Presentation on theme: "GoToWebinar (G2W) Format Everyone is muted by default. You can view presenters screen. Use the question box as a parking lot for questions/issues/concerns."— Presentation transcript:
GoToWebinar (G2W) Format Everyone is muted by default. You can view presenters screen. Use the question box as a parking lot for questions/issues/concerns. Raise your hand if you have an immediate need. We will review all questions post webinar and follow via email, if necessary.
WELCOME December 8, 2010 GoToWebinar ALE Workgroup
Norms of Conduct Focus on goals and objectives. Represent your district. Assume positive intentions. Avoid outside distractions (chat, email, phone). Treat other workgroup members with courtesy and respect.
ALE Goals Provide a high quality public education Fiscal and academic accountability Good stewards of public funds
Process Clarify areas of consideration. Conduct a transparent and open re-write process that involves the ideas and voice of districts implementing ALE programs. Address Governor's rules moratorium. Any rule revision and adoption will follow standard procedures.
Top Areas of Consideration Stipends/reimbursement Choice Assessment and evaluation Role of the teacher Clarity ◦ Tracking student progress ◦ Documentation Remaining flexible
Other Known Areas District oversight of ALE programs Contact requirement concerns Awarding of credit for high school courses Standards alignment Special education
Structure of Workgroup Idea Review Focus on topic area, not the sections of the rules. Review how the current rules address a specific topic. Summary of questions and concerns from small group ◦ Items with a (*) were unclear; please provide email follow-up. Audience poll Summary of ideas/solutions from small group ◦ Items with a (*) were unclear; please provide email follow-up. Time for input
Small Groups Group 1: Assessment and evaluation Group 2: Stipends/reimbursement Group 3: Clarity ◦ Documentation, contact requirements, and student progress Group 4: Role of teacher Group 5: Choice
Current Rules Assessment and Evaluation School district policy requires a description of how student performance will be supervised, monitored, assessed, evaluated, and recorded by school staff. School district policy requires that each student's educational progress be reviewed at least monthly. A minimum performance evaluation schedule and process are outlined. Include state assessment requirements for full-time and part-time ALE students. ALE students have the opportunity to participate in any required annual state assessments at the district of residence. It is the responsibility of the enrolling district to facilitate all necessary coordination with the district of residence and with the student regarding assessment. Programs are required to engage in periodic self-evaluation of these learning experiences in a manner designed to objectively measure their effectiveness. Require documentation of assessment, student progress, and program evaluation.
Workgroup Questions & Concerns Assessment and Evaluation Do the courses being evaluated address the EALRs? How is the student’s monthly educational progress reviewed? What is the role of the HQ teacher in the monthly Written Student Learning Plan (WSLP) assessment? With regard to progress reporting: what constitutes contact? How do we ensure that traditional schools are in compliance?* How can we ensure all programs file the report? What documentation is the issue?
Audience Poll Use the G2W poll feature; it should have popped up for you. Do you feel the small group captured your concerns, if any, around assessment and evaluation?
Small Group Ideas Assessment and Evaluation If the course has EALRs, the course should be aligned and assessed according to the EALRs. The certificated teacher should be evaluating student progress monthly based on WSLP student goals. The teacher of record must be named on the WSLP, next to the courses supervised. More information at the administrative level regarding the district’s responsibility when a student is accepted under “choice.” The focus of a district’s self-evaluation should be aligned to ALE goals such as student achievement, fiscal responsibility, and academic quality.
Input: Assessment and Evaluation Questions/Concerns/Ideas/Solutions Using the option to submit a question, provide any ideas that we should consider as we move forward. You have 2 minutes.
Current Rules Stipends/Reimbursements Board policy identifies reimbursable expenditures. Responsibility of district to provide instructional materials in line with learning plan. Instructional materials shall be provided in accordance with RCW 28A.320.230. 28A.320.230 Implementation standards reference “Instruction provided under contract” (WAC 392-121-188).
Workgroup Questions & Concerns Stipends/Reimbursements Are items/services allowed from stipends/allocation (reimbursed or not) for ALE students that are not available for traditional students? Can providers charge different prices for similar services (example: piano teachers) and still be eligible for reimbursement or payment by PO? Are transportation, food, and lodging reimbursable? In-state and out? Maximum amount per year? Are there valid reasons to reimburse parents?
