Good morning everybody and welcome to today's meeting July 24th of the super advisory council. My name is Jeff Pal. I'm superintendent public schools. I'd like to welcome everybody to today's meeting. As a reminder, we'd like to let all the
members of the committee speak into your mics if you have something to say today. Um, also we would like to Mr. Burton here Dr. Dice Mr.
I'm sorry y'all first. I apologize if I mess up. Okay, Mr. Mr. Mr. Jones, Dr. Mr.
Mr. Dr. Mr. Dr. Stoopes Dr. Walker, thank you so much. At this time, we'd like to extend a special welcome to Mr.
Case member on the council. So, welcome Mr. Case. At the same time, we'd like to recognize Dr. Melissa Stilly who I believe is in the audience. She has rotated off of the council. So thank you Dr. We'd also like to recognize some special
guests that are with us today. Board President Mr. Ronnie Morris is in the audience as well as Dr. Armstrong and Mr. Conrad Apple. So thank you for being present today. just like to recognize uh uh let everybody know that if you would like to make a public comment, we do
have cards available uh for you to be recognized at the appropriate time to do so. So you can see Betsy staff for that. With that, we would like to move forward with the next item on the agenda. And normally this is the point where we would approve minutes from the previous
meeting. However, we did not have a quorum at last month's meeting or the last meeting. So we're going to receive those minutes. Do I have a motion for that? Got a motion by Dr. Leon and a second by Mr. Keith.
Any questions about those minutes? Any comments on that? All in favor? All right. So next item, item number three, new standing item is consideration for revision bulletin in response to legislation of the 2025
regular legislative session. Uh at this time I'd like to turn it over to Dr. Brumley for these motions. Excuse me, Dr. Mr. has corrected me that we do need a motion to receive this motion by Mr. Ber
by Mr. and they intentionally did it on my first day here. So, I'm still trying to stand on the shoulders of Dr. Mr. Jones. Hey, good morning everyone. Um, thank you for giving me a few minutes to to overview a few of the acts from this um
this past legislative session. There were almost 1700 legislative instruments filed. We tracked about 15 of them and we um narrowed that down to just a few to talk with you about today. Of course, we gave you a brief overview of um two
of them at your June meeting. Um and so we'll touch on that briefly today, but not go into too much depth there. Um and then just mention others. We do have our curated active for system leaders is ready to deploy. And then we did the um the recorded overview again this year
too. And you'll see both of those linked in next week's newsletter. And so if you want to share that with your team so that they can get an an overview of some of the acts to pay attention to and some of the um implementation actions you can expect from the department that could help your teams as you prepare to implement these new laws. So the first
one I wanted to highlight for you, of course, last year was the first year that Louisiana statewide for public schools went to a 10point grading scale. Um this piece of legislation um in theory shouldn't impact you all too much except one thing to to make sure to pay
to is that all the grades that get reported to the state for tops purposes on that top four curriculum need to be on that grading scale. Um so we did make a support document if anyone needed to complete the conversion from this past year if it wasn't done that way that um
does6 um in bullet And if you have these policy revisions with you in your packet, we're not going to go line by line through all of it today, but as always, please share with your teams. If they see any um any issues or they have any questions about any of it, please reach out. We would like to get it all
all right ahead of time. Um so next one in bulletin 746, you'll see two acts incorporated there. One is the numeracy professional development. So this expands that requirement from grades four through eight. Math teachers
professional learning. Now it expands it to grades K through three math educators as well. Um and so it'll be that additional two years. So the requirement for um fourth through 8th grade teachers to complete within two years of hire that that's in effect now or as August
1st 2025. And then for employees hired after August 1, 2027 in grades K through three math they'll need to complete that numeracy professional learning within two years prior there. This is also being incorporated into um teacher prep programs as well. So in
theory within a few years you'll have teachers coming through programs who've been exposed to foundational numeracy and um that that professional learning module is also available on canopy that you can use some of our prep providers are going to use that as well. So um you'll see eventually a good deal of the
