7 68 33 25
('8&$7,21
$'92&$&<
7+(
www.cabe.org
www.facebook.com/ConnecticutAssociationBoardsEducation
-2851$/
&RQQHFWLFXW $VVRFLDWLRQ RI %RDUGV RI (GXFDWLRQ 7KH /HDGLQJ 9RLFH IRU &RQQHFWLFXW 3XEOLF (GXFDWLRQ Vol. 19, No. 4
Tedone elected to NSBA Board
View from the Capitol Patrice A. McCarthy Deputy Director/General Counsel, CABE
Robert Rader Executive Director, CABE
Patrice A. McCarthy Deputy Director/General Counsel, CABE
Connecticut Assessment: Frequently Asked Questions Editor’s Note: The Big 6 (CABE, CAPSS, ConnCAN, CCER, CAS and CBIA) compiled this information to counter some of the misinformation that has been building around standardized testing. We are all against “overtesting� but we need standardized testing to ensure we identify students who are struggling and be able to compare with other states, etc. This information has been sent to the Legislature and we hope it will be helpful to you if members of your community ask about the subject.
What Kind of Tests Are In Schools, and Why? The purpose of tests (also called
of Boards of Education Inc. Connecticut Association
See TEDONE page 8
NEW ENGLAND FIRST ROBOTICS COMPETITION
assessments) in the education system is to collect information that helps to track and improve learning. Tests help us monitor the development of our students’ skills and knowledge, find any gaps in in their learning, and address them. Some tests are very formal and require strict controls regarding timing and other testing conditions. For instance, Connecticut’s standardized assessment is a formal test that is administered annually to all public school students in grades 3-8, and once again in high school. In contrast, other kinds of testing, such as spelling tests or quizzes, are administered at the school or district level. In addition, many schools regularly use informal testing to monitor student learning. These tests are administered in such a manner that students may not even recognize their skills and knowledge are being “tested.� For example, teachers may develop activities to see if students have mastered a particular math See CABE page 14
Following a successful Day on the Hill for board members, superintendents, students and other friends of public education, the pace of activities at the legislature continues to increase. With just two months remaining in the Legislative Session, legislators are focused on adopting a 2 year state budget that meets the needs of the state priorities – including public education – while working within the fiscal constraints of the state’s revenues. Ongoing communication from board members and superintendents to legislators continues to be a critical part of this process. Let your voices be heard!
Spotlighting best practices Over the years, we have been asked for “best practices� from school boards and superintendents. Thanks to an idea from the New Jersey School Boards Association, we have a thoughtful and beneficial way to provide this information to our members. We have divided possible areas in which boards would find best practices helpful. An email is being sent to CABE member board members and superintendents with a link to a short questionnaire that will enable you to provide us with information showcasing some of your best practices. The best practices you share will be posted on the “Spotlight on Connecticut Practices that Lead and Inspire� section on our website. This online resource will become more robust as we receive your best practices.
See You In Court
Engaging Families
Professional Governance Board
Project Based Learning
PAGE 5
PAGE 6
PAGE 8
PAGE 10
81 Wolcott Hill Road Wethersfield, CT 06109-1242
Lydia Tedone, CABE’s Immediate Past President and chair of the Simsbury Board of Education, has been elected to the National School Boards Association’s Board of Directors. Lydia Tedone Lydia has served as CABE First Vice President, Vice President for Government Relations, Federal Relations Chairman and as a member of the Convention Committee. She has served as a member of the Simsbury Board since 1997. Lydia has been a member of the Capitol Region Education Council since 2000, and served as chairman in 2007-08. She is also a graduate of the CABE Leadership Institute. Lydia is well-known to Board of Education members - she’s a frequent attendee at workshops and, of course, the CABE/CAPSS Convention. As a member of the National School Boards Association, she hopes to “authentically and rigorously support local boards of education in ways that significantly impact teaching and learning. As public education experiences times of significant change and scrutiny, there is no more important time to advocate for those
APRIL 2015
³2XW RI WKH SXEOLF VFKRROV JURZV WKH JUHDWQHVV RI D QDWLRQ ´ 0DUN 7ZDLQ 1RY
Periodical Postage PAID Hartford, CT
2
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015 PRESIDENT COMMENTARY
Professional Learning In 2012, a major Connecticut educational reform statute was passed that redefines professional learning as intensive and sustained continuous improvement for educators that is aligned to standards, is conducted among educators, occurs frequently, and includes a repository of best practices for teaching methods developed by educators. The statute requires that professional learning programs reflect a comprehensive approach to increasing teacher and administrator effectiveness, focused on improving teaching methods and developing a shared collective responsibility for student growth (C.G.S. 10148a). The State Department of Education convened the Connecticut Academy for Professional Learning in September of 2014. The Academy consisted of public education stakeholders throughout the State including but not limited to Regional Education Service Centers (RESCs), Connecticut Association of Public School Superintendents (CAPSS), Connecticut Education Association (CEA) and American Federation of Teachers (AFT) (teacher unions), early childhood education and, higher education professionals, several resident teacher and principals, as well as Teachers of the Year. Several members of the State Department of Education were in attendance and last but not least, CABE was represented by Patrice McCarthy and me. The Professional Learning Academy was ably facilitated by Joellen Killion and Victoria Duff from “Learning Forward the Professional Learning Association”. Learning Forward is an amazing resource that I hope anyone who reads this commentary will access. As the only board member in attendance I was somewhat apprehensive as to my role within the Academy and what I could contribute from a school board perspective. The Academy for Professional Learning was comprised of six all-day sessions, two in September, two in November, and concluding our work with two sessions in March. Our ultimate goal was to present the final documents to the Connecticut State Board of Education. We worked on a definition of professional learning and then developing Connecticut’s standards for professional learning. The Connecticut definition says: “High quality professional learning is a process that ensures all
educators have equitable access, throughout their career continuum, to relevant individual and collaborative opportunities to enhance their practice so that all students advance Richard Murray towards positive academic and non-academic outcomes”. The Lighthouse Project, you will remember, states that no one has a greater effect on young children’s education then a highly effective teacher. The Academy believes that an effective professional learning system “is fundamental to both educator and student growth”. After all, isn’t that what we are all looking for in public education? To achieve results for educators and children, professional learning must shift from hours spent in continuing education units (CEUs), to sustained, authentic, jobembedded learning measured by evidence of practice and student growth. The Academy believes there are three elements to the Connecticut system: 1. The Connecticut Standards for Professional Learning 2. A local Professional Development and Evaluation Committee (PDEC) 3. A Comprehensive Plan Student learning must be at the center of each interdependent element. I could go on, but I think exploring The Learning Forward website (http://learningforward.org) would be more worthwhile for those that want to dig deeper. It was an honor to work with so many dedicated professionals who truly care about public education in Connecticut, I felt like a sponge much of the time. It was also an honor to represent school board members from across our State.
Testifying before the Appropriations Committee
CABE President Richard Murray (Killingly) testifies before the Appropriations Committee.
Mission: To assist local and regional boards of education in providing high quality education for all Connecticut children through effective leadership. Vision: CABE is passionate about strengthening public education through high-performing, transformative local school board/superintendent leadership teams that inspire success for each child.
