NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

1

Every Student Succeeds Act Consolidated Plan Team

Meeting Summary October 20, 2016

Facilitator: Gil Mendoza

Members Present: Andrea Cobb, Bernard Koontz (via GoTo), Bill Keim, Carrie Basas (via GoTo), Chad Magendanz (via GoTo), Chris Nation, Dana Anderson, Deb Merle, Doug Nelson, Frank Hewins, Gary Kipp, Gayle Pauley, Israel Vela, James Smith (via GoToMeeting), Joe Davalos, Julie Kang (via GoToMeeting), Kathryn Hobbs, Kim Brodie, Lorna Spear, Mele Aho, Michele Miller, Minerva Morales, Mynor Lopez, Randy Spaulding, Sarah Butcher, Sharon Tomiko Santos, Sherry Krainick, Tim Garchow (via GoTo).

Workgroup Members Absent: Ann Waybright, Brad Sprague, George Dockins, Jeff Vincent, Jennifer Kindle, Jennifer Wallace, John McCoy, Kate Davis, Leonard Forsman, Rich McBride, Steve Davidson, Wanda Billingsly

Alternate Members Present: Brian Jeffries (Alternate for Stephen Mullin), Kaaren Heikes (Alternative for Ben Rarick), Alex Ybarra (Alternative for Suzy Martinez)

Guests: Andrew Parr, Ben King, Deb Came, Ethan Moreno, Jake Cornett, Jami Peterson, Lisa Kodama, Logan Endres, Lucinda Young, Maria Flores, Mea Moore, Michael Merrin, Nate Marciochi, Patty Finnegan, Paula Moore, Sally McNair, Sarah Bolton, Sue Anderson, Tony Brownell, Wendy Rader-Konofalski

Meeting Summary Taken By: Carrie Hert

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

2

Agenda Item Discussion Action

1. Welcome/

Introductions/

Announcements

Meeting started at 9:15 a.m.

2. ESSA Effective Educators Workgroup Recommendations 3-4

Maria Flores and Sue Anderson presented and led the discussion to the ESSA Consolidated Plan Team.

EE3: State level activities

Recommendation: 3% of Title II funds dedicated for items 2 and 8 from the SEA

State Activities List.

2) Developing, improving, or providing assistance to local educational agencies

to support the design and implementation of teacher, principal, or other school

leader evaluation and support systems that are based in part on evidence of

student academic achievement, which may include student growth, and shall

include multiple measures of educator performance and provide clear, timely,

and useful feedback to teachers, principals, or other school leaders, such as

by—

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

3

Agenda Item Discussion Action

(I) developing and disseminating high-quality evaluation tools, such as

classroom observation rubrics, and methods, including training and auditing, for

ensuring inter-rater reliability of evaluation results;

(II) developing and providing training to principals, other school leaders,

coaches, mentors, and evaluators on how to accurately differentiate

performance, provide useful and timely feedback, and use evaluation results to

inform decision making about professional development, improvement

strategies, and personnel decisions; and

III) developing a system for auditing the quality of evaluation and support

systems.

8) Providing assistance to local educational agencies for the development and implementation of high-quality professional development programs for principals that enable the principals to be effective and prepare all students to meet the challenging State academic standards.

1% of Title II funds dedicated for item 5 on the SEA State Activities List.

5) Developing, improving, and implementing mechanisms to assist local educational agencies and schools in effectively recruiting and retaining teachers, principals, or other school leaders who are effective in improving

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

4

Agenda Item Discussion Action

student academic achievement, including effective teachers from underrepresented minority groups and teachers with disabilities, such as through—

(I) opportunities for effective teachers to lead evidence-based (to the extent the State determines that such evidence is reasonably available) professional development for the peers of such effective teachers; and

(II) providing training and support for teacher leaders and principals or other school leaders who are recruited as part of instructional leadership teams.

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

TPEP similarities

3% of Title II to be reserved for principals

Supporting principals should be key

Change from current practice—Currently 2% is for admin and 1% for state activities. This is an additional 4% from school districts grants, which was not allowed under NCLB.