parents between what the students are learning coming out of school and what you want your teachers to have in the classroom as well. You'll also see so act 649 is what was HB684 that we talked about last time. This is the one related to seclusion
restraint for students with exceptionalities. The crisis intervention instruction is also being incorporated into teacher prep programs and for certification. And just to clarify a little bit there, so there are two um levels of training there. So
we've been calling them big training and little training. So there's um the really intense training for restraint needs to be completed. This is in the law that it needs to be completed by anyone who's actually going to be performing that restraint. So, a lot of you already use CPI training that counts
for this. We are also providing um training for this that you all be able to access at no cost to you. That will count for this as well. So, anyone who's going to be actually performing that that restraint needs to go through this training. But then you have those situations where you have a general
education teacher. This student with some challenging behavior issues is assigned to that teacher. And it would be helpful for that teacher to have some context, a little awareness about here's what these specialized issues look like. Here's what the law says your role is and is not. Here's what you can expect
from that person on campus does have the specialized training. It's a much more shorter consolidated training designed for people who aren but to have some awareness of what kinds of situations might necessitate that and what what rules and regulations go along
with that too. We have that training available for those teachers now as well. That's not mandated for everyone. That's something that your school leaders could say everyone needs, but really you could use that whenever it seems like this teacher is going to be assigned a student. They need that
little bit deeper level of awareness. And that's available for you all. Okay, there are several revisions to bulletin 741 and you'll notice you have a set of them with me. Now, there will also be um some additional edits to that that will come to August. Bessie, I
think you'll be excited about. We're trying to really um streamline and clarify the way those diploma requirement sections are listed out. So, I think you'll be excited to see that. It's almost ready for you, but not quite. So, look for that to come out and we'll I'm I'm eager to hear your
feedback on that if people like it. For legislative acts, you have two related to discipline. So, um 34 is the one where you need to be able to transfer school disciplinary records um whenever they move school. If that student is moving out of your
district or within your district, they need to have access to the school disciplinary record, including all that documentation related to any suspensions or expulsions so that the receiving school can have the information they need to make the best decisions and support that student being successful there. And then also some changes were
made to the legislation from last year about mandatory expulsion for students found with um hydroabonol or um vapes that contain those substances. And so it's it's creating a discretionary expulsion on a first offense for that
and then the mandated expulsion moves from four semesters to two semesters for second or subsequent offenses. So you'll see those revisions reflected in 741. We know that will um affect your policy as well too. There's also going to be a new reporting requirement in the law
associated with that where we'll need to be able to um to collect the number of students suspended or expelled for that certain subset of offenses in statute 174. Um and we'll need to be able to tell
who's suspended or expelled for that for a first offense for a second or subsequent offense. We'll also need to be able to collect who's completed an assignment at alternative school or program and then come back into the regular setting after that. So, we'll get out more information to you for how
you'll need to collect that and report that to us at the end of the year, but I did want to put that on your radar that that's a new required um collection that that we'll have to operationalize. Um, and then I have Stephanie with us to talk a little bit about act 463 related
to nutrition. Um, some changes to that one are coming as well. as she makes her way up. We also very brief update about military status adding that one of the categories and I'll let Stephanie talk about I'm
Stephanie. I'm the executive director of child nutrition here at the department. So in terms of nutrition, it's not going to go into effect for a couple of years. It'll be effective in school year 2829. And there's a list of ingredients um
that are going to be prohibited from meals served for breakfast, lunch or for after school activities. Um so we have the list. We're communicating with your school food service directors about the change about what's going to be required.
