MINUTES OF THE MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION

MINUTES OF THE MARYLAND STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION Tuesday – Wednesday June 28-29May 24-25, 2005 Nancy S Grasmick State Education Building 200 West Baltimore Street – 7th Floor Board Room Baltimore, Maryland 21201 The Maryland State Board of Education met in regular session on Tuesday, June 28May 24 2005, and Wednesday, JuneMay 295, 2005, at the Nancy S Grasmick State Education Building The following members were in attendance: Dr Edward Root, President; Dr Lelia T Allen; Ms Jo Ann T Bell; J Henry Butta; Beverly A Cooper; Mr Dunbar Brooks Vice President; Mr Calvin Disney; Rev Clarence Hawkins; Dr Karabelle Pizzigati; Mr David Tufaro; Dr Maria TorresQueral; Mr Brian Williamson; and Dr Nancy S Grasmick, Secretary/Treasurer and State Superintendent of Schools Late arrivals on Tuesday: Ms Jo Ann T Bell; Mr Dunbar Brooks, Vice President; Mr Calvin Disney; Dr Maria Torres-Queral.TONY, Mr Brooks, Ms Bell and Dr Allen were only 5-10 minutes late Does that count? Valerie V Cloutier, Principal Counsel, Assistant Attorney General, and the following staff members were present: Dr A Skipp Sanders, Deputy State Superintendent, Office of Administration; ;Mr Richard Steinke, Deputy State Superintendent for Instruction and Academic Acceleration; Dr Ronald Peiffer, Deputy State Superintendent, Office of Academic Policy; and Mr Anthony South, Executive Director to the State Board CONSENT AGENDA Upon motion by Mr Disney, seconded by Rev Hawkins, and with unanimous agreement, the State Board approved the consent agenda items as follows (In Favor - 8): Approval of Minutes of May 24-25, 2005 Personnel Budget Realignment Permission to Publish: COMAR 13.A.06.01.01B(2) (AMEND) Programs for Food and Nutrition – Program Admin COMAR 13A.06.03.09 (AMEND) Interscholastic Athletics in the State – Sanction Rules COMAR 13A.04.01.01 (AMEND) Program in Technology Education – Requirements for Technology Education Instructional Programs for Grades 9-12 Selection of National Board Candidates for 2005-2006 Fee Incentive Program (List of Candidates Attached) ANNOUNCEMENTSIN Dr Grasmick spoke of two issues regarding the reorganization FORMATIONTHA within the State Department of Education NKS and One, a bill was signed, as passed by the legislature and signed by the DISCUSSIONANN Governor, to move child care and the family support centers to the OUNCEMENT Maryland State Department of Education This move will enhance the Early Childhood Continuum, but will create significant effort for the pre-kindergarten population So MSDE now has child care, family support centers, Judy Centers, Even Start Also pre-kindergarten programs and kindergarten programs and we’re moving toward fulltime kindergarten Dr Grasmick informed the Board that with the transfer of the Child Care Administration to MSDE on July 1, 2005, she was creating a new Early Childhood Development Division within the Department With this transfer, MSDE will be responsible for childcare, family support centers, Judy Centers and Even Start She then introduced Dr Rolf Grafwallner who was just approved by the Board to be the new Assistant State Superintendent for Early Childhood Development A new division is being created within MSDE called Early Childhood Development A reception held to welcome 250 new employees into MSDE was quite a success Dr Grasmick introduced Rolf Grafwallner, who is best positioned to lead this effort and is trusted throughout Maryland, who is requested to be the Assistant Superintendent for Early Childhood Development Dr Grafwallner said he is honored to take on the new role/position and thanked the Board for their support of him Dr Grasmick stated there will be a transition team, transitioning the people from the Department of Human Resources and helping with the renovation of the 10th floor The second thing Dr Grasmick also wanted to mentioned was that Sharon Nathanson, who is our Federal liaison, is leaving the Department and that she has asked Debbie Lichter to handle our federal relations along with coordinating internal operations with staffretired, then came back on a part-time basis, and now is retiring a second time Debbie Lickter will be handling our Federal work and will be coordinating a lot of internal affairs with the staff Betty Mack will now assume all of the internal TAPE OFF extended thanks to all Board members for the effort that they undertook on her behalf in getting the Board of Public Works to namethanked all for naming the State Education Building after her She also took this opportunity toand introduced Janice Flack as the new person to record and prepare the Board minutes FINE ARTS ASSESSMENT TOOL KIT AND ARTS EDUCATION UPDATECHESAPEAK E BAY TRUST ENVIRONMENTAL TEACHERS OF THE YEAR Mr Jay Tucker , Coordinator of Fine Arts, Division of Instruction, stated that the last the Fine Arts Education report to the Board was presented ind’s August 24-25, 2004 and , meeting focused on the strategic planning initiative that the Fine Arts Education Advisory Panel and MSDE created to in FY2000, to encourage systematic improvement of arts education programs offered by local school systems During calendar year 2002, Art Education in Maryland schools was awarded a two-year National Endowment for the Arts grant through the Arts Learning Program to review the status of Fine Arts strategic planning processes in the LEAs The policies and procedures and practices were examined that were established as a result of Legislative support The results of this grant indicated long-range strategic planning processes that have offered LEAs the support and means to enhance their programs, created opportunities for students and validated Arts Education experiences as academic endeavors Gary Heath, Assistant State Superintendent, Division of Assessment and Accountability, along with introduced David O’Neill, Executive Director of the Chesapeake Bay Trust., The Trust was created under Governor Hughes and is the State of Maryland’s nonprofit, grantmaking orgaization charged with increasing public participation in the restoration and protection of the Chesapeake Bay and Governor Schaeffer added two significant programs (license plates and donation via income tax) Those two funding sources go to the Trust The Board, working with staff, grants money out Last year over half a million was granted to public school teachers to support school-based projects designed to help schools/students participate in restoration of Chesapeake Bay Trust.Mr Tucker reminded the Board that the The advisory panel consists of a broad spectrum of stake- holders in the education enterprise; including superintendents, assistant superintendents, content supervisors, principals and representatives of organizations such as the dance, music, theater and visual arts, professional organizations and the Maryland State Teachers’ Association and the pPrincipals’ aAssociations Leadership of this panel is was provided by Richard Deasy who is head of the National Arts Education Partnership and one of the nation’s foremost authorities on arts education research; along with Dr Elizabeth