Title II allocations Unanimous consensus reached.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

5

Agenda Item Discussion ActionEE4: Educator Data—Suppression Rules for “Not Personally Identifiable”

Publicly report effective educator data at both the district (n-size 10) and school levels (n-size 5). School districts with 10 or fewer fewer than 10 teachers will be reported as an aggregate group and with a label indicating which districts fall in the aggregate group. An aggregate group will not apply to the school level data; data will not be displayed if the n-size is fewer than 5.

Implementation plan: adjust by the end of the 2017–18 school year, if needed. Reconvene the Effective Educator (EE) workgroup to revisit the full data set.

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Suppressing data with an N size of 5 of fewer teachers for school reports

Suppression rules

Concern that not all educators reported under TPEP fall under thatdefinition

Emerging educator definition would only apply to teachers that have 3years or less of teaching experience

Educator categorization

Concern for small districts

Concern for lack of data

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration with noted changes.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

6

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Unanimous consensus reached.

3. ESSA School and District Improvement Workgroup Recommendations 1A-2

Michael Merrin and Nate Marciochi presented and led the discussion to the Consolidated Plan Team.

SDI1A: State establishes steering committee to oversee school and district improvement similar to structure for TPEP Recommendation: The State, using the State’s system of meaningful differentiation, identifies lowest performing 5% of Title I funded schools. *to be referred to the Achievement and Accountability Workgroup. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Clarity on existing workgroup representatives—ensure representation is broad and includes teachers

Currently the Achievement and Accountability Workgroup (AAW) is in statute

Education Oversight and Accountability Workgroup

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

7

Agenda Item Discussion Action

The Consolidated Plan Team voted that the steering committee listed in this recommendation would be the AAW as it fits the description. If any component is missing from the AAW, we would add it to the workgroup moving forward. Unanimous consensus.

SDI1B: School and District Improvement Recommendation: School Improvement Process Summary State Identification 1111(d)(A) p. 40

SEA will convene a meeting with and for schools and districts for exploration of what it means to be an identified school which includes the subsequent process steps

Formula LEA funding provision based on number of identified schools. 1003(a)(1)(a)

LEA conducts a needs Assessment 1111(d)(B)(i) p. 40 (sec. 200.21 of PRG)

LEA and School Improvement Plan, including LEA support of Identified school. 1003(e) p. 10 1111(d)(B) p. 40

Review by peer(s).

School submits plan to LEA for approval 1111(d)(B)(v) p. 40

Submit school/LEA plan to SEA for approval 1111(d)(B)(v) p. 40

Funding is finalized for plan implementation

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

8

Agenda Item Discussion Action

The State must conclude plan approval process no later than 30 days after LEA submission.

LEA monitors progress and evaluates impact and reports to the SEA.

State monitors progress and reports Evaluation of Impact to the LEA 1111(d)(B)(vi) p. 40

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Integration with the needs assessment process in comparison with the law that passed earlier this year, the Washington Integrated Student Supports Protocol (WISSP)

WISSP will be a component of the needs assessment

State law to be followed with the marriage of these two needs assessments

Community, and parent/guardian involvement through implementation

Regulatory guidance consideration

Encouragement of districts to include parents/guardians in the development stages process

Communication similar to how the Report Card is shared

Consideration of best practices already in place

Assurance that guardians and families are included, in addition to parents

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

9

Agenda Item Discussion Action Consideration of additional stakeholder involvement such as members

of local smaller jurisdictions, city councils, and housing authorities

Expectations of inclusion of school principals regarding who all should beinvited to these discussions to ensure wider audience is reached

The OSPI CISL office is in development of a protocol on communicationoutreach with all stakeholders for the student needs assessment

Consensus reached.