CABE Board of Directors EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Richard Murray .................................................. President, Killingly Ann Gruenberg ................................. First Vice President, Hampton Robert Mitchell ................ VP for Government Relations, Montville Elaine Whitney ........... VP for Professional Development, Westport John Prins ......................................... Secretary/Treasurer, Branford Lydia Tedone ............................................ Immediate Past President Donald Harris ........................................................ Member at Large
AREA DIRECTORS Daniel Gentile ......................................... Area 1 Director, Plymouth Susan Karp ................................... Area 2 Co-Director, Glastonbury Donald Harris ................................. Area 2 Co-Director, Bloomfield Laura Bush ................................................. Area 3 Director, Vernon Douglas Smith ........................................ Area 4 Director, Plainfield Andrea Veilleux ................................ Area 6 Co-Director, Stratford Jennifer Dayton ............................. Area 6 Co-Director, Greenwich Roxane McKay ............................. Area 7 Co-Director, Wallingford John Prins ......................................... Area 7 Co-Director, Branford Lon Seidman ................................................. Area 8 Director, Essex Andrea Ackerman ..................................... Area 9 Director, Groton
ASSOCIATES Eileen Baker .............................................. Associate, Old Saybrook Sharon Beloin-Saavedra .............................. Associate, New Britain Gary Brochu .......................................................... Associate, Berlin Robert Guthrie .............................................. Associate, West Haven Robert Trefry ........... Associate, CT Technical High School System COMMITTEE CHAIRS Elizabeth Brown ......................... Chair, State Relations, Waterbury Donald Harris ......................... Chair, Federal Relations, Bloomfield Becky Tyrrell ...................................... Chair, Resolutions, Plainville
CITY REPRESENTATIVES Jacqueline Kelleher ....................... City Representative, Bridgeport Matthew Poland ................................ City Representative, Hartford Carlos Torre .................................. City Representative, New Haven Polly Rauh ........................................ City Representative, Stamford Charles Stango ............................... City Representative, Waterbury
STAFF Robert Rader ....................................................................... Executive Director Patrice McCarthy .................................. Deputy Director and General Counsel Bonnie Carney ............................................ Sr. Staff Associate for Publications Nicholas Caruso ............................................ Sr. Staff Assoc. for Field Service and Coord. of Technology Sheila McKay ............................. Sr. Staff Associate for Government Relations Kelly Moyher ......................................................................... Sr. Staff Attorney Vincent Mustaro ..................................... Sr. Staff Associate for Policy Service Lisa Steimer .............................. Sr. Staff Assoc. for Professional Development Teresa Costa .................................. Coordinator of Finance and Administration Pamela Brooks ......................... Sr. Admin. Assoc. for Policy Ser. /Search Ser. Terry DeMars ............................................... Admin. Assoc. for Policy Service Gail Heath ........................................ Admin. Assoc. for Government Relations Wilmarie Newton ........................................ Admin. Assoc. for Labor Relations Denise Roberts .................................... Admin. Asst. for Membership Services Corliss Ucci .................................. Receptionist/Asst. to the Executive Director
The CABE Journal (ISSN 1092-1818) is published monthly except a combined issue for July/August as a member service of the Connecticut Association of Boards of Education, 81 Wolcott Hill Road, Wethersfield, CT 06109, (860) 571-7446. CABE membership dues include $30 per person for each individual who receives The CABE Journal. The subscription rate for nonmembers is $75. Association membership dues include a subscription for each board member, superintendent, assistant superintendent and business manager. The companies and advertisements found in The CABE Journal are not necessarily endorsed by CABE. “Periodicals Postage Paid at Hartford, CT.” POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The CABE Journal, CABE, 81 Wolcott Hill Road, Wethersfield, CT 06109-1242. Email: bcarney@cabe.org. Members can find the CABE Journal online at: www.cabe.org/ userlogin.cfm?pp=84&userrequest=true&keyrequest=false& userpage=84
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April
3
2015
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR COMMENTARY
CABE Affiliate Members BUSINESS AFFILIATES DIAMOND MEMBER Finalsite GOLD MEMBERS
Advanced Corporate Networking dba. Digital BackOffice Berchem, Moses & Devlin Centris Group Guidance Counselors for Senior Teachers Pullman & Comley Shipman & Goodwin SILVER MEMBERS Anthem Blue Cross and Blue Shield Arthur J. Gallagher & Company Corporate Cost Control Milliman, Inc. Milone & MacBroom, Inc. Perkins & Eastman Siegel, O’Connor, O’Donnell & Beck The Segal Company
BRONZE PLUS MEMBERS BL Companies Friar Associates Goldstein & Peck, P.C. Milone & MacBroom Morganti Group O & G Industries The S/L/A/M Collaborative Trane
BRONZE MEMBERS Brown & Brown Insurance Chinni & Meuser LLC Dattco Inc. Fuller & D’Angelo Architects and Planners JCJ Architecture Kainen, Escalera & McHale, P.C. The Lexington Group Muschell & Simoncelli Ovations Benefits Group Suisman Shapiro Attorneys at Law
EDUCATIONAL AFFILIATES American School for the Deaf Area Cooperative Educational Services Capitol Region Education Council The College Board Connecticut Association of School Business Officials Connecticut Center for School Change Connecticut School Buildings and Grounds Association Cooperative Educational Services EASTCONN EDUCATION CONNECTION LEARN Unified School District #1
Spotlight on CABE Communications Successful boards of education maintain a culture of high expectations of board members, superintendents, staff and students. Continuous learning, whether from attending workshops, an annual board retreat or even the joint reading of a book, is an important aspect of this culture. Board members are very busy people. Often, they have fulltime jobs or other responsibilities and then they spent countless hours at board and committee meetings, to say nothing of the time and effort they invest in supporting students, teachers and others in a variety of activities. So, how can we expect board members to put in even more time in professional development? How can we make the process easier and less time consuming? We have been examining this issue for quite some time. We are trying to accomplish the provision of professional development, through a variety of means. This is even more important now, because our Delegate Assembly, recognizing the importance of professional development for all board members, voted in favor of mandatory school board member training.
Spotlight on Best Practices One of the ideas that we stole, err, borrowed is from the New Jersey School Boards Association. Yes, some good things do come from Jersey! We call our new initiative, “Spotlight on Connecticut Practices that Lead and Inspire”. The idea is to build a library of best practices that are easily accessible, concise and provide sufficient information, like contact information, that could lead a board member to additional resources. To me, the most interesting part of what we borrowed from New Jersey is that it is mostly focused on best practices for school boards. There are many sources of data and best practices for teachers in particular, including lesson plans and other suggestions. However, a best practices library, on the CABE website, will be the first one that I know of in our State, focusing on the critical and difficult work that you do. There are 14 areas in which to categorize any best practices. The sidebar indicates the areas. We are most interested in: advocacy, community engagement, student achievement, governance/ board leadership/policy and professional development. If you have developed some great ways of handling these issues, please tell us about them!
Providing Professional Development So, to get back to our original questions, we continue to look for ways that CABE’s professional training can be
easier to access and be a more effective system for you. We do not underestimate the importance and value of face-to-face meetings which we continue to provide. (Make sure you register for the upcoming demographics workshop, the collective bargaining workshop, the Legislative WrapUp, the Summer Leadership Conference and, of course, the CABE/ CAPSS Convention!). We know that attendees find the discussion among various board members and the time for networking extremely valuable. But, we have expanded in terms of how we provide our offerings. For example, we have done many webinars over the last few years. To see a listing of all of them, go to: http://www.cabe.org/ page.cfm?p=887. Just over two years ago, the CABE Board of Directors accepted the recommendations of its Communications Committee on how we can best ensure our members are well-informed on education issues in the future. We had surveyed our members and found that most responding wanted more information on our website. We have done exactly that. We are not only updating the home page, but, adding content. So, if you haven’t visited www.cabe.org yet, please do! In addition, we now have a new center for our advocacy efforts. The site, Legislative Actions, can be reached at http://www.cabe.org/page.cfm?p=132. It
Categories for the Spotlight on Connecticut Practices that Lead and Inspire: ❑ Advocacy ❑ Community Engagement/ Communication
❑ Curriculum/Student Achievement ❑ Facilities/Buildings and Grounds ❑ Finance ❑ Governance/Board Leadership/ Policy
❑ Professional Development for Board/Staff
❑ School Climate ❑ School Security ❑ Shared Services ❑ Special Education ❑ STEM Education ❑ Sustainability ❑ Technology
Robert Rader
will make your lobbying efforts easier and let you know exactly what is going on with the various bills before the Legislature or Governor. You’ll need your email address and password (cabeaccess2015) to get into the Legislative Actions website. If you don’t know about the Lighthouse Project, you certainly should. This work, which is part of a national study, helps boards better understand their role in raising student achievement. Thanks to State Department of Education sponsorship, so far ten districts have participated in Lighthouse training with more on the way. It is a rewarding one-year training process, where your board will better understand how to understand the data it receives, how to build relationships and support your superintendent in increasing student growth and how to enlist the community in work in this area. Check out Lighthouse at: www.cabe.org/ page.cfm?p=108. In addition, besides the many emails you get (Advocacy Highlights, Policy Highlights, the weekly What’s Going On At CABE) we now provide information on FaceBook and Twitter. I know that many people do not use either of these web tools. But, our hope is that for those who do, they will be helpful. And, of course, the CABE Journal is now sent out in both a digital and paper format. This digital format allows you to click on the links above and immediately go to the sites. With the strong support of our Board of Directors, all of this good work is accomplished by our internal staff. They are the ones who write the content and make sure it goes out in a concise and thoughtful manner. Thanks to all of them! Yes, of course, there are occasional glitches, but we try to make the best of them. We’re always looking for extra good content. Please share your great stories with us. If you have thoughts on this subject please let me know. We are always looking to become even more efficient and effective in serving you! Editor’s Note: Our first Spotlight will be published in the Journal in May.