Morgan, the Superintendent of Washington County Public Schools Mr Tucker introducedintroduced Mary Ann Mears, who is a member of the panel and is also the chair of the Arts Education in Maryland Schools (AEMS) alliance.s the Board of AIMS Arts Education in Maryland Schools Alliance Ms Mears said Nancy Smith, who s present, is the Executive Director Ms Mears and Ms Smith are also part of the Fine Arts Education Advisory Panel to Dr Grasmick and the Board Ms Mears stated the work that AEIMS does is about supporting and extending the policiesy and initiatives in arts education of the Department And Ms Mears then introduced Nancy Smith, AEMS Executive Director who described the work of AEMS over the past year.what they have Ms Smith included in her remarks AEMS work with higher education institutions which focused on the preparation and professional development of teachers in the arts and efforts in submitting a proposal to the Maryland Higher Education Commission to make a certificate in arts integration available as a postbaccalaureate certificate for teachers throughout the State AEMS has also developed a web site, www.aems-edu.org, to further internal information dissemination Ms Mears concluded the AEMS update by saying all of this work is having an impact on parents’ belief that the arts is vital to children being well-rounded individuals and is as important as reading and mathematics in enhancing the child’s academic skills, et cetera She said that there are still very serious challenges, e.g., shortsighted decision making across the country resulting in cut backs in arts education programs Ms Mears said AEMS’ challenge is to ensure MSDE policy is fully implemented so that the aspirations of parents for their children will be realized by having high-quality arts education programs in all of our schools Ms Mears then thanked Dr Grasmick and the Board for their commitment and leadership in arts education Mr Tucker assisted by Dr Ray Zigler (retired Professor of Music, Salisbury State University and former chair, Fine Arts Advisory Task Force) provided a PowerPoint presentation on the Online Assessment Tool Kit for fine arts education The Tool Kit was one of three priorities established by a focus group of MSDE staff and members of the Fine Arts Advisory Panel’s Steering Committee in June 2003 The Tool Kit was developed to inform instructional practice and to expand the practitioner’s understanding of assessment processes and tools in fine arts instruction The tool kit and tutorial are now in the process of being field tested in selected schools throughout Maryland The finished product should be available in August 2005 been doing this year Ms Smith said the findings of the effectiveness of the Fine Arts Strategic Planning process were published June 1st marked the sixth cultural arts for education conference held at UMBC by Dr Grasmick and UMBC staff The conference focused on the examination and celebration of professional development resources in the State Dr Colleen Seremet made a presentation at the conference wherein she unveiled the professional development standards which were unknown to many participants Ms Smith said a task force was convened to talk with principals about what they would need to incorporate fine arts programs in their schools and to increase the principals’ understanding of the importance of arts education in schools Ms Smith said also continued was the Higher Education in the Arts Task Force, a/k/a the HEAT Force, who puts the heat on administrators to make changes that are necessary for teachers and those in the higher education institutions around the State This year Ms Smith stated the HEAT Force has put together a certificate in arts integration and made a proposal to the Maryland Higher Education Commission to make this certificate available as a post-baccalaureate certificate for teachers around the State The HEAT Force also oversaw a project, through a pilot test, of this certificate’s effectiveness at schools in Montgomery County: Dr Charles R Drew Elementary, Kensington Parkwood Elementary, and Potomac Elementary AIMS is a partner with Montgomery County Public Schools under a 3-year major grant received from the U.S Department of Education’s Arts in Education Model Development and Dissemination Program AIMS hosted a presentation at the Walters Art Museum in September, 2003 for administrative professionals; i.e., superintendents, assistant superintendents, and the school principals Then follow-up communications with superintendents AIMS is now planning the next presentation with Dr Gramick and the Fine Arts Education Advisory Panel to inform the stakeholders about MSDE policy, the research on the benefits of arts education for students, and best practices that are available in the State AIMS developed a web site, www.aems-edu.org, to further an internal information dissemination process, along with a newsletter Ms Smith said AIMS is also in the process of reprinting and disseminating arts education tools, such as a brochure they put together that is a summary of the contents of the publication, Critical Links, which addresses 62 studies on the importance of arts education for students Also a 14-brochure series was developed summarizing the contents of the Maryland Essential Learner Outcomes for the Fine Arts and was very well received throughout the State A Fine Arts Tool Kit has been developed to assist parents in determining how to help better the programs at their neighborhood schools The Tool Kit was printed through the generosity of the National PTA, who allowed AIMS to steal from them the National PTAs Guide to Effective Advocacy printed in 2000 Ms Mears concluded by saying all of this work is having an impact on parents’ belief that the arts is vital to their children being wellrounded individuals and is as important as reading and mathematics in enhancing the child’s academic skills, et cetera But there are still very serious challenges, i.e., short-sighted decision making across the country resulting in cut backs in arts education programs Ms Mears said AIMS’ challenge is to ensure MSDE policy is fully implemented so the aspirations of parents for their children will be realized by having high-quality arts education programs in all of our schools Ms Mears then thanked Dr Grasmick and the Board of their commitment and leadership in arts education Mr Tucker showed an animated video describing the content and navigational qualities of the Maryland Fine Arts Assessment Tool Kit being field tested over the next several months After showing the video, Mr Tucker said the video will be revised and delivered to MSDE by August Dr Grasmick said this Tool Kit has required an enormous amount of work to develop and it should more appropriately be called an’s really an Instructional Tool Kit, because that is what it is really designed to be for that’s what it really is Mr Tufaro said art should be part of a program from the earliest stage in a child’s life and as far as hopefully their life continues He asked where are the greatest obstacles to art being part of the curriculum and taught on a consistent basis throughout Maryland? Mr