Workgroup Questions & Concerns Stipends/Reimbursements Does part-time or full-time enrollment affect stipend? How many months? How is individual student achievement measured in conjunction with stipend amount? ◦ Define making progress? Is this board policy? ◦ Applied to local assessment fees? Are PPP managing the reimbursements in a fiscally responsible and auditable manner? Reports on post-enrollment status? Graduating on time – is this progress reflected in availability of $? Demographic information?*
Audience Poll Use the G2W poll feature, it should have popped up for you. Do you feel the small group captured your concerns, if any, around stipends or reimbursement?
Small Group Ideas Stipends/Reimbursements Professional development required to implement stipends.* Expenses directly (learning materials) tied to standards, WSLP. Stipend amounts tied to the goals being assessed in the state assessment.
Input: Stipends/Reimbursements Ideas/Solutions to Consider Using the option to submit a question, provide any ideas that we should consider as we move forward. You have two minutes.
Current Rules Role of the Teacher Alternative learning experiences are: ◦ Individualized courses of study ◦ Supervised, monitored, assessed, and evaluated by certificated staff. Board policy ◦ The ratio of certificated instructional staff to full-time equivalent students enrolled in alternative learning experience courses or programs. ◦ A description of how student performance will be supervised, monitored, assessed, evaluated, and recorded by school staff. ◦ The requirement that each student has direct personal contact with school staff at least weekly, until the student completes the course objectives or the requirements of the learning plan. ◦ The requirement that each student's educational progress be reviewed at least monthly. Implementation standards ◦ The school district shall institute reliable methods to verify a student is doing his or her own work. WSLP - description of how weekly contact is fulfilled WSLP - be developed and monitored by district certificated staff
Workgroup Questions & Concerns Role of the Teacher How do we clarify the role of the credentialed teacher monitoring the learning plan as it relates to teachers employed by private companies? Can certificated teachers oversee other district staff who oversee, evaluate, and assess parts of the student written learning plan? Can we expand the definition of teacher to include people who do not have a certificate? Is it relevant that all ALEs do a statement of understanding? Can we focus on appropriate control rather than local control? * Some sections of the WAC that address the role of the teacher seem redundant.
Workgroup Questions & Concerns Role of the Teacher Do we need to clarify the role of the special education teacher in ALE? Should the teacher have access to equitable curriculum as the traditional school?* Is there need for more clarity in tracking student progress? Is there need for more clarity in contact requirement? How do we empower teachers to have the ability to take charge of the plan and draw boundaries around educational practices that are not within state guidelines? Can we describe ways in which digital communication can be two- way? How do we provide clarity to teachers regarding what students need to do when they enter and exit programs? What is the relationship between the truancy law and the ALE laws? What is the primary goal of the WSLP? Is the written student learning plan a fiscal document or an educational document? Are we making the assumption that ALE means ‘not as good’ or ‘not as accountable’?
Audience Poll Use the G2W poll feature, it should have popped up for you. Do you feel the small group captured your concerns, if any, around the role of the teacher?
Small Group Ideas Role of the Teacher State funding formula changes to adapt to different/flexible student-to-teacher ratios. Less prescription; more emphasis on outcome. Focus on outcome, not delivery-based model. Change the “supervised, monitored, and assessed to be evaluated by certified staff” to “supervised, monitored and assessed to be evaluated by district staff.” Separate fiscal documents from educational documents. Create clear differentiation between learning and funding issues. Auditing programs should have a parallel model that includes evaluation of learning, not just documentation. They should be delineated and they should be talking to each other.
Small Group Ideas Role of the Teacher Clearly define the floor of student progress so teachers can document whether or not students meet it. Add a statement to the law that requires the consultant to send evaluative communication to the student weekly. Create multiple forms of assessments, including formative assessments and portfolios. Use multiple forms of assessment to create School Improvement Plans (SIP) with the entire community: students, teachers, parents, administrators, and community leaders. * Provide ongoing professional development to mentor new programs while they develop best practices. The state develops a bookkeeping system to collect ALE documentation.
Input - Role of the Teacher Ideas/Solutions to Consider Using the option to submit a question, provide any ideas that we should consider as we move forward. You have two minutes.