4
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
The Policy Corner Vincent A. Mustaro, Senior Staff Associate for Policy Service, CABE
Cloud computing/student privacy issues – needed policy direction Technology is used in innovative ways accessing the latest software applications and using electronic pathways to store and process information. School districts house, process, and transmit educational and business records increasingly online. The shift to a new digital infrastructure has been made necessary by the ubiquity of personal devices such as tablets and cell phones enabling us to access, transmit, and store vast amounts of information instantly. This technological marvel that involves process, substance, hardware and software has come to be known as “the Cloud.” The Cloud’s presence has happened so quickly and subtly that we barely perceive its operation, although we feel
devices. The news about government surveillance programs, research reports, surveys, and official guidance from the U.S. Department of Education have focused the national spotlight on data privacy, particularly privacy of student data. This increased public attention has brought a wave of proposed state and federal legislation. School leaders need to articulate the district’s commitment to protect student privacy through its policies and practices. Steps must be taken to ensure that Cloud services deployed throughout district’s offices and classrooms comply with all applicable laws and district policies. The community, including parents should be consulted and educated about the district’s use of the Cloud. Community
maintaining security for student and employee privacy. More difficult student data privacy issues arise with the universe of applications available to individual staff and students through a simple Internet connection. These applications create separate “doors” to district data that it may not be able to control in every case. District-wide data management systems and the myriad tools available for specific pedagogical needs create opportunities for release of student data. Once school district information is transferred or stored in the Cloud, rather than on an on-site server, it is housed on a system operated by others, usually on shared servers. The school district does not have physical control over the data, even if the contract states that the district retains “control.” Potential issues such as data breach, data loss, and collection and aggregation of personally identifiable data and metadata for potential use in advertising and sale to third parties may arise. Data breaches have received much public attention. The greatest concern is the ability of service providers to collect and store “profiles” of students or their families on their use of an application. Such information could be used to target advertising to students or their families.
Laws to Protect Student Data Privacy its impact. In fact, many of the educational tools employed by teachers and district offices only operate through an Internet connection. The advantages of Cloud-based platforms and learning tools include ease, convenience, 24/7 accessibility, less staff time maintaining on-site servers, individualized learning, and compliance with testing requirements. These benefits bring serious challenges, particularly the potential for loss of privacy that accompanies the transfer of personal student information to the Cloud. Concerns about data privacy must be addressed by public school districts. Cloud computing presents a great opportunity for schools, but it creates data protection and privacy issues by placing a very large amount of student, teacher, and institution data into the hands of a third-party provider. Nationally, there is increased concern about protecting student data privacy. We are now more aware now about the kinds of personal information being exchanged through digital
feedback may significantly influence the direction a school district goes with restrictions placed on student data in the Cloud.
Online or Cloud-based Tools and Student Data Privacy Every device and application with a connection to the Internet potentially collects student data. The most obvious example of a Cloud-based application is Internet-accessed email which allows users to access and send emails anytime and anywhere. The applications are installed, maintained, and upgraded remotely in the Cloud by a third-party service provider. School districts can protect student data privacy more directly through district-wide systems such as email and records management, where the district has some control over the terms of the contract with the provider. Districts are working to configure their data systems to allow for the greatest efficiency while
Some federal laws potentially govern student data privacy. The most directly applicable to school districts and service providers are the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), the Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA), and the Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA). Today, student records are often maintained electronically. School districts are moving their work and the data they collect and store to Cloud-based platforms to reduce the need for servers onsite and to allow anytime/anywhere access. Teachers and students are taking advantage of Internet and Cloud-based learning tools separate from any “official” school district program. Vendors create apps that allow them to collaborate and communicate. The implementation of the Common Core and the emphasis on testing to assess and improve student achievement and to individualize learning has resulted in school districts collecting and using student data like never before. FERPA prohibits school districts from disclosing, except in limited instances, personally identifiable information (PII) contained in students’ education records
without the consent of the parent or eligible student. Educational records may include a range of written and electronic files. Generally, anything that is considered PII in an education record, including emails and other communications or documents created by students, teachers, and administrators, is governed by FERPA. Many new technologies are likely to result in the storage or transmission of information that also will be considered an education record under FERPA, but a few may not. It is prudent for school district policy to presume that all data created by students, teachers, and staff related to students is an “education record,” and to retain control over it. This presumption will help the administration direct third-party technology providers as to how they should handle the data, how they can use it, and with whom they can share it. Storing student information in the Cloud is permitted under FERPA. The FERPA statute and regulations require schools to manage education records and student PII securely. The U.S. Department of Education suggests that schools and districts authorize its staff to use only those services in which the terms of service allow the school/ district to retain enough control, and provide sufficient parental notice, to invoke the “school official” exception of FERPA. When a school district employs online educational services, it will do so under the “school official” exception, which allows a district to disclose FERPA-protected records without parental consent to “a contractor, consultant, volunteer, or other party to whom an agency or institution has outsourced institutional services or functions.” A district may use the so-called “school official” exception for disclosure of education records to online service providers, but the specific requirements of that exception must be met. This includes that the designated “school official” must perform a function that the school or district would otherwise have used its own employees to perform. FERPA regulates educational agencies or institutions, not Cloud service providers. The school district is responsible for privacy and security of educational data in the Cloud. When the school official exception is in play, the provider may not use FERPASee CLOUD page 14
5
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015 See You in Court – The Nutmeg Board of Education
The Nutmeg Board deals with an embarassing blog and due process rights Thomas B. Mooney, Esq. Shipman & Goodwin
The Nutmeg Board of Education makes many mistakes. The latest imbroglio created by the board will be reported here each issue, followed by an explanation of what the board should have done. Though not intended as legal advice, these situations may help board members avoid common problems. The almost-interminable winter was finally over, and Peter Principal saw a significant uptick in the number of suspensions for offenses ranging from horseplay to assault. To make things worse, many of the students had their lawyers on speed dial, and suspension hearings are increasingly becoming mini-trials. But the problems were not limited to the physical interactions between and among the students. The telephone rang in Mr. Principal’s office. “Have you seen it?” asked Bob Bombast, veteran member of the Nutmeg Board of Education. Mr. Principal had no
Mr. Principal called Joe Blow down to the office and accused him of creating the blog. However, Joe was a cool customer, and he stated that he would remain silent on “advice of counsel.” Mr. Principal suspended Joe on the spot, and he warned Joe that his silence about the blog would not fly at an expulsion hearing. The expulsion hearing was held last evening. Mr. Principal presented the information set out above, and he urged the Board to expel Joe for at least one calendar year. However, Bill Alot, a local attorney representing Joe, was dismissive of Mr. Principal’s case. “The case against Joe is bupkis,” Bill intoned. “What do we have? Rumor? At worst, we may have Joe’s misguided attempt to boost his selfesteem by claiming responsibility for something he would never do. The Board must exonerate Joe now.” Bob Bombast was visibly irritated by Bill’s presentation, and at his first chance
“. . . . board members must set aside prior knowledge and determine whether they can decide the case impartially based on the evidence presented.” idea what Bob was talking about. Bob continued, “There is a new blog out, and everyone is talking about it and posting links to it on their Facebook pages.” When Mr. Principal asked Bob what that has to do with him, Bob sighed. “It has everything to do with you, Peter. It is supposed to be your blog. And it is not pretty. It looks like somebody copied your picture from the school website, and they used it to create ‘Peter Principal’s Perch – a Commentary on Life and Times at Nutmeg High School.’ The blog includes posts about teachers at your school, including pictures of female teachers with ‘your’ vulgar comments on their appearance and more. While the blog purports to be created by you, even I know that it is a hoax. I don’t know who hates you enough to do this, but this blog is a colossal embarrassment for you and the entire school system. If some student did this, he or she should be expelled for sure.” Mr. Principal thanked Bob for giving him this bad news and for his support, and he finished the conversation with Bob by vowing to bring the miscreant who created this blog to justice. It didn’t take long. Mr. Principal has his sources, and soon a student told him confidentially that Joe Blow, an honors student, created the blog. Apparently, Joe was so pleased with his handiwork that he was overheard bragging to other students about the blog. But to be safe, Mr. Principal asked some other students, and two other students confirmed that they too had heard that Joe Blow was the mastermind behind the blog.
he jumped in. “What Joe did was despicable, and he must pay. The Board members have been talking about this embarrassing blog since it appeared, and we are pleased to find the student responsible and punish him for his actions. Should Joe be expelled? Do you have any concerns about Bob’s role here? Bob’s actions and comments were inappropriate. Board members serve in expulsion hearings as judges, and an impartial decision-maker is a fundamental element of due process. Accordingly, board members should not be personally involved in such matters, and they should certainly not form and express an opinion about an expulsion decision outside of the hearing itself. Bob’s comments to Mr. Principal and the discussion among Board members about this matter outside the hearing here could well result in a finding that the Board denied Joe due process. This is not to say that board members cannot participate in expulsion hearings if they have heard about a particular situation (and it is hard to imagine the Board members here not hearing about this blog). Rather, board members must set aside prior knowledge and determine whether they can decide the case impartially based on the evidence presented. If so, they may participate, and if not, they should recuse themselves. The hearing itself raised at least two serious legal issues. First is the question of proof. In an expulsion hearing, the superintendent has the burden of proving that the student did in fact engage in the conduct alleged.