Tucker stated one of the obstacles over the past 20 years is there is a lot of unevenness in programs He stated Maryland has some of the finest fine arts programs in the country and that has to with leadership, it has to with professional development needs, it has to with our changing priorities, and it also has to with unintended consequences of some of the legislation that has occurred not only in the arts, but a couple other content areas, especially the humanities areas that are losing time in the school program, wherein the arts never had a big block to begin with So all the work done is to support good programs Mr Tucker said the arts is so thankful for people like Dr Grasmick and Mary Ann Mears and the organization they are operating, and the support of a lot of partnerships and community groups, because without this support the arts would be unable to make significant impacts Mr Tufaro asked if it’s part of the curriculum in the 24 jurisdictions and that’s passed down to the principals of the schools, where does the failure occur? In response to a question raised by a member of the State Board regarding the reasons why art education is not receiving the support it deserves in our schools, Ms Mears stated she’s spent an awful lot of time working with the LEAs and there are a lot of breakdowns along the way But one of the most serious problems is the result of when principals who are faced withing the high consequences of No Child Left Behind, which is sort of really raising the bar on testing She indicated thatI think what happens , and in spite of many principalsof them understanding of what the arts means for kids, is aI think it’s a very practical thing that they think that the most defensible decision they can make in terms of resources, but even more significantly time in the day, is to cut their arts program and hire additional reading teachers Ms Mears thinks that is the biggest barrier COMAR requires the arts, but the LEAs are in violation; some more than others Mr Tufaro said, but isn’t that the problem, if the superintendent of the school district is overseeing what’s going on in the schools and either they or their assistants are busy, wouldn’t they know whether arts is being taught twice a week in this plan or that plan? It’s either being done or it’s not being done Ms Mears went on to say that what is needed isresponded by saying part of the effort here, it’s a renewed effort to say the arts are important Principals are very concerned about their school not getting into a school improvement category She stated that she believes what is missing that is what isis seen in successful school systems with, where they have a very robust program in the arts, and that is their ability to be able to integrate the arts so that they use the arts as an important vehicle for ratcheting up performance She cited an example, Wicomico County Public Schools She said that , she would like the Board to see how that county has proceeded with theat level of integration It is masterful It’s not an add on, it’s an integral part of everything that is happening tothat does enhance reading in that county That’s the kind of information Ms Mears feels that when they provide for this professional development with the research that superintendents can be exposed to and to see these kinds of examples Ms Mears doesn’t believe there is that level of knowledge throughout the State But the research in articles is put in the LEAs publications about the arts education impact, but they’re still not quite getting it So that needs to be addressed It’s important that the principals buy into and really understand the information and are enthusiastic about it, just in how the arts will transform their schools and transform the lives of their teachers Dr Grasmick stated students are selected into these schools not based on their academic records, but based on their areas of talent in specific areas of the arts What has happened, for instance at the School for the Arts, is that they have among the highest SAT scores in Baltimore City because there is such a nexus between the arts and increased academic performance; even though the students were not selected Mary Kerry in the Carver Center for the Arts, more than a third of her students were students with special needs and yet her achievements, every year we get a list of the national recognition for the Carver Center for the Arts of the students in that school and yet more than a third had IEPs; they were special education students Ms Kerry commented that one of the things that she felt that needed to be improved and is still improving, is that both the integrated arts program and the arts program is separate Both things are part of the Carver Center and really has an extraordinarily positive impact on the academics by looking at the advanced placement results, the SAT results, the scholarships for colleges and universities, and these are students who come with many needs, with great deficiencies in literacy and math, and their catch up is extraordinary and she believes it’s been proved through the arts Dr Pizzigati said it seems to her what the Board heard this morning speaks to a lot of the challenges faced in getting the right word out to the right constituencies and having it applied in correct ways that result in improved student outcomes and enrich student lives and professional lives as well Many leaders in the various sectors of the public help set and support priorities and the importance of really drilling down, as you are doing, with your parent tool kit and with other vehicles to reach both parents and professionals, principals, teachers and the like She said we need to ask some serious questions about the kind of professional development we are doing to help get the right message across, the correct message across, and have it be translated and have it be caught, if you will, in a very synergistic way by the professionals who are involved in it so that that word is spread Some folks are doing this very, very well; others need to catch this cold Dr Pizzigati believes the professional development piece is an area where you’re focusing a great deal of attention, but it may require even more specific kinds of examination, depending on what you’ve learned from your other sites And the sharing of that information among those who are doing it well with their peers who are not quite as sophisticated and as skilled She believes the materials that are being developed have great utility or could have great utility in public venues to help support the goals of MSDE in this arena and all of the work that AIMS is doing So to that end, Dr Pizzigati feels reprinting the parent guide or some synopsis or materials for your lay publics, the citizens of this State who need to know more about and who are certainly less well informed than others Her question is, in terms of both the distribution of the parent guide and its reprinting, you have the time frame, and have you thought about something that would reach the more general public with a distinctly educational task to it that would help advance this agenda? So two questions, the parent guide and the