purchase from within to the maximum extent practable. So um again service directors on local procurement whether that be produce or milk or different things they can purchase from the state
that meet all the requirements. So happy and then I wanted to point out to you related to instructional materials and the accessibility of those parents. This is a new it will require you to update the
local policy there if you don't have a fee schedule for any copies that schedule and that will need to be turned into the department and we're going to have to collect all those legislature. So um just just an advance to you to update those local policies
and we'll let you know the mechanism for those time and then next set of 42 ability of your school systems to contract with transportation network companies to provide third transportation for students. So, we're
making some revisions to listen just to make sure that that alternative means of transportation is allowable within policy. But, of course, this is all up to your district to be able to to contact those companies as you would like to do. The law laid out certain technical specifications that the
company will have to provide, certain qualifications of drivers, but all of that is just something that your districts may or may not decide to do, and we're just making a policy for you all to be able to do that if you choose to. employee bill of rights is there as well and this needs to be distributed to
certain employees put that on your radar um to be aware of at 449 requires vocational and technical education and it makes some specific requirements as well that um if a school system is
receiving CDF funds for a certain course a student can also be charged for participation in that course. So that piece of that for you all as well. And then we talked about this one a little while
and we talked through the specific requirements. So for moni the You can distribute this electronically or via paper and this is the list of those minimum standards that are in law.
We're required to have a complaint line at the bottom. But we also made space for you to have a local complaint line as well. If you would rather them call your building principal or someone at your schoolboard office when they're having an issue, you can put that that number in that space. This is available on our early childhood page of our
website and on our school policy page on our website now and our protocol for all of you will really be to say we call you up as a superintendent. We'll send you something in writing that you got it for your record and we'll say hey we received a complaint from someone in
your district about a prek program and we'll let you handle that district. That's the process that is in the law for us to handle that policy which I think is pretty consistent with how we handle this now but it makes it a little
more formal but that that document is available now 15 standards um to be met and then one of two other things I wanted to call you in this one um so starting August 1 new hires will need to
pass a um state central registry that child abuse in the black registry check. And so we have worked with OTS and DCFS to make to make that system accessible for you all through your existing ethnic security.
So starting on August 1, you'll see a new permission that you can grant um for people who should be allowed to access that system. It is very sensitive information and DCFS manages all of that platform. We're just giving you a way to
of accessing that if it clears to grant access should be able to access it and then to be able to access it. So starting August 1, if you have questions about how to grant that permission or how to give users access, your data
managers can reach out to our team about that. If you have questions about navigating the actual child abuse and neglect system, that would be a DCFS question and they'll have people available to help you with that as well. Um, they are aware that there is going to be an increased volume of registry
checks requested. So, they asked for patients, but they're also bringing additional staff in to help them navigate that with you. So, I wanted to pass that along and hopefully we'll make that as streamlined as possible. And then the last thing I wanted to point out on this one, this made some significant
to the way that mandatory reporter training is required and the way that those cases of alleged child abuses child abuse and neglect are handled. Um, including, for example, a requirement that parents of both of all the parents of any children involved be notified
whenever a situation occurs. So, I encourage you to review that, make sure that you update any local policy as needed to make sure that everything is in compliance with the law. that DCFS um training is required every year. And so starting next school year, um you'll
need to report to LDOE the names of employees who have completed the training and the names of employees who have not completed the training by September 30th each year. So for this year, complete it as you usually do. Keep that um that that certificate or that u verification of training complete
on file with you as you usually do. But then next year there'll be a mechanism to report that to the department by September 30th of each year. And this is a training that has to be completed between June 1st and August 30th every year. DCFS also has shared that their training has been updated online to be
in compliance with the new law and include the changes there. So um so any any trainings completed in their online um platform will be in compiance. Okay. Are there any questions? That was a lot.