Here, Joe admitted nothing, and the evidence presented by the Superintendent was simply that other students had heard Joe bragging. Such evidence is hearsay, because it is testimony on what someone else said that is presented for the truth of what the speaker said. If Mr. Superintendent had called the other students to testify, the Board could have considered their direct accounts and found that the statements by Joe were admissions by him. However, simply by reporting what the other students told him, Mr. Superintendent was asking the Board to rely on hearsay testimony. In recent years, the courts have been more tolerant of hearsay testimony in student expulsion hearings because of the threat of violence against a student who testifies. However, here, there was no such concern, and Mr. Superintendent’s reliance on hearsay testimony raised significant due process issues. Joe’s actions raise an issue of free speech as well. The Internet has posed significant challenges for school officials who must decide whether and when to discipline students for their online activities. At present, the law is evolving, because online activity raises basic questions about the jurisdiction of school officials. At present, we may say that school officials have jurisdiction over
online activity when one can reasonably forecast that the postings or other activity will come into the school. Jurisdiction however, is only the threshold question. Online activity by students is “speech,” which as such is protected by the First Amendment unless school officials can reasonably predict that such speech will cause substantial disruption or material interference with the educational process or will invade the rights of others. Here, it is not clear that Joe’s blog, annoying as it was to Peter Principal and the Board, was disruptive. Indeed, in most cases challenging discipline for online activity, the courts have found that the online speech was not disruptive and was thus protected. Finally, in passing we note that students in Nutmeg facing suspension have been lawyering up. The United States Supreme Court first decided in Goss v. Lopez (1973) that students facing discipline are entitled to due process. However, in the Goss case, the court clearly stated that for suspensions of ten days or less, students are entitled only to an informal hearing to hear the charges and to respond, i.e., no lawyers allowed. Attorney Thomas B. Mooney is a partner in the Hartford law firm of Shipman & Goodwin who works frequently with boards of education. Mooney is a regular contributor to the CABE Journal.
The Eighth Edition is here!!
A Practical Guide to Connecticut School Law by Thomas B. Mooney, Esq. Shipman & Goodwin The Guide comes with a CD which provides hyperlinks to many cases and statutes and will permit ord searches as a supplement to the Index. The Eighth Edition was substantially rewritten to reflect statutory changes, significant case law developments in state and federal courts. Some of the numerous legal developments and update are as follows: • School Safety and Security • Bullying Law • Teacher Evaluation and Support • Teacher Tenure Act • New Requirements for Professional Development • Budget Issues • Prohibitions on Electronic Notifications of Referenda • Minimum Budget Requirements • FMLA for Paraprofessionals • Child Abuse and Neglect Reporting Requirements • Uniform Regional School Calendars • Excusal • Student Assessments • Pool Safety • Concussion Prevention and Education • Sudden Cardiac Arrest Prevention and Education • Administration and Storage of Epinephrine • Excused Absences • Student Free Speech • Employee Free Speech
Order your copy TODAY by going to the CABE website: www.cabe.org/page.cfm?p=749
6
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
Engaging families and communities to improve student achievement Andrew Lachman Executive Director Connecticut Center for School Change
This year marks the fiftieth anniversary of the passage of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA). Family engagement has long been enshrined in policy at the federal level through Title I of ESEA, which requires that Title I schools develop parental involvement policies and ‘school-family compacts’ that outline how the two stakeholder groups will work together to increase student achievement. A year ago, the U.S. Department of Education, which administers ESEA, released the Dual Capacity-Building Framework for Family School Partnerships which suggests methods for school and district staff to effectively engage parents and methods for parents to work successfully with schools. The Dual Capacity Framework builds upon a significant body of evidence that family and community engagement plays an important role in student achievement and school performance. In the book Organizing Schools for Improvement: Lessons from Chicago, Anthony S. Bryk, former head of the Chicago Consortium for School Research and now president of the Carnegie Foundation for the Advancement of Teaching, presents compelling evidence underscoring the importance of family and community engagement. In their longitudinal study of hundreds of Chicago elementary schools, Bryk and his co-authors identified five essential supports for school improvement: a coherent instructional guidance system; professional capacity; strong parentcommunity-school ties; a student-centered learning climate; and leadership that drives change. Bryk and his colleagues developed indicators for each of the five support factors and tracked both positive and negative changes in student attendance and gains in reading and mathematics skills and knowledge. Among their findings: • Schools with strong indicators on most supports were 10 times more
likely to improve than schools with weak supports. • Half of the schools strong on most supports improved substantially in reading. • Not a single school weak on most supports improved in mathematics. • A material weakness in any one support, sustained over several years, undermined other change efforts, and improvements rarely resulted. Bryk views the five supports as an organized system interacting with and mutually supporting and reinforcing one another. He likens the five essentials to a cake recipe: absent any one ingredient
(flour, eggs, sugar, baking powder) it won’t be a cake. While all five need to be present to ensure school success, the rest of this article focuses on the one that is often overlooked or given short shrift: family and community engagement. In regards to family and community engagement, Bryk writes, “The absence of vital ties is a problem; their presence is a multifaceted resource for improvement. The quality of these ties links directly to students’ motivation and school participation and can provide a critical resource for classrooms.” Bryk cites three family and community engagement pathways that schools and districts can pursue that potentially have a direct impact on teaching and learning. First are efforts to engage parents in the processes of strengthening student learning. Examples of this approach are classroom volunteering, curriculum nights, reading to children, and helping parents establish routines that keep the focus on student learning.
As Bryk notes, “the social ties between parents and school professionals represent a significant resource for diverse school improvement initiatives, from enhancing safety in and around schools, to addressing problems of absenteeism and tardiness, to assuring more consistent and effective homework sessions.” The second of Bryk’s pathways is enhancing teachers’ knowledge about their students’ culture and community. A fundamental premise of good instruction is to build on the background knowledge and experience of the learner. Knowledge of students’ culture and community is also central to developing relationships and establishing the interpersonal connections essential for developing a classroom culture and climate conducive to learning. Lastly, Bryk notes that by engaging community agencies and neighborhood youth groups as partners, schools can broaden the array of services available to children and their families. This is a route to ensure that students have access to supplemental services such as eyeglasses, tutoring, dental and mental health services that are beyond the capacity of the school itself to provide. At the Center for School Change, we’ve always known that stakeholder engagement is an important component that contributes to successful outcomes for schools. Until recently, however, we’ve concentrated more on aspects of the other four essentials – leadership, instructional improvement and staff capacity building – than family and community engagement. Bryk’s research has convinced us that educators, support organizations, and boards need to give family and community engagement additional emphasis. We’re identifying the most effective ways to integrate family and community engagement into school and district efforts to improve teaching and learning. One example of how this plays out in practice is our experience with Manchester Public Schools. The school district retained the Center to act as advisors and strategic planners when it was developing
a proposal to the Hartford Foundation for Public Giving for strengthening educational outcomes through increased family, school and community collaboration. Two of the Center’s Program Coordinators, Patrice Nelson and Laura Boutilier, helped the district articulate a vision for strong, integrated school, family and community partnerships. The Center provided resources on stakeholder engagement; coordinated an inventory of family and community engagement programs and practices; and collaborated with the planning coordinator and superintendent to design and facilitate the process of drafting the final plan. Manchester’s proposal was approved late in 2014 and awarded $713,000 by the foundation. We look forward to partnering with interested school and district leaders and local school boards as they focus on family and community engagement. The Center for School Change will continue to grow our understanding and deepen our practice to support educators to successfully engage and collaborate with families and community stakeholders on behalf of better outcomes for students.