general public Ms Mears said a proposal is being developed for the St Paul Companies for addressing the issues of parent education The great joy of being able to distribute that Parents’ Tool Kit through the aegis of the Maryland PTA to all schools will really help Because of the expense of publishing any publication, so they have been put on their web site, that’s a great tool, but then you’ve got to drive people to the web site to look at it So the question is how you get it out to the general public and that is something AIMS is working to improve Ms Mears said in terms of reaching the general public, AIMS is in the process of expanding their resources they have, their database, the way they can get to people, their E Newsletter they think will be a great tool to help them In terms of the time frame, Ms Mears stated AIMS is speaking with the PTA this summer The Parents’ Tool Kit is to be developed beginning during this current fiscal year, FY ’06 that begins July for them In terms of materials for the general public, certainly the marketing committee is very concerned that the materials that we have 10 Ms Bell asked for clarification as to why this is necessary Mr Smeallie said legislation was adopted and signed by the Governor in 2004 requiring that social workers and others obtain and maintain certification to practice their craft in a school setting Mr Smeallie also said another component of the request is that individuals who might want to achieve or add certification as an administrator and if they haven’t held a certificate, they can’t obtain that endorsement Ms Cloutier recommend the State Board defer the decision on the conference committee until receipt of public comment and therefore you keep all options ope.n and if you need, you can then convene it Upon motion by Mr Brooks, seconded by Dr Queral, and with unanimous agreement, the State Board agreed to defermoved that the State Board defer action on a its option of requesting a joint conference committee until after public comment is received on the proposed regulation (In Favor.11) REPORT OF THE SUPERINTENDENT’S PANEL ON EXCELLENCE IN ADULT EDUCATION Dr Grasmick provided background said, as background information for the State Board members She said that, Maryland has over 600,000 youth and adults who lack a high school education and there is a waiting list of individuals who are desirous of the services of adult education Maryland has one of the lowest State investments in our Nation It’s time to remedy the problem so a Panel on Excellence in Adult Education was appointed and the State Board approved and supported it The Panel was charged with providing the State Board with recommendations that would ensure the citizens of Maryland could receive the services necessary adult education services Kathy Oliver, Assistant State Superintendent, Division of Career, Technology and Adult Education, stated that the Task Force to Study Adult Education, created by the General Assembly, in 2001, provided a number of recommendations Chief among them was that it’s necessary to take a look at the resources supporting the program and the need to ensure accountability forof those resources Ms Oliver introduced key members of the Team that will presented the preliminary findings and recommendations of the Panel Ms Oliver introduced the Honorable Tom Perez, President, Montgomery County Council, and Mr Chris Eddings, Publisher of the Daily Record Mr Perez emphasized that the issues of adult education and adult literacy are critical work force development issues One of the most important data points in Montgomery County is theat kids entering the public school system and their birth country,(Janice – I can not make 40 any sense out of the following :????? ESL kids, by a factor of four, the country in which these kids are born, four times more likely than number two on the list is the USA It tells us the parents have been here for four/five years, maybe more, and still haven’t mastered the English language In order to raise the bar and close the gap, this is a critical challenge to address the waiting lists Mr Perez also stressed the more investment in adult education, you get a higher rate of return because the average wage is higher and people become self-sufficient, less reliant on public assistance programs and we all benefit Mr Perez said from data on state investment in adult education, Maryland is at the bottom of the pack investing $1.2 million annually, as opposed to, say, North Carolina with an annual investment of almost $40 million Mr Perez said from data on state investment in adult education, Maryland is at the bottom of the pack at $1.2 million, as opposed to, say, North Carolina invested almost $40 million Chris Eddings, Publisher, Daily Record, stated that within Baltimore City, out of 10 adult citizens can not read Thus, they can’t fill out a job application or get their driver’s license, among other things, to become self-sufficient There are 600,000 people in Maryland who need adult literacy services of one sort or another and we spend less per person needing those skills than does the State of Alabama The Panel is developing a full model to provide full funding of adult education within Maryland and is beginning a public engagement process to further refine the Panel’s preliminary their recommendations A final report will be released in early fall COMAR 13A.08.01.01.,02 and 02.29 (AMEND) STUDENTS – GENERAL REGULATIONS Rolf Grafwallner, Coordinator of Early Learning, Division of Instruction; and Michael Cockey, Specialist in Early Learning, to discussed amendments to the COMAR regulation which included sections which allowed local boards of education to adopt regulations for early admission of children who missed the established cut-off dates but were developmentally ready and more advanced for prekindergarten, kindergarten and grade Dr Grasmick recommended to the Board that the required date of implementation of the proposed regulations be changed to January 30,2006 to provide a phase-in period needed by to some school systems that are strapped, which would conclude by January 30, 2006, to be sure every system would be in tandem with the requirements of this Board This later date would also accommodate concerns made regarding the need to incorporate the requirement into the formulation of the annual local school system budget proposals Where budgets have already been in place; new budgets have not been formulated to 41 accommodate this, et cetera With that inclusion, Dr Grasmick recommended the adoption of the proposed amendment requiring local school systems to have a policy on early admission to pre-Kindergarten, Kindergarten, and first grade Dr Root stated that thesaid Board will accept Dr Grasmick’s requested modification, as clarified by Ms Cloutier, as an editorial change Upon motion by Ms Bell; seconded by Dr Pizzigati, and with unanimous agreement, the State Board adopted the proposed regulations; i.e., incorporating the editorial change (In Favor – 11) RECESS AND EXECUTIVE SESSION Motion to go into executive session for purpose of discussing two legal appeals; reviewing one draft opinion; discussing