January 31, 2005 Minutes
Minutes
Commission on Secondary School Reform
January 31, 2005
I. Location and Attendees
The meeting was held at George National Jewish Medical Center at 1400 Jackson Street. Members of the Commission in attendance were co-chairs Lucia Guzman and Dorothy Horrell; Commissioners Hank Baker, Brian Barhaugh, Dana Bryson, Leanna Clark, Ariel Cisneros, Judi Diaz-Bonacquisti, Maria Guajardo Lucero, Debbie Jessup, Christine Johnson, Steve Kaplan, Jesse King, Ginger Maloney, James Mejia, Rick O’Connell, Bill Ritter, Esther Rodriguez, Al Yates; ex-officio members Jeff Buck, Ann Greenfield, Mario Williams; staff Trish McNeil and Liz Aybar.
Observers included Becky Wissink, DCTA President; Leo Smith, Citizens’ Committee on Bond Expenditures; Nancy Mitchell, Denver Rocky Mountain News; Alison Sherry, Denver Post; Mariah Dickson, PEBC/Colorado Children’s Campaign; and Aimee Wagstaff.
II. Introduction, Approval of Minutes, Overview of the Day – Dorothy Horrell
Ms. Horrell welcomed Commissioners and introduced the DPS General Counsel, Mary Ellen McEldowney. Ms. McEldowney explained why this body should hold its meeting as a public session. Ms. Horrell suggested, and Commissioners agreed, to proceed with the meeting.
Ms. Horrell noted that the goal of the meeting is to move toward consensus of recommendations to the Board. She suggested the Commission focus on the draft letter to Board of Education and draft Executive Summary. She expressed that after using these for the basis of the discussion, Commissioners and staff can then go back into full report and make necessary changes to assure alignment and consistency.
III. Letter to the Board – Dorothy Horrell
Ms. Horrell broke down the letter into the different sections and asked Commissioners for comments on each section. The following is a summary of those comments and conversations.
Our Work and Current Reality
<DIR> <DIR>The System: Commissioners raised the question about the causes for the current problems in high schools. They expressed that very well-meaning individuals (teachers, staff, administrators) are trying to function in a system that is a relic of a time when society and the students were different. The structure has not adapted to these changes which makes it difficult for people to do what is best for students. Commissioners agreed the letter should reflect those ideas.
Research: Commissioners discussed whether or not research should be included in this letter. They noted that there is extensive research and data in the paper which should be mentioned in the letter. It was agreed that the letter should explain that the Commission’s findings come from conversations with people in the District, schools and community; visits to schools; and data and research.
</DIR></DIR>Our Vision
<DIR> <DIR>Commissioners made a slight change to the vision statement to emphasize that every student "can and will" graduate. Prior to that conversation, the word "can" was not a part of the vision statement.
</DIR></DIR>Achieving Our Vision
<DIR> <DIR>Rigor, Relevance, and Relationships: Commissioners discussed the importance of each one of these principles. They emphasized that the District and schools cannot emphasize one principle at the expense of the other two. All three must exist in order to help students succeed. They also discussed that the concept of "relevance" includes helping students see how what they are learning fits into the context of their lives. It is not merely changing the curriculum to ensure that it fits each student’s interests.
Five Strategies and Recommendations: Commissioners noted that these bullets refer to schools, principals, teachers, choice and the District, but that it should be made clear in the letter that one key strategy is treating students as individual learners. They agreed to add that as the first strategy.
District Guidelines and Policies and the DCTA-District Contract: Commissioners expressed the importance of aligning all guidelines, policies and contracts with school reform efforts. While that information is in the Executive Summary and full report, it should also be in the letter.
Current District-Wide and School-Based Strategies: Commissioners wanted to include a sentence explaining that current programs and reform efforts should be assessed, and if found to demonstrate success, they should be continued and potentially expanded.
Focus on Student Achievement: Commissioners expressed the desire to be sure that the letter is phrased in a way that maintains the focus on student achievement rather than school structure.
Tone: Commissioners discussed the importance of having the community will to make these reforms a reality. They emphasized the importance of the Board acting on this, that it is serious and urgent, and that they are not alone and have support in the process. They discussed adding some of the data or examples included in the Executive Summary and full report in the letter to draw attention to the urgency of the situation. They agreed to note in the letter that the full data and examples are contained in the full report.
</DIR></DIR>
IV. Executive Summary – Dorothy Horrell
As she did with the letter to the Board, Ms. Horrell broke down the Executive Summary into the different sections and asked Commissioners for comments on each section. The following is a summary of those comments and conversations.