Available from The CABE Bookstore!
Understanding the Connecticut Freedom of Information Act and Access to Public Meetings and Records - Fourth Edition Written by: Mark J. Sommaruga, Esq. Pullman & Comley, LLC to order the FOIA book go to the CABE Online Bookstore at www.cabe.org/page.cfm?p=749
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
7
8
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
CABEMeeting CABE-Meeting is a user-friendly online service offered by CABE specifically for school boards. Users can eliminate unnecessary paperwork, increase efficiency and reduce costs while enabling board members to utilize the latest in cutting edge technology. Using CABE-Meeting, the Meeting Manager can create and electronic meeting from developing the agenda to creating the minutes and everything in between. When the meeting is ready, the Meeting Manager emails your board members and designated administrators to let them know they can log in. Users can login from the comfort of their homes or work place. With a mouse click, agenda and related documents are open and ready for viewing. Using the search features, administrators and board members can easily locate information from previous board meetings. No more time consuming, tedious searches through mounds of paper!
What Else Does CABE-Meeting Offer? • Secure login access for board and district staff • Password protected access for certain features and audiences • Access from any location with Internet access • Search archived agenda and meeting related items in a flash. • Ability to download and print attachments • Option to provide a public link to board meeting information • Calendar for tracking events of district interest
Your CABE-Meeting Subscription Provides: • • • •
Access to CABE-Meeting Initial and ongoing training Support and maintenance Upgrades to the service
CABE Member Subscription Information: Initial Subscription Fee – $3,000 Annual Maintenance Fee – $1,500 If you have an interest in this service, contact Lisa Steimer at 860-571-7446 or lsteimer@cabe.org.
The Professional Governance Board Gary Brochu, Chair, Berlin Board of Education
Building a Learning Organization “Learning is not attained by chance. It must be sought with ardor and attended to with diligence.” – Abigail Adams A quick review of the mission statements and goals of boards of education finds frequent references to the importance and primacy of student learning. This is not surprising, as the vast majority of boards of education understand their work as supporting student learning. A commitment to creating a learning environment for students is commendable. Unfortunately, few governance boards turn this same focus on learning on themselves. Given the importance of an effective governing board to a school district particularly in creating and reinforcing a district’s culture, a board’s commitment to its own education and learning is an essential element of its ability to build an organization characterized by student and staff learning. Simply put, an organization’s commitment and capacity for learning can be no greater than that of its members; particularly those members who serve as the models of the organization’s values - the members of its governing board. In recent decades considerable research and writing has taken place concerning the concept of a “learning organization.” In a time of unprecedented technological, structural and conceptual
change, the idea of a learning organization has been advanced as a way for organizations to ensure that they can keep pace with, if not anticipate and influence, rapid changes in their environment. One author on this topic, Mike Pedler, has written that “a learning organization is an organization that facilitates the learning of all of its members and continually transforms itself.” This description of a learning organization seems remarkably well-suited to describe an effective board of education and school district - committed to staff and student learning, preparing them to be able to adapt to an ever-changing world. For members of a governing board to build and lead a learning organization, as its leaders it must champion learning throughout the district, fostering a culture of continuous improvement. This means that the board of education must serve as a model of the district’s commitment to learning. Think of how much more powerful the board’s message of professional development and learning is when the board itself is invested in its own learning and development. To summarize Peter Senge, a leader in the field of learning organizations, ‘if the board signals the importance
Tedone elected to NSBA Board (continued from page 1) involved in our educational systems each and every day.” President Richard Murray stated that “Lydia was able to win the position through her tenacity, determination, and unparalleled passion. The CABE Board of Directors is very proud of and in total support of Ms. Tedone and believe this new platform will allow her to be an ambassador for NSBA and to continue her enthusiastic advocacy on behalf of public schools and the children they serve on an even greater stage.” Bob Rader stated that “Lydia is an excellent board member, who builds relationships, which are key to the work of any successful board member. She thinks strategically, cares deeply about children and will be an immeasurable help as NSBA moves forward.” In other CABE news at the NSBA Convention • Our delegates at the Delegate Assembly were: President Murray, First Vice President Ann Gruenberg and Area 2 Director and Member at Large Donald
Harris. Elaine Whitney (Westport) and Robert Mitchell (Montville) were our alternates. Robert also served on the credentials Committee. • Presenting workshops at the Convention were Robert Rader (Ten Practices to Avoid Liability and the Future of Boards of Education), Patrice McCarthy (Ten Practices to Avoid Liability) and Associate Director Gary Brochu (Berlin; Becoming A Professional Governance Board: How to Create and Use a Board Member Handbook). Other Connecticut attendees also presented workshops. • Patrice was also wished well as she left the Council of School Attorneys (COSA) Board of Directors. She served as Chair and in other positions for over 15 years. She stated, “It was truly an honor to serve on the COSA Board with amazing colleagues from around the country. COSA members demonstrate an unwavering commitment to providing effective legal guidance to school boards. I am grateful to the CABE Board and Staff for their support of my involvement in COSA.”
of spending time on problem identification and discussion, knowledge acquisition and transfer, and post-action reflection - these activities are likely to flourish throughout the organization.’ In the simplest of terms - how a governing board conducts itself matters, and matters a lot. How can a board build and lead a learning organization? The best
“. . . a learning organization is an organization that facilitates the learning of all of its members and continually transforms itself.” way is to start with itself, taking steps to institutionalize board member learning and create a board culture committed to learning. Some possible actions are creating a board committee focused on board development and member learning; require individual member professional development plans at the start of each year; create a board professional development library of key books, articles, and webcasts; and create a professional development calendar for board members. These are just some suggestions of steps that boards can take to encourage board member learning and development. The real challenge is create an environment and culture that encourages, values and expects a commitment to board member learning. Board meetings characterized by informed discussions on complex issues; board member learning as part of the board’s self-evaluation process; board retreats that focus on board learning and reflection; and scheduled time for joint professional development opportunities. A learning board can provide a foundation for the building of a school district committed to learning and continuous improvement. A governing board with a commitment to learning is a board that is continually expanding its capacity to create the future; which is the job description of any good school district. But to build a learning organization we start at the top; we start with the governing board; we start with ourselves.
9
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
CABE Search Services is recruiting for
Region 1 Public Schools Assistant Superintendent Consult an ode onsultan antt: Mar Maryy Br Brode oderrick
Preston Public Schools Director of Finance Consult an ts: Mar ode aul Ga gi ar du cc onsultan ants: Markk Br Brode oderrick an and Gagi giar ardu ducc ccii d PPa For an update or more information on vacancies go to our website: www.cabe.org For more information contact, CABE Search Services, 860-539-7594 Mary Broderick, Senior Search Consultant Paul Gagliarducci, Associate Consultant Jacqueline V. Jacoby, Senior Search Consultant Bob King, Associate Consultant P.O. Box 290252, Wethersfield, CT 06129-0252 www.cabe.org/support • Equal Opportunity Employers
Remembering Dr. Catherine Wade Ann Gruenberg First Vice President, CABE and Board Member, Hampton
In the tiny town of Hampton, Connecticut, nestled in the quiet Northeast corner of the state, the Hampton Board of Education has shared its appreciation for the life and service of Dr. Catherine Wade, who passed away in September, 2014, at the age of 88. Dr. Wade served on the Hampton Board of Education for over 20 years, as well as being a strong advocate for public education and a professional educator. She began her career as a music educator working in several one-room schoolhouses. She continued her work, eventually teaching in the Windham School System, before retiring in 1992. Along the way, she earned a doctorate in music education from the University of Connecticut. She also served on the EASTCONN Board of Directors. Paula Colen, Executive Director of EASTCONN, said “ She always put students first in any discussions we engaged in. She advocated for collaboration and cooperation among and between districts whenever possible understanding that combined efforts when feasible would allow scarce resources to be
maximized to the benefit of the region’s students.” Dr. Wade was visionary. Though she had limited sight in her later years, she had a clear view of, and commitment to, educational priorities for children. She loved teaching. In her retirement she continued to teach students in her home, offering free lessons on occasion. In her long, full life, she shared her love of music with generations of students. One of her many initiatives involved the coordination of a musical instrument lending library. This increased accessibility for students who otherwise might not have opportunities to play an instrument. She stored over 100 instruments in her home, for use by students. The Hampton Board of Education appreciates CABE’s recognition of Dr. Catherine Wade’s leadership and advocacy. We are honored to continue her legacy in spirit.