an appeal of Board decisions; discuss a request for joining in litigation; seek advice of counsel on an issue involving private school personnel issues; seek advice of counsel on issue involving holidays for religious observance; update on legal controversies involving two school systems; affirm action on a personnel issue involving a local school system; and discuss a number of internal Board management matters Upon motion by Mr Brooks, seconded by Ms Cooper, and with unanimous agreement it was agreed to discuss above-referenced items (In Favor – 11) Pursuant to §10-503(a)(1)(i) & §10-508(a)(1),(7), & (8) of the State Government Article, Annotated Code of Maryland, and upon motion by Mr Brooks _, seconded by Ms Cooper , and with unanimous agreement, the Maryland State Board of Education met in closed session on Tuesday, May 24, 2005, in Conference Room 1, 8th Floor, at the Nancy S Grasmick Building All Board members were present The Executive Session commenced at 12:25 p.m The State Board deliberated the following appeals and the decisions of these cases will be announced publicly: • Toni M Davis v Montgomery County Board of Education – curriculum revision dispute • Bruce M Venter v Howard County Board of Education – noncertificated employee termination The State Board also authorized the issuance of one pending opinion At 12:45 p.m., JoAnn Carter, Carol Ann Baglin, Steve Brooks, Ann 42 Chafin, and Brian Rice joined the Executive Session With Ms Cloutier, staff discussed issues that have been raised regarding the three charter school opinions issued on May 6, 2005 The State Board deferred action to the open session later in the day Dr Grasmick and Ms.Cloutier discussed with the State Board requests for reconsideration of the State Board’s decision to remain neutral in the Schaeffer v Weast appeal in the United States Supreme Court After deliberation, the State Board unanimously agreed to remain neutral in the appeal Ms Carter, Ms Chafin, Dr Baglin, Mr Brooks and Mr Rice left the executive session at 1:55 p.m Dr.Grasmick briefed the State Board on the status of monitoring and corrective actions required of a nonpublic school The State Board took no action on this matter at this time Ms Cloutier advised the Board on a substantial constitutional issue in the recommendation for two floating holidays for students for religious purposes The State Board unanimously agreed not to take action on the recommendation, finding that the existing COMAR regulations on lawful attendance and lawful absence adequately addressed the matter The State Board members unanimously affirmed the results of the Board poll on candidates for the existing vacancies on the Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners The Board directed Mr South to forward the names of those candidates to the Mayor and the Governor Dr Grasmick advised the Board that no audits had yet been received from the Prince George’s County Public School System Therefore she is obligated to withhold ten percent from the next installment of State aid The Executive Session concluded at 12:20 p.m LEGAL ARGUMENTS The State Board heard oral arguments in the following case: Appeal filed by Dr Ben Carson Charter School, 43 Independent Child Study Teams of Maryland and Denise Beck v Harford County Board of Education PUBLIC COMMENT The Board heard comments from the following individuals: NAME Leo Condis Patrick Spicer PANEL ON STATE BOARD’S DECISIONS REGARDING CHARTER SCHOOL APPEALS TOPIC Charter School Entity Harford County Bd Of Ed Dr Grasmick introduced the presentation by a panel of key executive staff of MSDE to enhance the details of the three opinions rendered by the State Board two weeks ago concerning three appeals to the State Bopard related to charter schools This concerns the Charter School law, which is a new law for implementation in the State of Maryland However the law has many inconsistencies as part of it (Janice – all references to charter schools should be lower case) Steve Brooks, Chief of the Budget Branch, discussed the Board’s decision to use of an average per pupil as the basis for funding charter schools funding level, which is not a mean thing to The Board followed the example of the Thornton Commission in determining funding allocations Two of the Commission’s guiding principles were flexibility of funding and simplicity of funding Mr Brooks stated the calculation of average cost does not mean that the funding mix of each fund source to the LEA needs to be duplicated at the Charter School level Funding sources that would be provided to the school would be dependent upon the specific school’s eligibility for those restricted funds Mr Brooks stressed that average means just that It does not necessarily represent an amount that any specific student receives Some students will cost more to educate, some will cost less The use of average cost ensures that the same level of funding per pupil is available to the Charter School as is available district wide It’s up to the Charter School to spend those funds effectively just as it’s the responsibility of the local school systems to the same JoAnne Carter, Assistant State Superintendent, Division of Student and School Services, discussed Title funding in Charter Schools regarding the per pupil Charter School allocation and how to would you go about including Title funding as a part of Charter Schools Ms Carter introduced Ann Chafin, Chief, Program Improvement and Family Support Branch, Division of Student and School Services, and asked her to ecplain who will explain their the hand-out that was provided to the Board and the public 44 Ms Chafin stated the charter school Charter School per pupil allocation represented by, CPPA on the handout replicated the formula issued in the Board’s decisions., replicating formula within the opinion The CPPA is the sum of aAll local, state and federal dollars added together and divided by September 30 enrollments Obviously that would be multiplied by the Charter School’s enrollment and that would be for any one school, the total Charter School funding The sSecond bullet in hand-out dealtdeals with computing the Title per pupil allocation, TPPA This is done, as always, once you determine the Title schools to be served, which is based on a ranking of all schools, including the Charters They determine how far down that rank they can actually serve Title students and that becomes the cut off For sSchools above that line, they look at the number of free and reduced meal students, except in Baltimore City and Anne Arundel County In those two jurisdictions,, they use only the free meal students They the ranking that way That’s how they determine the number of kids, the number of low-income kids in those Title schools They then look at the total dollars for the Title allocation, the total dollars coming to the system They take out the set-asides that have to with parent involvement, those things that have to with district-wide activities and/or things that are not equitably distributed across the school From that, the money that remains after the setasides is divided by the number of low-income students in that Title school