SDI2: School and District Improvement

Recommended: Process for Targeted Improvement Schools

1. SEA, using the meaningful differentiation of schools, notifies LEA of anyschool served by the LEA in which any subgroup of students isconsistently underperforming, as described in subsection (c)(4)(C)(iii).1111(d)(2)(A)(i)

2. LEA notifies the school 1111(d)(2)(A)(ii)3. The identified school, in partnership with stakeholders, develops and

implements a school-level targets support and improvement plan toimprove student outcomes for the identified group. 1111(d)(2)(B)a) Informed by indicators 1111(d)(2)(B)(i)b) Includes evidence-based interventions 1111(d)(2)(B)(i)

Consensus reached to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

10

Agenda Item Discussion Action

4. School submits plan to LEA within 90 days of the start of the school year after identification. 1111(d)(2)(B)(iii)

5. LEA approves plan 1111(d)(2)(B)(iii) 6. LEA monitors the outcome of the identified group of students and

reports progress to SEA. 1111(d)(2)(B)(iv) 7. SEA monitors progress of the identified group of students and reports

progress to LEA. 8. If school has not met the exit criteria, a team is convened prior to year-

end to the school’s level of progress. The team will be comprised of, but not limited to the principal and other school stakeholders include parents, superintendent or designee, OSPI/ESD content lead for goal areas needing to be addressed. The team may include an outside consultant agreed upon by State and LEA. The SIP is reviewed and the team provides the LEA a report including commendations and recommendations. 1111(d)(3)(B).

9. If progress is not made in the final year towards meeting the statewide exit criteria, the SEA may identify the school for comprehensive support and improvement. 1111(d)(3)(A)(II).

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Associated funding recommendation

Identification of the consistently low performing schools based upon sub group performance

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

11

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Concern for funding of schools that do not have committed funding

State and federal funding available for these schools

Consensus reached.

4. ESSA Report Card Workgroup Recommendations 1–6

Deb Came presented and led the discussion to the Consolidated Plan Team.

RC1: N-Size for display Recommendation: All non-accountability information (Report Card data) should have a minimum N-size of 10 students in order to be displayed, in accordance with state law. The Report Card should if possible, instruct and allow users to ‘bundle’ sub-groups until the minimum N-size is achieved. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Bundling explanation needs to be consistently communicated and delivered

Allowance of sub group bundling using online mechanism o OSPI to explore the feasibility of this

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

12

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Unanimous consensus reached.

RC2: N-size for Accountability Recommendation: N-size design for Accountability may be determined by the ESSA accountability workgroup. However, the Report Card Workgroup reviewed the topic and makes this recommendation to the Accountability Systems Workgroup for consideration: “ESSA requires states to establish the minimum number of students to be included for accountability purposes. To balance student inclusion with reliable results, we support using a minimum n-size of 20 for accountability calculations for the ‘all students’ category and for student subgroups. For schools with fewer than 20 students in a given subgroup, we recommend combining the most recent two or three years of data if that results in reaching the 20 student minimum.” Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Concern for counting students multiple years

Students are spread across different years so different student outcomes are reached for different years

Concern for reporting different N size for accountability

Inconsistent with current EOGOAC recommendation

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

13

Agenda Item Discussion Action

N size of 10 importance of uncovering challenges that exist within broadly defined ethnic racial groups

Variability and impact that one student could have in a trend, especially in smaller schools

Trends affected by how accountability is factored

Concern about noise and variability with small data sets

Development of standardized rules for bundling

Not discretionary for school districts for accountability

Concern for risk of being underreported without an assurance of small N size

Needs for standard definitions on percentages of students that are included on each N size

Consensus reached.

RC3: Design and usability Recommendation: The workgroup recommends the Washington Report Card website be developed and improved with the following underlying principles. Report Card should be: Rich. Provide access to meaningful and relevant data with different levels of detail. This would include having disaggregated information, longitudinal data, drill-down capacity, and downloadable data files.

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

14

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Timely. Updated regularly, such that it contains the most recent information. Easy-to-use. Simple and intuitive navigation that is ADA compliant, and multilingual. Understandable. Information is clearly labeled. Definitions and documentation are readily available and easily understood. Interactive. Information is accessible in a variety of user customizable presentations that allows users to consume information in a manner that suites them best. User experience should be customizable and provide search and help features. Actionable. Contextual documentation is easily accessible that enables users to fully understand the information viewed. No comments. Unanimous consensus reached.

RC4: Customer and Stakeholder Input Recommendation: The workgroup recommends the following regarding customer and stakeholder input for Report Card:

a) Leverage parental/guardian/family input activities initiated by other ESSA workgroups to gather as much parental input as is possible.

b) Leverage District and Stakeholder activities initiated by other ESSA workgroups to gather as much input as possible.