10
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
Project-based learning lights up kids’ eyes and makes them want to come to school Joyce M. Singer Connecticut Association for the Gifted
In the most successful classrooms, learning adventures begin with teachers who inspire burning questions begging for answers. When students either can choose real-world projects to accomplish within the school building, or can pursue selfselected interests that provide learning experiences beyond the classroom, such opportunities will keep them motivated through days and weeks of challenging tasks. Ideally, their teachers will provide the perfect combination of guidance and enthusiasm to convince students their work will matter, that it can contribute to their school, or that it can benefit people and causes they had never before considered. Spurred by their immersion into complex problems that often generate more questions and further engagement, teachers’ assignments will prompt now intrinsically-motivated problem solvers to get to work. Teacher-led guided activities that fire students’ fervor soon translate into inquiry-based learning and possible opportunities for interdisciplinary studies across the curriculum. At Westside Middle School Academy in Danbury, Principal Frank LaBanca stands out as an instructional leader committed to inspiring and sustaining student engagement not only in the engineering course he teaches, but also because he ensures subject-area teachers throughout the building provide students with realworld, project-based learning opportunities. In his course, work similar to the tasks professional engineers might encounter drives student projects. For example, when students studied packaging engineering, using structured guided-inquiry, Dr. LaBanca facilitated
the task of building paper prototypes of two-dimensional structures – in this case, a square and a triangle. After they investigated forces associated with threedimensional structures, the next assignment required them to build a structure that would support a water bottle. Accomplishing their task involved budget analysis, calculating the cost of their materials, and assessment of their efficiency for the amount of material used. Real-world tasks resulted in
ing the media specialist, or “customer,” to ascertain his precise needs and wants; then submitting designs; gaining feedback; making adjustments and, finally, physically building the structure. This process – reminiscent of W. Edwards Deming’s Plan-Do-Check-Act Cycle for problem analysis – required the development of a potential solution, gaining feedback to determine whether the design needed improvement, and then implementing the solution, yet another
authentic pro-ducts. Students do not take tests or quizzes in this project-based course; instead, assessment occurs when they create real structures and then write about how they accomplished the task. Other authentic projects at Westside, involved the design and building of an extension for a table in the principal’s office and a kiosk for the media center. The latter request necessitated interview-
real-world experience. In this school, sometimes, teachers assign the problems; at other times, students develop their own. When teachers do not provide structured, defined ways to solve a problem, students invent their solutions and methodologies, which reults in student-controlled learning that requires higher-order thinking. If a teacher’s goal is to build a certain skill, projects will be more guided. When the goal involves encouraging creativity, assignments are more open-ended. Typical projects from start to completion take four weeks, with up to two months allotted for science fairs or an invention convention. To provide enough time for students to work on their projects, the school utilizes four-by-four ninety-minute block scheduling, with additional “project days,” so students can have intensive two to three hours of project time. Within the building’s STEM academy, authentic audiences composed of scientists and engineers evaluate student projects. At the school’s science fair, students shared their work with actual professionals and experienced sophisticated and new kinds of conversations. In Westside’s global studies academy, students created peace posters for a national contest, and they also work with published authors, participate in mock trials and model United Nations, and learn how to conduct Socratic seminars. In other academic settings, usually at the high school level, depending upon the
Convention planning has begun!
Subcommittee of the CABE/CAPSS Convention meets to review workshop proposals and make recommendations to the CABE/CAPSS Convention Committee. The Convention will be held on November 20-21, 2015 at the Mystic Marriott Hotel in Groton. It’s not too early to mark these dates on your calendar! Participating were: Elaine Whitney (Westport), Donna Leake (Retired Superintendent), Ann Gruenberg (Hampton), Doug Smith (Plainfield) and LIsa Steimer (CABE).
scope of assigned projects, student involvement beyond the campus has the potential to make a significant difference in the real world. Convincing them they can and should add their voice to existing ideas and practices often will produce surprising levels of student passion to sustain their efforts. Their motivation continues, particularly when students’ tasks include searching and researching, both textual and fieldbased, insistent probing, the hunt for multiple perspectives, and the creation of action plans. Hopefully, students’ labors will result in discoveries that rouse and awaken individuals who possess influence to turn ideas into reality. If not, they still will have experienced not only the challenges that accompany hard work, but also the power of small contributions that can move an idea toward a goal. If the fate of that idea leads to the graveyard of all unrealized ideas, the quest will not lose one ounce of merit, for the student will have gained yet another genuine experience: how to persevere if and when they meet disappointment. Student engagement in such Type III activities, as categorized by Dr. Joseph Renzulli, brings gifted pedagogy into all classrooms and inspires students at all learning levels. Teachers introduce the “spark” that fires students’ interests (Type I), teach process skills and methodologies students can then utilize or adapt for their specific needs (Type II), and provide them with opportunities to conduct their own investigations and to think like professionals. Culminating activities occur when students present their products and/or findings to real audiences. The importance of access to technology to help students achieve their goals cannot be underestimated. Whether they apply technology to conduct research; communicate; design; create, learn “how to” lessons, or to present their work, enrichment and talent development become natural byproducts of student engagement in inquiry-based projects. The Connecticut Association for the Gifted offers professional development that pairs schools and districts with expert educators who can assist with the design and implementation of project-based learning activities within both regular and talent development classrooms. When gifted education strategies are shared with educators across all learning levels, all students benefit. Visit CAG’s website www.ctgifted.org to learn about additional professional development offerings that will educate teachers and ultimately enrich classroom experiences for all learners. For further information, and to bring programs to your district, contact CAG’s Co-director of Professional Development Joyce Singer, at jsinger@ctgifted.org.
11
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
CABE: working for YOU
Individualized Workshops • Professional Development Opportunities Legal Services • Policy Services • Representing You Statewide and Nationally Below are the highlights of activities that the CABE staff has undertaken on your behalf over the last month. We did this:
•
➤ By representing Connecti-
•
•
•
cut school boards on the state or national level:
•
•
• •
•
•
•
• •
•
•
Attended a conference pertaining to discrimination and discipline. Participated in Leadership Greater Hartford’s Lessons in Leadership program. Participated in two planning conference calls for the summer National School Boards Association (NSBA) Trainers Conference. Met with Kim Jennings, Springboard, about future opportunities. Participated in drafting an NSBA Management Audit for the Idaho School Boards Association (ISBA) and presented it to the ISBA Board of Directors. Participated in Big 6 (CABE, CAPSS, CAS, CBIA, CCER and ConnCAN) teleconferences. Participated in meeting of the Connecticut Anti-Definition League (ADL) Board of Directors. Met with the WhatWillOurChildrenLose Coalition (CABE, CAPSS, CASBO and CAS). Participated in meeting of the LEAD Connecticut Partners. Participated in teleconference of the NSBA Ad Hoc Task Force on the Future of Boards of Education. Participated in teleconference of the Educator Preparation Advisory Council (EPAC). Attended meeting on the Connecticut Teacher of the Year Council’s
• • •
“Empowered to Lead” Symposium. Attended meeting of the Connecticut Commission for Educational Technology. Participated in Senator Chris Murphy’s meeting on reauthorization of ESEA. Participated in Professional Learning Advisory Committee meetings. Participated in interview with CT-N on the Governor’s budget. Presented in NSBA Council of Schools Attorneys Board webinar. Attended State Board of Education meeting.
• •
•
•
•
➤ By providing opportunities for members to learn how to better govern their districts:
•
Meetings were held for informing the following about CABE programs, services activities with the following: – Chair Ronald Goldstein and Superintendent Jeffry Mathieu of the Colchester Board of Education; – Superintendent Brian Reas of the East Haddam Board of Education; – Superintendent Tom Moore of the West Hartford Board of Education; – Naugatuck Superintendent Sharon Locke and Assistant Superintendent Chris Montini; – Region 14 Chair George Bauer and Board Vice Chair Maryanne Van Aken, Board Member Pamela Zmek and Superintendent Anna Cutaia-Leonard;
– Region 16 Superintendent Michael Yamin. Demonstrated CABE-Meeting for the West Hartford Town Council. Met with Michael Howser, Connecticut State Data Center Director, regarding future CABE workshop on demographics and declining enrollment. Staffed meeting of the CABE/ CAPSS Convention workshop proposal subcommittee meeting. Facilitated strategic planning session on Community Leadership with the Columbia Board of Education. Provided policy information to 33 districts, one RESC, two newspapers, two out-of-state school boards associations, one law firm and the State Department of Education through 51 answered requests for information or sample policies, on 42 topics. Further, districts continue to access CABE’s online Core Policy Reference Manual and/or online manuals posted by CABE for policy samples. The topics of greatest interest included graduation requirements, bullying and safe school climate plans, social media, food allergy management and administration of medication.
