Politics for PrincipalsMid-Winter Edition

Dec. 2013

Today’s Topics1. The Political Cycle – Looking Forward @ 20142. Sec. 1249 Revisions & MCEE3. School Report Cards4. 3rd Grade Retention Mandate5. New Civics Standards?6. MMC

#princ13Questions?

Year 1 Spring Session• Budget #1• 1st Chamber New

Policy Initiatives Summer Recess• Workgroups &

Special Hearings• Unfinished

Business from Budget #1

Fall Session• 1st Chamber

Unfinished Business from Spring

• 2nd Chamber New Policy Initiatives

Year 2 Spring Session• Budget #2• Negotiations btw.

Chambers on Major Policy Initiatives

Campaigns & Elections• Summer: Primary• Early Fall:

Posturing• Late Fall: General

Election

Lame Duck• Election Reaction• Last Minute

Scramble

The Political Cycle

Looking Forward @ 2014 Jan & Feb – last chance for most controversial bills

EAA Letter grade system for schools 3rd grade reading MCEE Merit pay?

May – Final budgets due MCEE? Funding increases? Testing

June – last call on business before summer Sept – last month of session before the election

(all posturing) Nov-Dec – lame duck (all bets are off)

Sec. 1249 & MCEEA work in progress…

The Process So FarA pair of bill sponsors have taken up the charge on

educator evaluations Rep. Margaret O’Brien (R-Portage) – main bill Rep. Adam Zemke (D-Ann Arbor) – admin evaluations

House: A workgroup of stakeholders has been meeting Started informally over the summer and has grown Includes associations, unions, reform groups, charters,

MDE, etc.Senate: Waiting on the HouseGovernor’s Office: Hasn’t yet weighed in.

Understanding the ProcessNot starting from scratch

Existing language in Sec. 1249 is being amendedTranslation: some things currently in Sec. 1249 but not

in MCEE are likely to stayNot everything from the MCEE recommendation is

going to end up in the legislationSome things will be simpleSome things will be impossibleSome things will be tough to get

Bottom line: This was always going to be a heavy lift, but so far, so good.

Who is at the Party?

• MASA• MASB• MAIS

A

• AFT-MI

• MEA

• GLEP• Ed

Trust Midwest

• Students First

• MAPSA

• K-12 Budget Cmte.

MASSP Bill Sponsors MASSP

Where is MASSP?Heavily involved in this process

Drafting bill languageAttending and facilitating meetingsMeeting one-on-one with key legislators &

stakeholdersDeveloping implementation strategies and

informationAll hands are on deck!Take us to your local meetings.

What’s In & What’s OutWhat’s In

Observations as single largest piece of evaluationState growth assessment & data = approx. 25%Student growth = 50% of eval. (fully implemented)Pick one model of the 4 recommended or do a

waiverWhat’s Out

3 rating categoriesVAMSuccessor MCEE and significant MDE infrastructure

What’s Up in the Air?A. Mandatory, state-funded training.B. Waiver criteriaC. Longer implementation window (esp. for

growth)D. State assessment criteriaE. Peer observers (yes/no) and qualifications

Turn & Talk:Of the issues up in the air,which is most important?

Next Steps?Timeline is still a ?

Bill likely introduced early JanuaryHouse hearings start in earnest first thing next yearUnclear the time horizon to move through House &

Senate policy committeesThe Budget Process

SY 2014-15 budget process begins in JanAt this point, looks like funding for this will be

decided as part of that budgetStay tuned.

School Report CardsTaste the rainbow.

Current System Scorecard introduced as part

of Michigan’s NCLB waiver No state-level consequences

tied to color score Top-to-bottom list also

retained for consequences Priority Schools Focus Schools Reward Schools

BOTTOM LINE: Lots of legislative blowback over the color system. Desire to combine the 2 into 1.

HB 5112Would replace BOTH color-coded report card AND

top to bottom list.Hallmark of the bill is an A-F letter grade system.It’s not just swapping colors for letters

Changes the formulaExpands consequences to all schools receiving an “F”

Still leaves a lot up in the airStandard for year-to-year growthState assessment mechanismGrade distribution formula (what is an “A” vs. an “F”)

HB 5112Proposed K-8 Formula

50% based on pupil proficiency as measured on state assessments

25% based on annual learning gains on state assessments 25% based on annual learning gains for pupils in the lowest 30%

of the public school’s pupils in proficiency. The performance of this cohort may not be the sole criterion for determining a final letter grade.