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration with noted changes.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

15

Agenda Item Discussion Action

c) Design and implement a feedback survey.

Incorporate feedback survey into current Report Card website for the purpose of influencing design of new Report Card.

Incorporate feedback survey into new Report Card for the purpose of continues product improvement.

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Language change to include guardian and family to be consistent with ESSA Parent and Community Engagement Workgroup language

Unanimous consensus with noted changes.

RC5: Civil Rights Data Recommendation: The workgroup recommends that the ESSA requirement to display the Civil Rights Data Collection (CRDC) shall be met by providing a clearly labeled and defined link to the federal data site (http://ocrdata.ed.gov/). The site already contains a variety of data displays, using the data submitted directly by districts. The workgroup recommends that OSPI continue to review elements that are reported in CRDC and already collected in CEDARS. Where appropriate and

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

16

Agenda Item Discussion Action

possible report those elements directly on Report Card when it would be valuable to have them integrated with other Report Card information. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

No change to current practice

Continuation of overview Unanimous consensus reached.

RC6: Functions, Features and Data Recommendation: The workgroup made a collection of recommendations regarding prioritization and the structure of Report Card. The recommendations are specifications and will help guide the actual development of the revised Report Card. The attached documents outline:

a) workgroup prioritization for features and functions. b) workgroup recommendations for layering of data and data groupings. c) example of workgroup recommendation of data presentation style.

No comments. Consensus reached.

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

17

Agenda Item Discussion Action

5. ESSA English Learners Workgroup Recommendations 10, 15C, 17-18, 21

Mea Moore presented and led the discussion to the Consolidated Plan Team

members.

EL10: Describe how SEA will assist LEAs in: A–Meeting State-designed long-term goals including measurements of interim progress based on ELP assessments Recommendation: SEA to establish reasonable goals related to student growth and proficiency and provide tools to measure interim progress based on academic standards and English language proficiency. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

This recommendation is addressed under the ESSA Accountability System Recommendation 11 under goal 3, and will be addressed this afternoon.

No vote taken.

No vote taken.

EL15C: Academic Assessments – Requirements. The inclusion of ELs. To the extent practicable, ELs shall be given “assessments in the language and form most likely to yield accurate data on what such students know and can do in

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

18

Agenda Item Discussion Actionacademic content areas, until such students have achieved English language proficiency.”

Recommendation: SEA will provide the state required academic assessments in the top 57 languages and provide students access to these tests to the full extent of the law. SEA will develop guidelines to assist LEAs in making the decision to test in the most appropriate language.

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Amend the language in this recommendation to be the top 7 languages

Top 7 languages change every year and come out of CEDARs

Reported to the legislature yearly

Regional differences and impacts on school districts

Percentage of EL students represented in the top 7 languages

Unknown cost to add a language to the assessment system

Possible federal funds to support this

Ability to measure academic progress in dual languages and alignmentwith state tests

Impacts on translating state tests

Concern for smaller sub group sizes and how they will be accounted for

Intent to start with the top 7 languages and move out from there tocapture more students

for consideration with noted change.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

19

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Data affects from students that are not covered in the top 7 languages that are being tested in English

Moving forward, the data OSPI will collect will provide information to test in additional languages

Possible tests to be developed at the local level for languages that are not in the top 7

Addressing the gap between the top 7 languages vs. the 219 languages The Consolidated Plan Team voted unanimously to amend this recommendation to be the top 7 languages. Unanimous consensus reached.

EL17: Additional Academic Indicators Recommendation: Additional academic indicators in the state’s accountability system shall include (1) decreases in grade-to-grade retention and (2) increases in overall percentage of the students completing rigorous academic courses including, but not limited to dual credit courses, gifted and talented, career and technical education, fine arts, and college preparatory courses, e.g., Advanced Placement (AP), Advancement via Individual Determination (AVID). Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

No vote taken.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

20

Agenda Item Discussion Action

This recommendation is addressed under the ESSA Accountability System Recommendation 1 and will be addressed this afternoon.