That’s the Title per pupil allocation Dr Carol Ann Baglin, Assistant State Superintendent, Division of Special Education, stated her division isthey are in the process of finalizing Maryland’s version of the Technical Assistance Bulletin which will cover very complex issues related to the delivery of special education in a Charter School Dr Baglin then discussed the issues associated with funding and services of Charter Schools and special education Ms Cloutier then discussed three accounts of the opinions that surfaced in the newspaper and variousthe questions that have been addressed to the e State Board has gotten and questions that Dr Grasmick regarding the Board’s opinions.has gotten in the legal arena Dr Grasmick indicated that each of the presenters willagrees with the resolution of the issues that Ms Cloutier has raised that each of the presenters would work with their counterparts in the local school sytems on the specificity of what has been present to the State Board today regarding the three opinions renderendsystems on the specificity on what has been presented to the State Board today regarding special education, Title I, and business executives But Dr She emphasized 45 that theGrasmick believes the the questions that have been posed are important to be resolved so that the information that is we shared with local systems will be absolute correct Ms Cloutier requested direction for her working on the three issues regarding the newspaper accounts and the questions that came to the State Board and to Dr Grasmick Dr Root, with Ms Clothier’s permission, asked that they defer these issues until a later time.tomorrow SECONDARY SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS OF THE YEAR Dr Grasmick introduced this item by stating expressed that the leadership of a school is an absolutely critical element to the success of anyall of our schools Leadership matters, it always matters and the principal is a pivotal position Dr Grasmick introduced Sue Ann Tabler, Executive Director, and Maryland Secondary School Principals Administrators Association Ms.Sue Ann Tabler introduced the high school principal of the year, who is Heath Morrison, Thomas Stone High School, Charles County; and the assistant principal of the year, who is Lori Batts, Mardela Middle and High School, Wicomico County Ms Tabler said that; and the middle school principal of the year, is Cathy J Townsend, Principal of Salisbury Middle School ,Wicmomico County, was unabe to attend today’s meeting (who was unable to attend) Dr Root and Dr Grasmick congratulated Mr Morrison and Ms Batts and presented each with a and certificates of recognition from the State Board were given out to those individuals PUBLIC COMMENT The Board heard comments from the following individuals: Name Topic Dr Barbara Dezmon Add floating holidays for School holidays and religious observance Religious observance John Haden Charter Schools John Woolums Charter Schools Mary Alice Gehrdres Charter Schools Dr Linda Burgee Charter Schools Dr Bonnie Borsa Charter Schools Patricia Foerster Charter Schools Gordon Sampson Charter Schools William Ekey Charter Schools David Blydon Maintenance of Effort Work Group 46 REPORT ON MAINTENANCE OF EFFORT COMMITTEE Dr Grasmick introduced Mr Disney and Senator Barbara Hoffman and handed out the proposed charge and the proposed membership of the Maintenance of Effort Committee to the Board members Senator Barbara Hoffman, Co-Chair, said it is the State’s the School Board’s responsibility to propose this committee’s charges and membership and that the size of the committee is important She said that it was important that the committee not be so large as to become unmanageable and that the county and State be properly represented since they are the major sources of revenue for public education., its county government to provide revenues and, of course, it’s the State that provides the revenues as well She also indicated that she would not have agreed to cCo-cChair this effort if she believed there was a pre-ordained conclusion She feels it’s time to talk about this commission and feels it will be effective Wants everyone’s cooperation in filling out the names of the membership list Ms Bell suggested including people from the Maryland business roundtable, the Maryland Chamber of Commerce, somebody from a business entity Senator Hoffman suggested directing the Governor, if appropriate, in his two appointments that he go to the business community or the citizenry The size of the membership is important Do not want to make it too big to become unmanageable Mr Disney said he looked forward to working with Senator Hoffman It’s time to talk about Maintenance of Effort, both good and bad He hopers the Committee can complete its work this fall Hopes to wrap up in the fall Upon motion by Mr Brooks, seconded by Mr Butta, and with unanimous agreement, the State Board accepted the proposed charge and proposed membership of the Maintenance of Effort Committee (In Favor – 12) RATIFICATION OF POLL VOTE ON MODIFICATIONS TO MARYLAND’S ACCOUNTABILITY PLAN FOR NO CHILD LEFT BEHIND Dr Root announced that since the last meeting of the State Board, a telephone poll was taken of the State Board regarding two additional requests to the United States Department of Education regarding modifications to the State Accountability Plan spoke of a telephone poll on some modifications to Maryland’s Accountability Plan for No Child Left Behind He then asked the Board toWe need now to publicly affirm the submission of those two additional requestscharges 47 to USDOE So our Deputy Superintendent can get the information to them Upon motion by Dr Queral, seconded by Ms Cooper, and with unanimous agreement, the State Board affirmed their vote to include two additional requestscharges to the USDOE (In Favor – 12) RE-VISITED THREE ISSUES OF THE STATE BOARD’S DECISIONS REGARDING CHARTER SCHOOL APPEALS Dr Root indicated totold Ms Cloutier the Board would now can deal with theher three items which she had requested the Board provide direction on following the panel presentation made earlier in the meeting.requests The first item would be the affirmation of the Board’s processprocedure on waiver requests The Board, in lieu of developing an interim proposal for one month., will use the proposed processprocedure even though the process can not be formally adopted until June, in lieu of developing an interim proposal for one month Upon motion by Mr Tufaro moved that the Board use the process as proposed., This motion was seconded by Mr Brooks., Mrs Bell raised a concern regarding the appropriateness of this action given that the proposed waiver process regulation could not be formally adopted until the June meeting (then there was discussion re Ms Bell had a problem with semantics) To address Mrs Bell concern, Ms Cloutier suggested the revised opinion include an amendment to footnote #7 stating that pending the adoption of regulations in COMAR regarding charter school waivers, the State Board will follow the procedures as proposed to allay Ms Bell’s concerns to amend the wording of Footnote 9, the last sentence, you felt a need for process, you