Any questions or comments from the council members on any of the proposed bulletin changes to this point? Dr. G question with the procedures that spoke about we get something in writing
with some pass. Yeah, that will be coming out shortly. And the system will not be available before August 1 just because of the ability to to get that information and it is sensitive in nature but yeah you'll have communications with us from
us about how to permission. Any other questions or comments from council members? Yes, man. Yeah. So, the conversation came up um during during session whenever this bill is being discussed. Who's not offering CTE right now? Because the bill does
require the CTE courses to It said that you can partner with your higher ed institutions with other organizations to offer those. And so we we ran um some numbers just to see who's not really offering it. And it seemed that really the only schools that this is scooping in additionally now or maybe
some charters that have a really unique purpose and mission that doesn't align with and then um some of your specials of your resol may not align. So the the discussion was just to create a mechanism by which
Bessie could approve a waiver for that. Um but it looks like all of our traditional public school systems are in compant. Excuse me, Dr. Joseph, if you wouldn't mind speaking into the microphone. So we can Okay. say if they uh they don't because they just don't have the resources or
don't have the the staff to conduct those things. How would that impact the accountability system and their you know their scores and everything? We do have you know there are a variety of funding streams available to you to be able to offer CTE. So this is
something that you all um you know we're happy to help problem solve with you about how you can offer a course to students. So if you feel like you're having issues with that please let us know. happy to help navigate that. Question is about if we do apply for the school applies for a waiver or the
district applies for a waiver, how will that impact accountability, you know, like the accountability, but they wouldn't be able to satisfy the um Any more questions or comments from
a few more to go through? Yeah, that was all for me. Of course, there were lots of other acts. If you have questions about any of them, if you have questions about the policy when you see it, very happy to talk about all that. Did we have any public comments from the audience regarding any of the
presentation so far? You heard? So, uh, with that, we have a option to receive, endorse, or not endorse the report we just received. Take no action. I got a motion to receive by Mr. Martin
and a second by Mr. Van 3. We had a motion to receive it initially to open. We're all good. Both of our first Mr. Martin and Van meter.
All in favor? Any opposed? Thank you. Motion 3.2 consideration of an update report regarding literacy and numeracy initiative. We have a motion to receive Dr. Bartholomew and second by Mr. B.
Thanks Mr. Pal. So um with the start of school upon us uh we felt it was appropriate to share a little bit of information relative to uh literacy and and numeracy. We're excited about the gains that we're seeing on both of those
fronts, but at the same time certainly have opportunities to improve and so I ask Dr. to share some information with you all. Thank you Dr. Good morning everyone. Happy to bring you all some updates this morning um from the office of teaching
and learning and especially around literacy and numeracy. So I'll start first of all with a Um, I'll start first of all with a slide around ensuring healthy core instruction. And this, you know, this may seem like
just a run-of-the-mill type slide. Why wouldn't we be talking about what's happening in class instruction? But, you know, my team and I recently a bit of research that really stood out to us and it said that if core instruction is healthy then 75% of students are on
grade level and above. And so when we are seeing data that less when we are seeing data that less than 75% of students um are on grade level and above then we know that we have an issue with what's happening instruction. Um, and so
with that, I know we've spent a lot of time over the last five years really talking about things like intervention and tutoring. You know, what's happening to meet really specific student needs in their learning gaps. Um, and that's still important. It'll always be
important, but we also really want to focus a lot of attention this upcoming year on what's happening during core instruction. And so these are just a few notes about um things that we feel are most important. One being that school schedule should reflect adequate time to
fully implement the selected curriculum for that grade level. Um this is not something that's easy to do especially when you're also you know being asked to provide those interventions that tutoring for certain amounts of time. It can be difficult to juggle a school
schedule um to ensure that this happens. But it's so important that we are really using that curriculum as it's intended within the full time. Um and really we'll continue to put bandaids on student learning and have a need for
tutoring and for interventions um if we're not ensuring that the curriculum can be fully implemented within a school schedule. The next bullet um is just something that we believe a lot in. I know uh you hear Dr. Brley say at times that back to the basics approach and
that back to the basics approach for instruction really looks like these three key things. Um it looks like devoted daily for explicit teacher instruction. We know that there is time and place for inquiry based learning um
