and accurate assessments, which we desperately need and are not getting.
Your voting NO to OSSE’s proposal will give all of us time to make a policy of accountability that will reflect well on each school and every child. Thank you.
D.C. SBOE and OSSE are currently developing a new accountability system under ESSA that will meet the needs of D.C. students. ESSA will go into full effect for the 2017-18 school year. The SBOE and OSSE must decide what indicators of school quality should be included in the accountability system, goals for improvement in each category (for all students and each subgroup of students), and how to weight the various accountability components.
The Weight of Testing: How much should test scores count in the school rating? The OSSE discussion draft suggests 80%; the SBOE response memo suggests it should be much lower. Overwhelmingly, parents and teachers echoed sentiments in their testimony that so much weight on testing has damaged education and has lead to a narrowing of the curriculum. There is pressure on schools to focus on teaching students who are close to the proficient cusp instead of those who score substantially higher or lower; a disincentive for schools to enroll challenging students, whose test scores typically grow more slowly; and, not enough attention to the non-academic aspects of education, including providing a nurturing, safe, challenging, engaging environment. Moving forward, parents and teachers want testing to be set at the lowest level allowed by law.
The Weight of Growth (Individual Progress) in Relation to Proficiency (Achieving Set Standards): Rather than only holding schools accountable for reaching specific proficiency levels, ESSA offers the opportunity for DC to rate schools based on the academic progress students achieve. In spirited testimony throughout the evening, there was a nearly universal call for increasing the emphasis on student progress and including a measure of growth in the new plan.
The OSSE straw man draft gives equal weight to proficiency and growth. The SBOE has written in its response that giving equal weight to proficiency and growth is “unfair in principle and unhelpful in practice. Schools that enroll lower scoring students—on average, students who are poorer, don’t speak English, and are in special education—have to be many times more effective than their counterparts to earn an equivalent rating…. In effect, under the current and currently proposed system, “when students begin their year at a low score, the school is in effect penalized for not raising the child multiple grade levels.
Safety, Engagement and Environment Indicators: The SBOE believes that it is important for all students, teachers and parents to feel welcome, safe, and engaged in their school—all qualities that research says directly influence achievement. This relates to many factors including facilities, school discipline, attendance, bullying, parent engagement, teacher turnover, and student reenrollment. Policy experts testified to the need for a climate survey that is research-based. The goal would be to measure the aspects of safety, engagement and environment that predict achievement. When we focus primarily on test scores, we lead schools to overly focus on test prep and the two tested subjects rather than a well-rounded education.
During the March SBOE Public Meeting, the Board heard from three ESSA experts. Watch their discussion on best ESSA practices here.
During the June SBOE Public Meeting, the Board heard testimony related to school quality and student success. Watch the discussion here.
During the July SBOE Public Meeting, the Board heard testimony related to the potential impact of ESSA on vulnerable students. Watch the discussion here.
During the September SBOE Public Meeting, the Board heard testimony related to state leadership and implementation challenges. Watch the discussion here.
During the October SBOE Public Meeting, the Board heard testimony related to a Parent Summit that includes ESSA related sessions. Watch the discussion here.
During the December SBOE Public Meeting, three ESSA policy experts, a charter school Vice President of Policy, and a Ward 5 charter school parent provided testimony to the Board. Watch the discussion here.
Please share your thoughts on ESSA with us online by emailing sboe@dc.gov
The Weight of Testing: How much should test scores count in the school rating? The OSSE discussion draft suggests 80%; the SBOE response memo suggests it should be much lower. Overwhelmingly, parents and teachers echoed sentiments in their testimony that so much weight on testing has damaged education and has lead to a narrowing of the curriculum. There is pressure on schools to focus on teaching students who are close to the proficient cusp instead of those who score substantially higher or lower; a disincentive for schools to enroll challenging students, whose test scores typically grow more slowly; and, not enough attention to the non-academic aspects of education, including providing a nurturing, safe, challenging, engaging environment. Moving forward, parents and teachers want testing to be set at the lowest level allowed by law.