wanted input from the local and this was at least set out and actually published The last sentence says, “Although the regulation done in the promulgation process, the State Board will follow these procedures for any waiver request it receives from Charter School applicants.” Ms Cloutier recommended amending that to say, “Pending the adoption of regulations in COMAR, the State Board will follow those.” So that it makes it clear; it’s just in the interim Dr Root questioned if that is acceptable as an editorial change to the Motion? With unanimous agreement, the motion above was approved with the editorial changes of Ms Cloutier (In Favor – 12) Second issue, Ms Cloutier asked if the Board wants to issue a revised opinion that would incorporate guidance that was presented today by Mr Brooks, Dr Baglin and Ms Carter and Ms Chafin on the general statements regarding per pupil funding , Title I , and Special Education 48 in Title Sub-question: indirect cost She suggested taking them separately Upon motion by Mr Brooks, seconded by Ms Cooper, motion for a revised opinions, taking into account the information gGuidance provided today There was a suggestion by Ms Cloutier to incorporate Guidance by reference and attach handouts as eExhibits to this opinion With unanimous agreement, the State Board approved issuing revised opinions incorporating the suggestions of agreed to the amendment as suggested by Ms Cloutier (In Favor – 12) The Third issue discussed was is indirect costs Ms Cloutier said the staff proposed deducting from payments to charter schools an indirect cost of 2% since, because of the requirements at the central office, there are certain, administrative responsiblities that the central officeion will have to regardless of how autonomous the Charter School is., that it’s recommended to deduct a percent indirect cost from the beginning and, then, in addition, if If the Charter School negotiates for additional services to be provided by the local school system it would, of course, reimburse the local school system in excess of the 2% for those additional costs Mrs Bell made a motion to include the 2% indirect cost as part of the revised opinions Her motion was seconded by Dr Queral Dr Root stated it’s very important that the revised opinion include that information A question was raised regarding the appropriatness of the 2% figure Mr Steve Brooks said it was suggested as an opportunity for the Board to use something that is already available There are indirect cost rates at the local school system and those rates vary significantly Restricted rates are associated with their federal grants Those rates can go up significantly beyond percent The percent that’s being referred to actually relate to what they are allowed to charge on specifically restricted State funds and thought that this might be something that the State Board could consider Overall restricted grant could, obviously, go significantly higher Upon motion by Ms Bell, seconded by Dr Queral – Mr Disney said staff is going to recover some of that administrative cost Some locals have to expend a sizeable amount of money just reviewing these Charter proposals and all, and the Charter Schools are getting grant money to this Mr Disney asked if the Board feels the percent is meant to help them also recover some of this cost for evaluating all of these Charter proposals Ms Cloutier said it’s in the manual, “not to exceed percent” It 49 really doesn’t apply to this It’s just by analogy Mr Steve Brooks said it was suggested as an opportunity for the Board to use something that is already available There are indirect cost rates at the local school system and those rates vary significantly Restricted rates are associated with their federal grants Those rates can go up significantly beyond percent The percent that’s being referred to actually relate to what they are allowed to charge on specifically restricted State funds and thought that this might be something that the State Board could consider Overall restricted grant could, obviously, go significantly higher Dr Root asked if this is a fair percentage, the percent, with the possibility of higher amounts on other types of grants Mr Brooks said, especially with regard to the fact that they could, in fact, request other services that they would otherwise be able to obtain themselves Yet if they wanted to get it from the local school system, then obviously, as Ms Cloutier said, that would be an additional reimbursement from the Charter School Mr Disney felt that didn’t address his concern regarding the investment that the local school districts have to put into evaluating these Charter School applications and going through some of these other things, but Mr Disney is all right with discussing that more Dr Root stated this is an evolutionary process and if the Board finds that the percent is not fair, the Board can revisit that, if necessary Ms Cloutier suggested if the State Board feels strongly, the Board should begin with something everyone agrees with because she doesn’t envision legally that it’s wise for everybody to think that every month the Board has to issue a revised opinion This should be it or this should be it for these three This is on staff recommendation so the Board can whatever it wants Dr Root was concerned about Mr Brooks’s statement that indirect costs vary significantly from district to district Mr Brooks stated it’s computed through mathematically a formula and it’s used to assess against primarily federal grants Ms Cloutier said, for better or worse, the way the budgeting is set up in Maryland, money does not follow the child Most of the arguments are made from the premise that money follows the child, it doesn’t And local school systems have different ways of accounting for how any public school is funded and there is great variation even in Baltimore City They have more resources Everyone has to abuse themselves of the notion that money follows the child That’s number 50 one Secondly, Mr Disney’s concern about the transfers and getting approval from local government, she doesn’t believe you have to, because what has been appropriated per major category, the Exhibit to budget shows specifically what the local school system has budgeted per pupil It’s already there They are not changing that It’s just how much of that is going to the Charter School for each category Mr Disney suggested discussing Ms Clothier’s comments above at a later time Following lengthly discussion, Ms Cloutier,reiterated that again, said average per pupil, given the way everything is budgeted right now in Maryland, seems like the best proxy and The that she nowBoard needs to advice from the Boardse Ms Cloutier on what indirect costs the Board wants to useput so that she can includeadd this information in tto the revised opinions Dr Root said that on on the floor is a motion to include the percent indirect costs and asked if there was AAny sentiment to amend that motion So with unanimous agreement, motion carries (In Favor – 12) EXECUTIVE SESSION AND ADJOURNMENT Upon motion by Dr Allen, seconded by Ms Cooper, and with unanimous agreement, the Board went into Executive