➤ By ensuring members
receive the most up-todate communications:
•
As part of the Custom Update Service policy materials were sent to Avon, Bloomfield, Ellington, Griswold, Newtown, North Haven, and Thomaston.
Area 3 Legislative Breakfast
➤ By providing services
to meet members needs:
• •
•
•
•
•
•
•
Attended Area 4 Legislative Breakfast. Facilitated a tri-board meeting with the North Stonington Board of Education. Facilitated a workshop on the Superintendent Search Process for the Mansfield Board of Education. Completed the audit of the policy manual for the Region 14 Board of Education. Entered into an agreement to do an audit of the New London Policy manual. Developed new policies pertaining to diversity and equity and progressive discipline. Entered into an agreement with the Oxford Public Schools to host the district’s policy manual online utilizing CABE’s Online Policy Service (C.O.P.S.). Met with the Superintendent of the New Canaan Public Schools to discuss policy issues and needs.
➤ By helping school boards to increase student achievement
•
•
•
Provided Lighthouse training for the Vernon and the Winchester Boards of Education. Sent out three issues of Policy Highlights via email listserv covering topics that affect student achievement. This included administration of epinephrine, vaccinations, recess programs, protecting online student data, and school resource officers. Planned and implemented successful Hot Topic workshop - Discipline and Discrimination: It’s a Fine Line.
➤ By promoting
public education:
• •
Met with Norwich Bulletin editorial board. Met with numerous legislative leaders to discuss education issues.
Participants attending the Area 3 Legislative Breakfast held on January 14, 2015 at Rockville High School in Vernon.
12
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
Enhancements made to C.O.P.S. Online program Vincent A. Mustaro, Senior Staff Associate for Policy Service, CABE
CABE introduced the electronic service, Connecticut Online Policy Service (C.O.P.S.) eight years ago. The Connecticut Online Policy Service puts a district’s policies on the Internet. A key advantage of this placement is that each time any user checks the electronic version of the district’s manual, they will access the most recent version. Simply posting policies on the district’s website in static form doesn’t satisfy the needs of most districts. The pdf and html formats are adequate for some items such as sports schedules and cafeteria menus. However, searching features and other research tools are needed if board members, school administrators and the public are to find needed policy information quickly in a user-friendly format. CABE’s Policy Service, through the Connecticut Online Policy Service, has offered school districts an economical way to make all district policies and administrative regulations fingertip accessible on the Internet. This service enables a school district to create a convenient, “paperless” policy collection that’s accessible to board members, administrators, teachers, parents and other community members anytime, all the time, on the district’s website. The Internet-based manual is user-friendly, easy to navigate, searchable by word or phrase and easily expandable. Links are provided to all related policies and to
the Connecticut statutes. Board exhibits, charts, forms and tables are also available in their original format for downloading. The CABE Policy Service is now pleased to announce that the program is being enhanced, at no additional cost to current subscribers or to new subscribers. The new enhancements include the following: 1. An improved print feature a. Print one to several policies at a time, using the check box functionality in the TOC (table of contents). b. Print entire section(s) or the entire manual at one time, again, using the check box functionality in the TOC. 2. An improved Table of Contents a. The TOC works on all four modern-day browsers (Safari, Chrome, Fire Fox, IE). b. The TOC will expand just by clicking the section/ policy title (you don’t have to click a folder or arrow). c. For individual district manuals, the TOC will automatically expand the different section headings upon loading the site (Section A, Section B, etc.). 3.
Searches can be saved.
4.
End-users can perform multiple searches without having to close any existing search results.
5.
An iPad app that automatically loads when browsing to the policy site. No need to download the app.
6.
The iPad app/mobile site also works with Android devices should a district decide they would like that option included on their policy site.
7.
Improved and more user-friendly skins (templates).
8.
Programming architecture that allows for future upgrades and integrations.
9.
The new search engine leverages cloud technology, allowing for better redundancy and better updating processes.
10. Policies can now be copied from the online version into Word in order to make revisions. The old site used tabled HTML whereas the new technology keys off of a stylesheet (CSS). The C.O.P.S. service includes the conversion of a district’s current policy manual to an online database; highlighted key word text search capabilities; links to legal and cross references; unlimited update service/ website revisions; and hosting of the policy database. For more information contact the CABE Policy Service at (860) 571-7446; (800) 317-0033 or email Vincent Mustaro or Pam Brooks at vmustaro@cabe.org or pbrooks@cabe.org.
CORRECTION: The article, “Policy Update: providing homebound instruction,” which appeared in the March 2015 issue of The Journal inadvertently did not include one of the sources used in its preparation, in addition to the State Department of Education regulations. Valuable clarifying material was also used in the article which was included in a PowerPoint presentation posted on the State Education Resource Center (SERC), Middletown CT. The PowerPoint is titled, “State Department of Education, Bureau of Special Education, Legal Forum, Homebound Instruction and 504 Planning, March 27, 2014.” The presentation was done by Attorney Michelle C. Laubin of Berchem, Moses, and Devlin, P.C. Vincent A. Mustaro, CABE Senior Staff Associate for Policy Service
“Good management is the art of making problems so interesting and their solutions so constructive that everyone wants to get to work and deal with them.” – Paul Hawken
13
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
The
Media Message
from Ann Baldwin, Baldwin Media Marketing, LLC
Are your missing out on positive press? More and more school districts understand the importance of positive press and often feel a sense of frustration when what they consider a “newsworthy” event happens at their school and the media doesn’t cover it. But, did you ever wonder why some schools have a great “buzz” about them, but your school does not? Perhaps the reason, more often than not, is that the schools with great local and regional media exposure have made a commitment to communication. Communication needs to be part of the district culture. It is something that should be addressed during on-going professional development with not only your staff and parent leaders: everyone within your school community needs to understand that communication is a priority in their school. It really takes strong “internal” communication to make that happen.
For example, take a look around at all of If not, they should be. the great things happening in your school. • Do you have a local cable access Now take another look. Are you missing station in your community that you dozens of are not opportuniutilizing? If ties to get so, that is a good press huge missed each year? opportunity. Try to Regardless of identify the what you top events might think, happening people do within your watch it! • Asking school district and your local come up paper if you can contribwith a tactical ute an article Congresswoman Esty with a Womogo student. effort to get on what is the message out to your local community. happening in your school community on a • If you have a school newspaper, or weekly or monthly basis. Many publicanewsletter, are your local media tions are begging for good content and outlets on the e-mail or mailing list? would love to have your school contribute
quality content. • If you are concerned that writing an article on a regular basis is too much work, then why not share some of the great photos that are taken at these events with a brief caption. After all, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” The picture that I am using as an example is of Congresswoman Elizabeth Esty (D-5th), who recently spent some time in the Makers Space classroom at Wamogo High School, to see how students work in this innovative space. It is as simple as that, and YES, this photo made the local newspapers. So start building your PR momentum now, it’s never too late and once you do you will start noticing that you are creat-ing a “buzz” about your schools and as a result, your entire community will be more engaged as a result.
CABE and Baldwin Media: Partners in Managing Communications
New study shows Connecticut has. the best schools (K-12) in the U.S. A new SmartAsset study has found the state in the country with the best schools (K-12) and Connecticut is in the number 1 spot! It’s not hard to see why. In the study, Connecticut had the 3rd highest college-enrollment rate of any state in the country, with 76% of high school graduates enrolling in college within 12 months of graduation, and the ninth lowest high school dropout rate! See the chart below that outlines the top 10 states with the best schools along with the stats that placed them there:
Rank
State
SAT Testing Percentage
ACT Testing Percentage
College Attendance Rate
Dropout Rate
Funding Student
StudentTeacher Ratio
Grade
1
Connecticut
88%
29%
76%
2.1%
$18,512
13.19
A
2
New Jersey
79%
25%
71%
1.4%
$19,601
11.97
A
3
Massachusetts
84%
23%
74%
2.5%
$16,775
13.94
A
4
New York
76%
27%
71%
3.8%
$20,376
12.01
A-
5
Virginia
73%
28%
68%
1.9%
$12,097
12.33
A-
6
Delaware
100%
18%
69%
3.5%
$17,348
14.25
B+
7
New Hampshire
70%
20%
65%
1.3%
$16,657
12.09
B+
8
Minnesota
6%
76%
71%
1.9%
$13,085
15.95
B+
9
North Dakota
2%
100%
66%
3.0%
$12,516
12.22
B
Nebraska
4%
86%
69%
2.2%
$10,545
9.80
B
10
Source:SmartAsset:https://smartasset.com/student-loans/states-best-schools. SmartAsset’s mission: “We use our software and data to provide simple, easy to understand answers to complex financial questions.”