No vote taken.

EL18: ELP Timeline and Targets: For English learners, for increases in the percentage of such students making progress in achieving English language proficiency, as defined by the State and measured by the required assessments, with a State-determined timeline. Recommendation: OSPI shall include in their accountability system two indicators; one that measures progress using a peer-based model and one that measures proficiency. For progress we recommend providing a series of growth targets that reflect the minimum growth necessary to make sufficient progress. For proficiency we recommend setting targets for reclassification based on students’ years in program, e.g., less than five years verses five years or more. For small districts and non-traditional education entities, e.g., re-engagement and detention centers, the indicators may be adjusted. Target setting in 2016–17. Target implementation in 2017–18.

No vote taken.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

21

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

This recommendation is addressed under the ESSA Accountability System Recommendation 10 and will be addressed this afternoon.

No vote taken.

EL21: Exited ELs: With respect to a student previously identified as an EL and for not more than 4 years after the student ceases to be identified as an EL, a State may include the results of the student’s assessment with the EL subgroup for accountability purposes. Recommendation: SEA will track achievement of EL students who have exited the program for two years as a separate subgroup for accountability purposes. SEA will track achievement of EL students who have exited the program for four years as a separate subgroup for federal reporting purposes. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

This recommendation is addressed under the ESSA Accountability System Recommendation 9 and will be addressed this afternoon.

No vote taken.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

22

Agenda Item Discussion ActionNo vote taken.

6. ESSA AccountabilitySystem WorkgroupRecommendations1-14

Deb Came and Andrew Parr presented and led the discussion to the Consolidated Plan Team.

AS1: School Quality or Student Success Indicators

Recommendation: The ASW Consolidated Plan Team recommends that the Superintendent include two five measures as the SQ/SS indicator as part of the Annual Meaningful Differentiation of schools. 1. A measure of chronic absenteeism2. 1. A measure of 9th graders on track2. Disproportionate discipline3. Advanced course-taking (dual-credit)4. School Climate and Engagement Survey5. Teacher Assignment and Equity

Minority Opinion (of ASW): There were additional indicators considered that were close to consensus but did not reach 2/3:

3. Disproportionate discipline

4. Advanced course-taking (dual-credit)

5. Verified post-secondary acceptance

Majority approval to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration with notes changes.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

23

Agenda Item Discussion Action

6. School Climate and Engagement Survey

7. Teacher Assignment and Equity Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Concern with high poverty, homelessness, and mobility throughout the state in addressing attendance

Concern with lack of healthcare, after school care, mentors, and attendance staff

Need to support schools rather than punish them

How to define 9th grade on track

Careful evaluation of data quality issues

Leaving it out of the achievement index is a positive thing

Students 9th grade school is held accountable

Concern on inconsistencies throughout the state on which school is held accountable for the 9th grader

Challenge chronic absenteeism as a way to proxy our schools

Move towards more incentive based supportive accountability system

Look at all different ways that absenteeism shows itself and what the state definition is

Engage more meaningfully with our community of stakeholders

Use of the school climate survey as a measure being used by other states

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

24

Agenda Item Discussion Action

More focused on the student and teacher

Realm of decision making at the district level

Research kinds of measures that move us in a direction of looking at it as support

Consideration of current teacher shortage when looking at accountability and data

Concern that parents and students make the decision more than educators on absenteeism

High schools and middle schools are not given funding for attendance coordinators

Opportunity to change things with ESSA

Social emotional needs of students need to be looked at more

More attention to school climate and teacher assignment needs—need for more data

Equity issues

Concern that chronic absenteeism places accountability on districts of something they aren’t able to control

Looking through the lens of how to push resources to schools to support them

Lost learning time

Recommendation to go to AAW and SBE The Consolidated Plan Team voted on the following measures:

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

25

Agenda Item Discussion Action

1. Chronic Absenteeism2. 9th Graders on Track3. Disproportionate Discipline4. Advanced Course Taking5. Verified Post-Secondary Acceptance6. Teacher Assignment and Equity7. School Climate and Engagement Survey

Majority approval reached on measures 2–4, 6–7.