Introduction
<DIR> <DIR>·
Number of Recommendations: Although we do not list all of the recommendations, we should say that all 22 are listed within the full report.·
Focus on Students: Commissioners suggested that the language focusing on student achievement be predominant and consistent with the letter to the Board, including adding the new strategy (number 1 of 6) to focus on students as individual learners. </DIR></DIR>Denver’s High Schools
<DIR> <DIR>Data: Commissioners noted that the data do not seem to clearly represent the urgency and direness of the situation. For example, they discussed the statistic about English Language Learners and that it seems too low. There was a lot of discussion about the inability to get data on how many students do not speak English as a first language. They also noted that many students who would be ELA high school students have dropped out of school. Commissioners also requested that other data be included to demonstrate the economic and societal cost of a high school dropout. They agreed that the Executive Summary needs to include data that will paint a picture that creates the need for change. They also expressed that the importance of collecting data and following where students go should be in the Executive Summary.
Achievement Gap: One of the powerful statistics is the difference in achievement levels and graduation rates between white students and African American and Latino students. They noted that the numbers reflect the Commission’s sense that there is a substantial achievement gap and problems with accurately and consistently calculating graduation rates. Showing these data could help express a fundamental problem that must be addressed.
</DIR></DIR>Action Plan
<DIR> <DIR>Consistency: Commissioners noted the importance of being sure to make the necessary adjustments in the Executive Summary so that it is consistent with the revised letter to the Board.
The Strategies: Commissioners talked about the wording of the six suggested strategies for implementing their vision. Issues raised included who has ultimate authority over the curriculum in schools and the importance of principals as leaders and teachers as leaders. Clarification was reached that the District and School Board should establish clear standards for what high school graduates should know and be able to do and define how that will be consistently measured across the District. There should be flexibility to allow the standards to be mastered in a variety of ways. That corresponds with the Commission’s recommendations regarding meeting individual student’s needs and providing a variety of high quality choices
The Steps: Commissioners discussed the appropriate language that should be used to explain the suggested steps to convert the Commission’s principles and strategies into actions. Commissioners outlined and agreed upon a series of steps that will place the responsibility for reform with the superintendent; involve all stakeholders in the process; creating a template based on the principles of rigor, relevance and relationships for what conditions and standards should exist in all high schools to make them high quality and meet the needs of individual students; assess high schools based on that template (Commissioners noted here that the criteria and process for this assessment should be defined by the Board and Superintendent and must include looking at available research and involve the school staff and community- this must be empowering for the people within the schools); assist high schools, their administrators, their staff, their students and their communities in developing a plan for the future of the school that will help it meet the conditions and standards of the template; and empower principals and teacher leaders in the school reform process.
Creativity: Commissioners discussed the importance of laying out the vision, strategies and recommended action steps while leaving room for the district and schools to create and implement the specific process of reform. Commissioners emphasized the importance of thinking outside the box as the District and high schools change to better meet the needs of Denver’s students.
Additional Steps: Commissioners noted that after following these steps there are a number of other important actions for the Board and District to focus on.
9th Graders: Commissioners agreed that it is important to focus on ninth and tenth grade students but suggested that the focus be on designing experiences for all students that stress individual attention.
Choice: Commissioners talked about the difference between the type of choice they envision in the District and the type that exists now. Currently, students usually choice into other schools to move away from what they perceive not to be a good school. Instead, Commissioners want all high schools to be high quality schools so that students who choose to attend something other than their neighborhood school, choose to do so because of a specific learning style or interest. The goal should be to create such strong neighborhood schools that students choose out of that school for a positive reason.
Data: Commissioners discussed the importance of a strong data system and suggested that information about the state student identifier be added to the Executive Summary.
District: Commissioners expressed the importance of being clear about who the "District" refers to in our recommendations. It is meant to refer to the people outside of the schools, based primarily at 900 Grant Street, but that may not be clear to people reading the report. They also discussed the importance of creating open and frequent communication in a respectful environment throughout schools and the District.
</DIR></DIR>
V. Next Steps
Commissioners discussed when it would be appropriate to present their recommendations to the Board. While they wanted to be sure they are taking the time to do it well, they also wanted to be sure they are not taking more time than is needed. Potential dates for the presentation to the School Board were discussed.
At the end of the meeting, Commissioners felt confident they could finish their work via electronic communication. Ms. Horrell suggested that if there is a need for another meeting, Commissioners should feel comfortable calling for it.
VI. Adjourn
The meeting was adjourned at 7:00 p.m.