Current Rules Choice Choice rules not addressed in ALE rules WAC 392-137 (“Finance-nonresident attendance”) and RCW 28A.225
Workgroup Questions & Concerns Choice How do we handle logistical issues with Choice students in assessment? Can school districts mail and market students from other districts to influence Choice? Parents not informed that Choice is an option--and second, being denied-- then setting a required part-time enrollment (EQUITY and PARITY).* Challenge: parents are being burdened between districts in Choice ◦ Need to streamline process. Challenge: Students are dual enrolled in districts. At what point does a district know they are dual enrolled? Challenge: Clarify what families really need to do in Choice. Challenge: One form done every year or in a cycle for years. Marketing: Allocation of funds indiscriminately to lure students away from district A to district B. Educate the students, not the opposite. Biggest issue: Districts are losing funding when students enroll in other districts Assessment: Unfunded mandate right now. ◦ Districts charging kids to take assessment.
Audience Poll Use the G2W poll feature, it should have popped up for you. Do you feel the small group captured your concerns, if any, around Choice?
Small Group Ideas Choice Allows for part-time enrollment Choice out forms to transfer Will CORE 24 actually allow us to credit on competency vs. seat time? ALE that is competency based vs. 150 hours Tracking through competency for progress Consistency in equity and parity We need to have it [choice] spelled out (CLARITY). Clarity around who is responsible for NOT MAKING PROGRESS and then being dropped by a district choiced in. Funding equal to performance…so districts are not left hanging onto the bag. Marketing: Guidelines as to what is fair and equitable. Guidelines for online programs as they market. ◦ How do they talk about themselves?
Input - Choice Ideas/Solutions to Consider Using the option to submit a question, provide any ideas that we should consider as we move forward. You have two minutes.
Current Rules Clarity Board Policy Learning Plan Enrollment reporting Assessment Documentation
Workgroup Questions & Concerns Clarity Does there need to be more clarity around certificated staff versus highly-qualified staff? If stipends/reimbursements exist, should the rules define consumables? What needs to be returned and what is a consumable? What specific types of documentation would be adequate to demonstrate contact? What specifically substantiates the documentation of contact?
Audience Poll Use the G2W poll feature, it should have popped up for you. Do you feel the small group captured your concerns, if any, around clarity (documentation, contact requirements, student progress, etc.)?
Small Group Ideas Clarity School boards/districts should continue to have authority, but the state should provide better clarity regarding the documentation. Current special education rules apply to all public education. A standard needs to be established regarding a district first releasing or the choice program requesting. The RFR (Choice) should define Special education, 504, Gifted and talented education, ELL, Becca, Expulsions, etc. SIP should be part of this *
Input - Clarity Ideas/Solutions to Consider Using the option to submit a question, provide any ideas that we should consider as we move forward. You have two minutes.
Observer Questions Are there ways to provide for Special Services that don’t effect the FTE in online programs– not shared FTE, but contracted back to the resident district? What about the “high needs” student? Can we deny enrollment due to inability to provide for highly-specialized needs? Does rule or statute address this issue? Do the enrollment policies unfairly penalize school districts with large ALE populations and/or non-resident ALE populations? Should ALE enrollment be separate from Basic Ed enrollment for the purposes of teacher-student ratios? Or, only for online? Should districts have more latitude in making choices in student/teacher ratios for ALE? Is there a way to enforce the 48 hour requirement so that the receiving district can more expeditiously count FTE? Can Washington be a leader in providing a stable school environment for families that are in the military? Can the state assessment standards be adapted for ALE?
Observer Questions Can there be some funding mechanism for a district that is providing an assessment for a non-resident student? How do we take down barriers between districts? Can we add additional testing methods (other than the state assessment)? Should the schools be penalized when it is a parent choice? Should there be a distinction between school scores and parent choice in testing? Should the data be based upon the student taking the test on the percentage of students taking the test and not on the year the test is taken? Is there a way for OSPI to collect more diverse data (i.e. alternate assessments)? Can auditing procedures be adjusted to provide consistency from audit to audit? Is it more appropriate to discuss program characteristics than program “types?” Do the documentation requirements act as a barrier to student learning? Must Document Requirements for ALE be MORE rigorous than Basic Ed? And is there a need for more scrutiny? Make ALE the same as Basic Ed. What constitutes “student interaction” (two- way)?
Post Meeting Feedback Collecting ideas via email Received input from several workgroup members not addressed in this presentation. OSPI will use input to shape tangible solutions. Using mail distribution list to submit is fine. ◦ All messages are moderated.
Next Steps How to improve ALE implementation? Prepare for face to face meeting. ◦ Create and bring to next meeting concrete solutions. ◦ State-wide perspective
Next Meeting January 18, 2010 Olympia 1:00pm – 5:00pm