Session for purpose of considering a legal appeal (In Favor – 12) Pursuant to §10-503(a)(1)(i) & (iii) and §10-508(a)(1), (7) of the State Government Article, Annotated Code of Maryland, and upon motion by Dr.Pizzigati , seconded by _Ms Cooper , and with unanimous agreement, the Maryland State Board of Education met in closed session on Tuesday, May 24, 2005, in the 7th floor board room, at the Nancy S Grasmick Building All board members were present The Executive Session commenced at 6:00 p.m The State Board deliberated the following appeal and the decision of this case will be announced publicly • Dr Ben Carson Charter School, et al., v Harford County Board of Education: The Executive Session concluded at 6:15 p.m RECONVENED The State Board reconvened at 9:00 a.m on Wednesday, May 25, 51 2005 Dr Root pointed out that Dr Queral and Rev Hawkins would notwill not be in attendance for this session of the meeting.e afternoon session PTA LIFETIME ACHIEVEMENT AWARD Ms Ester Parker, President, Maryland Congress of Parents and Teachers, reported that the gala held by the National PTA, celebrating 90 years of advocacy in Maryland, was a tremendous success At that gala Aan award was scheduled to be given to Dr Grasmick at the gala but due to circumstances beyond Ms Parker’s control the award presentation could not be made, however because of horrible traffic and late arrivals the award was not presented So Ms Parker then presented toDr Grasmick today was presented with the National PTA Life Achievement Award, which is the highest honor the National PTA can bestow on anyone Ms Parker read a letter from Linda Hodge, President of the National PTA, who couldn’t attend the Board meeting, and welcomed Dr Grasmick as a member to this distinguished group and thanked her for being such a strong advocate for children Dr Grasmick thanked Ms Parker for this honor and praised her for the, in turn, spoke of what a tremendous job she was doing inMs Parker washas done in forging a new direction for the engagingimportance of parents in the educational process HIGHLY QUALIFIED SPECIAL EDUCATION TEACHERS Dr Grasmick (while awaiting the presenters of the BCPSS Update to arrive) gave the latest copy, hot off the press, of The Maryland Classroom, which talked about high qualified special education teachers Dr Grasmick said thatbelieves there has been a lot of confusion about what this means and that it was her belief that, so she believes the handout will add clarity to any confusion that may exist Carol Ann Baglin and Kim Lewis are in attendance, and Dr Grasmick believes one of the things they have done is develop that HOUSE, the Highly Objective Uniform System of Evaluation, for teachers in Special Education, as was done for teachers in so-called regular education BALTIMORE CITY PUBLIC SCHOOLS UPDATE David Lever provided an update on the progress of seven areas of concern regarding the facilities management program of the Baltimore City Public School System, which were as followed: & School Closures and Comprehensive Educational Facilities Master Plan Progress on School Construction Projects; i.e., Dunbar High 52 School, #415; Carver Vo-Tech, #454; Highlandtown Elementary, #237; and 40 TIMS Projects Environmental Safety Management Program; i.e., Lead Based Paint Management; Asbestos Management; and Utility related Emergency Plans Inspections and Preventive Maintenance; i.e Semi-Annual Roofing Inspections; Preventive Maintenance Eleven Schools with Hazardous Conditions; i.e., Door and Window Projects; Roof Projects; and Structural Projects Staff Capacity for maintenance and operations, including custodians, engineers, electricians and inspectors TEACHER OF THE YEAR RECOGNITION Dr Grasmick introduced this item by speaking aboutspoke of the pride the Board has in the 58,000 teachers in the State of Maryland and stated that there are 24 teachers selected from that pool of Maryland’s very best to be nominated for the Teacher of the Year She said that theThe judging process is rigorous and once the local teacher of the year is announced, it is a source of pride for that particular school system The Board will be honoring these 24 teachers again on October 7th at Martin’s West in a huge gala at which time the Marylandand the Teacher of the Year will be announced.selected at that time Dr Grasmick introduced and acknowledged the 2005 Teacher of the Year, Brad Engle, Social Studies teacher at Kent Island High School, Queen Anne’s County Mr Angle is a leadership coordinator He attracts students who aspire to be leaders and works with those students at Kent Island High School He’s also been the Chair of the Middle States Steering Committee Dr Grasmick acknowledged and thanked thefor corporate sponsors of this program The program wouldn’t have the magnitude it has without that corporate sponsorship Among the sponsors are: The Maryland New Car and Truck Dealers Association;,, Peter Kitzmiller, President, and Pam Loving, Community Affairs Director McDonald’s Restaurants, Inc.;, Rod Mann, Greater Baltimore Area, and Kathy Foster, Washington Area Also thanks went to Bank of America;, Comcast;, Lockheed Martin;, Northrop Grumma0n;, The Sally Maey Fund; and, the Whiting-Turner Contracting Corporation Dr Grasmick introduced Dr Darla Strouse, Director, Corporate and Foundation Partnership Development, Office of the State Superintendent and asked her to introduce this year’s Teachers of the Year Each teacher was recognized and received a certificate of 53 congratulations signed by Dr Root and Dr Grasmick (A list of the Teachers of the Year is attached as part of these minutes.), as the presenter of these awards Janice – Put the following paragraph back in Dr Strouse thanked Paul Ritchie, Chairman, Maryland New Car and Truck Dealers Association, and that Association sponsored the luncheon held that afternoon Dr Strouse acknowledged the local school system coordinators for this program for their efforts Also acknowledged was Jillda Scott, Dr Strouse’s assistant, for her tireless work LEGAL OPINIONS Each nominee received _ (List of this year’s nominees is attached as a part of these minutes.) Ms Cloutier announced the following opinions: #? 05-17 Philip Ashtianie v Howard County Board of Education The State Board has found no due process problems or other illegalities and, therefore, affirmed a student’s suspension The Board is also issuing a couple of Orders of Dismissal The Board meeting concluded at 12:00 noon ._ p.m Respectfully submitted, Nancy S Grasmick Secretary/Treasurer NSG:jaf APPROVED: NSG/jf APPROVED: July 19, 2005 54 ... that were the subject of some of the waiver requests The State Board then engaged in a 38 lengthy discussion of the substance of the requests The Board Board deferred final action on the matters... children of Baltimore as members of the Baltimore City Board of School Commissioners and congratulated them on their retirement from the City Board Dr Welch was the last of the original members of the. .. Baltimore City Board of School Commissioner 29 • Michael McKemy v Harford County Board of Education The State Board also authorized the issuance of one pending opinion The State Board then received