14 Cloud computing (continued from page 4) protected information for any other purpose than that for which it was disclosed. It is the district’s responsibility to enforce that requirement. Rather than undertaking the practically impossible task of identifying which bits of school district student data are subject to FERPA, it is prudent for school officials to craft policy that presumes that all data created by students, teachers and staff related to students is afforded “education record” status for purposes of directing third-party technology providers on how they should handle the data, how they can use it, and with whom they can share it. Determining what portions of an education record should be considered PII is a challenging and context-specific inquiry that is the school district’s responsibility by law. Therefore, school districts should preclude third-party service providers from making determinations about what elements of an education record are or are not PII. The most conservative course to take is to consider all data protected by FERPA. The Protection of Pupil Rights Amendment (PPRA) requires schools and contractors to make certain instructional ma-
Policy Implications Policy, #3520.13, “Student Data Protection and Privacy/Cloud-Based Services,” has been developed related to this issue. This policy speaks to the issue of a board entering into a contract with a third party provider for services for digital storage, management and record retrieval, utilizing Cloudbased services and the use of digital educational software to access, store and use student records. In addition, the policy prohibits third-party providers from targeting advertising to students or their parents, using covered information to compile profiles of K-12 students, selling a student’s information, or disclosing covered information. In addition, other CABE policies and materials relate to this topic and are available. These include #3520.1, “Information Security Breach and Notification,” #3520.11, “Electronic Information Security,” #3520.12, “DataBased Information Management System Confidentiality” and Policy,” #5125, “Student Records,” which contains the appendix, “Guidance for Reasonable Methods and Written Agreements.”
terials available for inspection by parents and to obtain written parental consent before requiring minor students to participate in some surveys, analyses, or evaluations that reveal information concerning certain subjects. The law also requires school districts to develop policies in consultation with parents on the collection, disclosure, or use of personal information collected from students for the purpose of market-
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015 ing or selling that information, though there is an exception to this requirement for “educational products or services,” including district testing. School districts must give parents at least annual notice of PPRA policies, an opportunity to opt out of instructional activities related to these subjects, and notice of specific events surrounding these subjects. The Children’s Online Privacy Protection Act (COPPA) imposes certain requirements on website (and mobile app) operators “to place parents in control over what information is collected from their young children online.” The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has issued rules and guidance that apply to operators that collect, use, or disclose personal information from children, and those with actual knowledge that they are collecting, using, or disclosing personal information from children under the age of 13. When a school contracts with a Cloud vendor to provide online services to students, it may provide consent under COPPA on behalf of the parents under certain circumstances, but school personnel need to understand fully the purpose for which any personal information about students is collected and how it is used or shared by the operator. An operator will need to obtain actual parental consent (not school district consent) when it “intends to use or disclose children’s personal information for its own commercial purposes in addition to the provision of services to the school.” In short, these laws provide a basic framework, but not a complete regulatory scheme for addressing student data privacy issues. Some state legislatures have imposed new data protection requirements, and other states and Congress may do soon. With an incomplete and evolving legal landscape and public opinion leaning in the direction of additional protections for student data, your school board should consider going beyond the current legal requirements and adopting a “comprehensive approach to protecting student privacy.” This article is based upon material excerpted from “Data in the Cloud,” April 2014 NSBA, and “Cloud Computing and Student Privacy: A Guide for School Attorneys,” NSBA, May 30, 2014.
Connecticut Assessment: (continued from page 1) concept, or they may assess reading comprehension through classroom discussions.
How Is Connecticut Dealing With Concerns About Over-Testing? The state’s required standardized test is offered annually and actually takes up very little of a student’s time. In fact, the latest version of the state test, called the Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) test, takes about the same amount of time as did the Connecticut Mastery Test (CMT) – which
has been the state test for over two decades. However, additional layers of testing have been added over time to many districts’ assessment systems – some of which may no longer be necessary. Recognizing this trend, the Connecticut State Department of Education (CSDE) is working to help districts audit their testing systems to eliminate extra tests. Recently, the CSDE announced a $450,000 program to provide districts with the technical expertise to maximize instructional time and use tests wisely to support instruction.
Why Do We Need Standardized Tests? Standardized tests are scientifically developed tests that are statistically proven to measure: (a) the same results on multiple occasions; and (b) the information that the test seeks to measure. Standardized testing is a federal necessity under the Elementary and Secondary Education Act (sometimes referred to as “ESEA,” “No Child Left Behind,” or “NCLB”). In 2001, ESEA was updated to require that states annually assess every child in grades 3-8 and once in high school – in exchange for federal education funding. For nearly a decade before that time, Connecticut had been a leader among states – requiring testing in grades 3, 6, 8 and 10. After 2001, Connecticut was also required to add testing in grades 4, 5, and 7. With this change, it became possible, for the first time, for schools, districts, and states to identify gaps in achievement among various groups of children (e.g. Black, Hispanic, economically disadvantaged, and special education) throughout their education experience. This valuable information has increased efforts to understand how we are meeting the needs of these traditionally underserved students and has resulted in improved learning opportunities for all children. If we were to eliminate standardized tests, we would be deprived of a statistically accurate measure that – along with other indicators of achievement – can be used to reliably monitor how all students are progressing. Every district has some students who are not doing as well as they should be; we need to be able to identify them and get them the support they need to succeed. Standardized testing helps us to hold schools accountable for giving ALL students the education they deserve.
What Are Summative and Formative Assessments? Summative tests measure student learning by comparing achievement against benchmarks at the end of a specified period of time. Summative tests can be used for accountability purposes. In contrast, formative tests can be offered more frequently during the specified period of time to provide teachers with feedback so they can modify instruction and keep students on track. A balanced system will use a reasonable combination of both forms of testing.
What Are the Smarter Balanced Assessments? The Smarter Balanced Assessment Consortium (SBAC) is a group of 22
states that have worked collaboratively to develop a modern testing system that can accurately measure student learning aligned to the Common Core State Standards. Connecticut educators were involved in this effort. Since Common Core sets higher expectations for students – asking them to learn more than ever before--the SBAC is a more rigorous test than any previously used. Beyond measuring fact memorization, it examines how well students are mastering the knowledge and skills that they will need in preparation for the jobs of the future. These tests are taken on the computer, and they adjust the difficulty of questions based upon a student’s answers to previous questions. This allows us to measure a student’s knowledge and skills much more accurately; it allows students to complete the tests in less time than in previous assessment systems; and the results of these next generation tests will be made available much faster than the results from traditional paper and pencil tests. In addition, the SBAC test can eliminate many local tests because it includes materials to help teachers ensure that instruction is aligned with the new standards in English and Mathematics.
Why Can’t Teachers Write Their Own Assessments? Individual teachers can and do write tests about their own lessons – to understand how well their students are progressing. In fact, the Common Core gives teachers the flexibility to develop their own curricular materials, including tests. However, teacher-written tests alone cannot determine how well our state policies and investments in education are working. For accountability purposes, teacher-written tests must be supplemented by standardized tests that are statistically valid and reliable.
Who Else Supports Annual Statewide Testing? Aside from our six organizations, a number of American organizations support fair, annual testing – including many civil rights and business organizations, such as: American Association of University Women, Association of University Centers on Disabilities, Business Roundtable, Council of Parent Attorneys and Advocates, Children’s Defense Fund, Disability Rights Education and Defense Fund, The Education Trust, U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network, Institute for Educational Leadership, The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights, League of United Latin American Citizens, Mexican American Legal Defense and Educational Fund, NAACP, National Association of Councils on Developmental Disabilities, National Center for Learning Disabilities, National Congress of American Indians, National Council of La Raza, National Disability Rights Network, National Indian Education Association, National Urban League, National Women’s Law Center, Partners for Each and Every Child, Teach Plus, and United Negro College Fund.
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015
15
16
The Journal – Connecticut Association of Boards of Education/April 2015