you know for students to discover their learning but there's also really important time especially within those foundational skills around numeracy and literacy for explicit teacher instruction. Equally as important is time for students to practice on their
own and then opportunities for students to receive that strong academic feedback that's going to improve their performance. And finally, school day embedded teacher collaboration is such an important piece of this because we can't sit back and
just wait for core instruction to improve or put enough time within the school day and and pick a great curriculum and then expect instruction to improve. um that teacher collaboration that should happen weekly at the school level is so important for
driving those improvements in core instruction. Um we have a common language for high quality instruction and what that looks like with our new lead system and with that Louisiana educator rubric and it's so important for teachers to have that sacred time and space. I think if I went around to
most schools and school systems around the state at this point and asked, "Are you engaging in weekly instruction leadership team? Are you engaging in teacher collaboration?" I think mostly everybody would say yes. Most people are implementing some sort of you may call
it something different. You may call your teacher collaboration something different. Um, but they all look probably pretty similar and teachers are coming together to collaborate. And so that really the at what quality what's happening during those meetings and how
is it really driving improvements in the classroom and so that's a special focus of our team this upcoming year that I wanted to let you all know about is really about driving quality teacher collaboration how do we make sure um you know our teachers time is so sacred and
so important how are we making sure that they're getting the most out of that time to drive what's happening in their classroom so really driving quality and teacher collaboration is our focus for this year and that connection to improving core instruction
as a result. The next slide is just about that extra dose that we know a lot of our students need high dosage tutoring. Um we know that this comes as a result of act 771 of 2024 and I'm still so grateful for the work that school systems and schools
did last year um standing up that that heavy program. It was a lot to do very quickly and I our state did an incredible job um of just really rising to that challenge of implementing high dosage tutoring for our kindergarten through fifth grade students. We know
that we once again received that $30 million appropriation um which is amazing and I think going to be able to continue that work so well. Um your plans will be due in EGMS by September 15 once again. And again what I've heard across the state is you know
we did the tutoring program last year had hits and some misses. Some things worked, some things didn't. We learned a lot. And this year, we're really all about driving quality. How does what is that quality high dosage ting look like? How do we make sure that we're getting the most out of that instructional time
between the tutors and our students? And so things like tutor selection and training, I know it's really top of mind for you all. There are things that that worked last year, things that you want might want to do differently for this year, whether you're choosing a vendor or through your own LEA staff. Um, How
are you making sure that those folks are um chosen, selected wisely, and then trained appropriately and supported throughout the year so that what they're doing during tutoring can connect to what's happening in student learning during core instruction. And then
finally, choosing materials that are high quality. I'm asked a lot, you know, what should you use during tutoring? We have a tab within our the tutoring plan which was updated and sent out to you all in May um on those materials that can be used during that tutoring time. Those are materials that have been
vetted very carefully um for evidence so that we we know that the materials that we're putting in front of students during that tutoring time will really make the most impact. And finally, just want to share with you all that we have reorganized our team
here at the agency. Um and was known as our division of school improvement which was the team that is field based and went out every day out into schools and school systems to support our schools with academic labels. Um that team has shifted and we have now created a larger
literacy team and a larger numeracy team. Um our math team was quite small doing some really amazing work with just a few folks but uh we really wanted to expand that math reach and we know that y'all been using our literacy team that was
members deep um over the last few years to really go out and do some some great support for you all and we've gotten a lot of good feedback from that. So, we thought it was important to expand their reach by really increasing the size. So, we now have a much larger literacy team
and numeracy team at the department as a result of reorganizing that school improvement team and those members. And so, you will have an opportunity starting this school year to request from those teams through a new menu of
services. So if you're used to the way that the school improvement team used to work, you had a single point of contact and you signed a memorandum of understanding with us and we were able to push out into your schools and into your school system and support those schools um around school improvement