AS2: Additional information for Report Card

Recommendation: The ASW Consolidated Plan Team recommends the following be included on Report Card:

Disproportionate Discipline

Advanced Course Taking

Verified Post-Secondary Acceptance*

Teacher Assignment & Equity (**)

School Climate & Engagement Survey*

WaKIDS

Seal of Biliteracy

Discipline Rate

Dropout Rate

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration with notes changes.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

26

Agenda Item Discussion Action

CADRs (College Academic Distribution Requirements) (**) Some of these measures will require new data collection (*) and will need to go through the Data Governance process. Others (**) will need modifications to improve data quality before they could be reported in a consistent way. Minority Opinion: In addition to SQSS recommendations for Report Card, the group discussed an ‘Opportunity to Learn Dashboard’. There was some support for the development of a tool or measure that included other "input" indicators that every student at a school typically receives (e.g., recess minutes, arts instruction, or basic funding.) This dashboard might reveal inequities in the school resource allocation system at the district and state level that could be impacting a school's ability to achieve success on certain indicators. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Will go through data governance process The Consolidated Plan Team voted on the following two measures:

1. Verified Post Secondary Acceptance for Reporting 2. CADRs for Reporting

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

27

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Consensus reached on two measures.

AS3: High school graduation Indicator Recommendation: The ASW Consolidated Plan Team recommends that the Superintendent include more than one measure for the high school graduation indicator as part of the Annual Meaningful Differentiation of schools: 1. The 4-Year adjusted cohort graduation rate as required 2. Extended-year adjusted cohort graduation rates: 5, 6, and 7-Year cohort rates No comments Unanimous consensus.

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

AS4: Minimum number of students Recommendation: The ASW recommends the following: 1. Use a minimum N-size of 20 students for including schools and student

subgroups for school accountability. 2. For consideration in the plan: evaluate the technical feasibility and identify

the unintended consequences of combining student data for up to three years to create more reportable student groups at schools.

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

No vote taken.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

28

Agenda Item Discussion Action

This recommendation was incorporated into the Report Card Workgroup Recommendation 2 and validated by the Consolidated Plan Team

The EOGOAC recommendation was for an N size of 10 for reporting and accountability

A higher N size would be in opposition of the EOGOAC

House Bill 1541 states an N size of 10 for display, reporting and accountability

Consolidated Plan Team directions early in the process noted that anything contradictory to state law will not be considered.

No vote taken.

AS5: Annual Meaningful Differentiation Recommendation: Discussion of 2 options for differentiating schools: 1. Assigning a name (or label) to school

2. Assigning a 1-10 rating, name, and color coded.

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Summative score is one score, not one for each category

Existing index concerns

Currently, one summative score is NOT a requirement

Consensus on assigned rating 1 to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

29

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Research on consequences in other states where they have tried to put grades on schools

Communication to the public and stakeholders

Development of a system that makes sense and is user friendly for parents/guardians/families and the public

Possible removal of “exemplary” language

Creating a meaningful differentiation of schools system

Displaying one rating for growth and one for mastery

Importance of supporting schools rather than labeling them The Consolidated Plan Team voted the following:

1. Assigning a name (or label) to school

2. Assigning a 1-10 rating, name, and color coded.

Consensus on assigned rating 1.

AS6: Participation Rate Recommendation: The ASW Consolidated Plan Team recommends the Achievement & Accountability Workgroup shall develop details around state-determined actions for schools that do not meet 95% participation rate. Those actions should be non-punitive supports that do not affect the rating or funding of schools. The AAW would define and recommend these supports and

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

30

Agenda Item Discussion Action

technical assistance that would be used to help schools meet 95% participation. AAW would also recommend and define tiered accountability if improvement wasn’t made. No comments Consensus reached.