Proposed 9-12 Formula 50% based on pupil proficiency as measured on state

assessments 25% based on graduation rates 25% based on annual learning gains for pupils in the lowest 30%

of the public school’s pupils in proficiency. The performance of this cohort may not be the sole criterion for determining a final letter grade.

ConsequensesConsequences targeted to a new group of

schools:Schools that received an "F" for 2 years within a 3

year period ANDWere in the bottom 5% of schools in the state for 2

years in that same 3 year period.No more Priority, Focus, and Reward Schoos

Schools on the list would either be forcibly closed, OR

Turned over to state control.

Other ElementsEliminates a provision from an earlier draft that

would have used a bell curve methodology to determine district letter grades.

Specifically enumerates that there is no limit to the min or max number of schools that can receive a certain grade.

New school transparency dashboard which would be developed by MDE and which each district would have to post on their local webpage.

I’m seeing something…

State level accountability systems (letter grades, colors, rankings, etc.) based

on student proficiency and/or growth are not

going away.

3rd Grade RetentionCan you read anything on the bottom line on the chart?

HB 5111 & HB 5114Two bill package that does the following:

Mandatory retention of 3rd graders not at least “proficient” in reading on state assessment (currently MEAP)

Some exceptions and alternative assessments are allowed A series of mandatory interventions schools would have to

provide those students No additional funding

The sound byte: “After 3rd grade, students read to learn, so they shouldn’t move on if they can’t read.”

In 2012-13, Michigan had approx. 36,000 students “partially proficient” or “not proficient” on 3rd grade reading MEAP

HB 5111 Mandatory retention of third graders not proficient on state

reading assessment (applies to transfer students). “Good cause” exemptions if pupil meets one of the following:

Demonstrates 3rd grade reading level on alternative MDE-approved reading assessment

Demonstrates 3rd grade reading level through pupil portfolio Student with a disability for whom assessment is not appropriate Student is ELL with fewer than 2 years of English instruction

Students given an exemption shall receive interventions Retention is capped at 2 years. Student may retake the state assessment to achieve

proficiency.

HB 5114 MDE shall do the following to assist schools in providing

interventions Develop a report outlining interventions that have been

demonstrated to be successful in schools. Develop or recommend 1 or more reading skills intervention

programs Pilot the recommended interventions (there is intent to fund the

pilot). Schools shall do all of the following:

Implement early screening instruments to identify literacy delays for all pupils in grades K-2

Notify parents of identified issues as early as possible and provide tools to assist in early intervention

Implement intervention programs for students with literacy delays Submit literacy data to MDE

Michigan Merit CurriculumPart MCMLXXXI

SB 66SB 66 (S-1) is the current version, more changes to

come.How the politics are playing out:

The groups making this happen are trade unions and business groupsMI Manufacturers Assoc.Assoc. Builders & ContractorsFarm Bureau

The reason for legislative interest is specifically business related

This is seen not as pure MMC flexibility, but specifically aimed at job creation.

RESULT: The bill focuses on flexibility for CTE.

SB 66MMC

Allow students to complete Algebra II by taking a CTE program that covers state assessed benchmarks.

Allow agricultural science to count for the third science credit.

Personal Curriculum Require schools to write a PC at

parent request (schools retain the power to deny implementation)

Allow CTE to substitute for health/phys ed or VPAA (limited to MDE approved programs)

Clarify that there is no limit on the number of PCs

Require schools to notify students/parents of PC option (can be in handbook)

Require MDE to provide additional guidance on how to integrate MMC into CTE

SB 66 – Possible ChangesSchools must write a PC at parent request ONLY

if the modification is allowable under law (still retain the right to deny the PC)

Simplify the PC processOnly 1 school person must be involvedNo in-person meeting requiredNo more mandatory quarterly follow-up

Specifically allow fulfillment of foreign language requirement K-12 with grade appropriate instruction (not just HS equivalent).

Turn & Talk

Who is getting a PC in your school?If you are not approving PCs, why not?What could make the PC process simpler?

Bob KefgenAssistant Director for Government Relations

bobk@michiganprincipals.org

Questions?