AS7: Identification of Schools for Comprehensive Support Recommendation: The recommendation is to identify schools for Comprehensive Support based on the All Students group in combination with targeted subgroups. This approach emphasizes the importance of targeted subgroups’ performance. The ASW workgroup did not reach consensus, however about how to combine the scores. The Achievement and Accountability Workgroup shall review data, and consider different methods for the calculation (weights and proportions) in order to balance the importance of historically underserved populations but not skewing outcomes for schools with large populations of those students. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Similarities with NCLB

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

31

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Not producing multiple methodologies

5% means 5% as identified in the law

Alternative high schools should only be 5% of the 5% lowest achieving schools

Straightforward communication to help with clarity

Helpfulness of sample data runs

Average and not weighted

Average numerical score vs. flat average

Concern with tenuous nature of researching the formula

Concern for lack of data

Inclusion of all N targeted subgroups

Requirement of running data and statistics every year Consensus reached.

AS8: Identification of Schools for Targeted Support Recommendation: The workgroup recommends identifying schools for targeted support by grouping race/ethnicity subgroups together, and grouping program subgroups together. This approach will identify the lowest performing from two categories: race/ethnicity groups, and the lowest performing program groups. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

32

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Suggestion to add language that the AAW will review this data

Bottom 5% of each category

High poverty could be weighted higher

5% requirement in federal statute

Goal to serve as many students as possible

Identifying the need and how we should serve them is the intention of ESSA

Braid and blend funds whenever possible

Possibility of breaking out race/ethnicity, high poverty, and special education

The Consolidated Plan Team voted and reached consensus to add language that the Achievement and Accountability Workgroup (AAW) will review this data. With the inclusion of the AAW, consensus reached.

AS9: English Learner subgroup definition Recommendation: The workgroup recommends that the English Learner subgroup be Current EL students only. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

33

Agenda Item Discussion Action Current practice is counting EL students for sub groups for accountability

purposes

Unanimous consensus.

AS10: English Language Proficiency Progress Measure

Recommendation: With input from BEAC and AAW, OSPI will develop an EL progress measure over the next year. Using the second year of ELPA21 data, OSPI and SBE will conduct analyses and simulations.

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

More data to follow over the next year

Unanimous consensus reached.

Unanimous consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

AS11: Long-term goals and timelines

Recommendation: While the group ESSA Accountability System Workgroup (ASW) did not reach consensus, they discussed several conceptual approaches to setting overall

goals. The Consolidated Plan Team recommends:

1) Aspirational goal of 100% with ambitious, achievable interim goals

2) All schools of tomorrow are like the exemplary schools of today

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration with noted changes.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

34

Agenda Item Discussion Action

3) Improvement every year, based on reducing the number of non-proficient

students each year by a specified percent.

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Difficulty of reaching 100%

Notion of improvement trajectory

100% proficiency of the system—not students

Long term goals and timeline for how we are going to get to a system that meets the needs of every student where they are

Need to engage schools in the meaningfulness of this process and goals

Critical aspect as goals removed from schools

Goal to be the best for student outcomes The Consolidated Plan Team voted the following:

1. Aspirational goal of 100% with ambitious, achievable interim goals. 2. All schools of tomorrow are like the exemplary schools of today. 3. Improvement every year, based on reducing the number of non-proficient

students each year by a specified percent.

Consensus reached on goal 3.

AS12A: Interim targets method–elementary and middle schools

Unanimous consensus to move forward to

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

35

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Recommendation: For elementary and middle schools, the workgroup recommends that long-term goals and interim progress toward those goals be determined using a hybrid approach, based on a combination of proficiency and adequate growth. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Great approach

Need for data and who will make decisions based on data

Final to be based on modeling

Annual calculations, but a 3-year average

K–2 is not part of Smarter Balanced Assessments

Goals and measures of interim progress Unanimous consensus.

Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

AS12B: Interim targets method–high schools Recommendation: The workgroup narrowed the options for a target-setting method:

A) Interim steps based on an end-point (which could be 100% or something

less than that (see ASW11))

B) Interim steps based on improvement but without a fixed end-point

Consensus reached to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

36

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Expectations of schools

Further away from N target

Calculating student growth percentile

Concern for students that have been historically underserved and then historically underperform

Greater allocation of resources

Goals on setting long term goals and long term targets

End point goal is graduation The Consolidated Plan Team voted the following:

A) Interim steps based on an end-point (which could be 100% or something less than that (see ASW11))

B) Interim steps based on improvement but without a fixed end-point

Consensus reached on method A.

AS13A: Indicator weighting Recommendation:

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

37

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Elementary Schools

Proficiency Medium

Growth High

EL progress Med-Low

SQSS Low Medium

Middle Schools

Proficiency Medium

Growth High

EL progress Low

SQSS Low Medium

High Schools

Proficiency Medium-High

Graduation High

EL progress Low

SQSS Low Medium

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Graduation should be a measure of student proficiency

Raise awareness of career and college readiness

for consideration with noted changes.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

38

Agenda Item Discussion Action Importance of growth at the elementary and middle school level

School quality and school success

Weighting for how schools are measured for accountability

SBE adoption

The Consolidated Plan Team reached consensus to weigh the SQSS indicator as medium for elementary, middle, and high school as noted above.

Additionally, the Consolidated Plan Team reached consensus on the chart with the above voted upon changes for SQSS.

AS13B: Weighting within the grad rate indicator: cohorts

Recommendation: Online poll (not a vote) suggested a preference for emphasizing the most recent cohort (4-year graduation cohort). The Consolidated Plan Team recommends:

58% Prioritize most recent cohort (4 year)

32% Weight cohorts equally (25% each)

11% Other

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration with noted changes.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

39

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Defined in indicator section

Weighting based on the number of students

Cumulative weighting score

Shows increases more readily

Within the chart in the recommendation, the Consolidated Plan Team reached consensus that “Prioritize most recent cohort (4 year)” should be used.

AS14: Equity Lens Recommendation: The workgroup recognizes that the CPT has already reviewed the majority of the recommendations from the other workgroups, but recommends that OSPI and SBE, and EOGOAC review the recommendations from the CPT and the workgroups through an equity lens and incorporate a focus on equity and serving historically underserved students in the final ESSA Consolidated Plan. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Providing as many opportunities as possible to kids

Adding EOGOAC into the language

Consensus to move forward to Superintendent Dorn for consideration with noted changes.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

40

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Equity and access for all

Use of a 5-questions equity lens that Oregon uses

Include gender identity

Need for a standardized definition of equity The Consolidated Plan Team reached consensus to include EOGOAC in this recommendation. The Consolidated Plan Team reached consensus on the recommendation with the amended language voted upon above.

7. ESSA Parent and Community Engagement Workgroup Recommendations 7A-7B

Paula Moore presented and led the discussion to the Consolidated Plan Team.

PCE7C: Older English Learners’ School Enrollment Options. Recommendation first to the Consolidated Plan Team after consultation with the English Learner workgroup. Recommendation: OSPI must provide clearer guidelines under Title I, C and Title III/TBIP and Civil Rights to districts and schools on the responsibility to provide services to older EL students with limited credits or SIFE (Student with

Unanimous consensus

to move forward to

Superintendent Dorn.

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

41

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Interrupted Formal Education) status. Schools and districts must ensure all eligible EL students are provided the opportunity to enroll in traditional academic settings, regardless of their high school credit status. The enrollment decisions should be made based strictly on the student’s best interest determined by the student’s families. This should be based on appropriate information from the school and district on available programs. If this recommendation is adopted, OSPI needs to monitor and enforce the guidelines as part of Title I, C and Title III grant administration. This should include data review to identify any potential disproportionality of EL enrollment, graduation, and retention rates among the school and district. Additional resources should be provided for this effort. Discussion took place between ESSA Consolidated Plan Team members around the following areas:

Schools only allowed to serve students up to age 21

Relation to on-time graduation and factoring in accountability

Student interest should come first

Courses may not be as comprehensive

Caution on unintended consequences

Concern that students are not being given rigorous coursework and may be counseled out

Addressing communities of color

NOTE: The ESSA Consolidated Plan Team reviewed the recommendation(s) for Washington’s ESSA Consolidated Plan. They will not take effect unless they are approved by the State Superintendent and the U.S. Department of Education.

42

Agenda Item Discussion Action

Unanimous consensus reached.

Meeting Checkout Meeting concluded at 5:50 p.m. Gil Mendoza thanked everyone for coming and for their time and commitment to this work. This meeting was the last scheduled meeting of the ESSA Consolidated Plan Team.