function. And so we'll work somewhat the same in that we're still going to go out and provide great high quality services, but they will be specifically focused around literacy. still supporting teacher collaboration, instructional leadership teams, classroom observations and feedback, but
doing so from content experts and with a focus on content and curriculum implementation. So, you'll still designate a single point of contact. When I uploaded this idea and got some input from superintendent, um they noted that they really liked having a single
point of contact from your end um so that you can really organize yourself and know when a member of might be coming to you. And so you'll still designate a single point of contact from your school system who can request support from the literacy and numeracy
team. Um and that will be available to you all beginning next Friday, August 1 call. So we'll release the menu of services and you will have a mechanism by which you can go online and request services from those teams and we're happy to come out and support your
schools with academic labels or your schools that might not have labels that you feel need extra support in an area. We can also support you at the school system level um with your overall lit. So we're really excited um about that
shift and looking forward better being able to support you all especially around literacy and numeracy this upcoming year. Thank you Dr. Any questions or comments from the council members Dr. Just high dosage ting again is
outside the MFP correct any ideas have they given you guys any ideas when where that will drop the funding yes so um similar to last year it's written into legis that you all have a plan due by September 15th and we we
have that plan in Eg. So your plan is due September 15 and then you would receive your allocation um once it is approved. So when you submit that plan and that plan is approved um if your plan is not approved it will be returned to you with feedback
for you to make adjustments. We'll go through that process and then you get that allocation. We are bringing these allocations to the August meeting. Um but if you have not completed your um quarter fiscal reporting, you will not
be eligible for an August. So just um I think that's a really important thing to note. I'm glad you as you all do need to ensure that you have completed your reporting from last year so that we can release those funds up.
Do we know if we have not done that? Yes, you point of contact. That allocation is formula based, correct? By the number of students it is. And so you can expect similar amount to what you received last year.
Uh we didn't see huge differences in number. A difference might be if you did not spend your total allocation last year. You may see a reduced allocation this year. Any other questions or comments from council?
One thought on that, Mr. We are for the first five school years, our work really focused on school systems that wanted that level of support for their schools. Um, we didn't push
there. Um, but we just felt like the demands one, the importance alone of our state foundation warranted us to make a shift. the demands that we were receiving from
some of you all in terms of requesting support from those areas were more than we could handle in the way we were previously structured and so Dr. I spent a lot of time thinking about ways to approach this moving forward. So we shifted some things around service
approvals. Um and so what she's referencing about next week is you're actually going to get this menu of services that we are offering to you all as our team will come out and support.
So in the same way you go to your favorite restaurant and say I'd like to order this. you're actually placing our order through that one point of contact. We're really excited about it. Makes
sense for us. It's another way you know that, you know, not every system has every level of expertise at certain levels that you have. So, we're really excited about this. Hope you take advantage of
Thank you. Mr. Jones, so for school districts that may already support we have so is someone who's already on one of our approved vendor guides. We already have a partnership with them. Um we already
work closely so that we can align in language and approach. Um you know that works better with some entities than others. In all honesty, that partnership is stronger by people who maybe have footprint here in Louisiana. Um but we are happy and this is something my team
has done and we're happy to continue doing it especially coming out and doing visits along that third party. at the table at so that we can have that approach
to walk alongside you and that question I would like to take this opportunity to show appreciation for Dr. Cass her team as well as Mr. great as y'all come around to support systems uh and teams around coherence and each of the topics
that you you've spoken of all of our teams and rap I think around our region for sure are appreciative and and learning and growing from it. So thank you. All right. With that, we'll entertain a motion to accept or endorse or not
endorse this particular motion. Mr. Burton makes a motion to endorse this presentation. Second, Mr. Jones. Thank you. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Any opposed?
Thank you very much, Dr. Kessle. All right, we're going to move to item number four, which standing item consideration for regarding assessment accountability. Specifically, item 4.1, consideration of revisions to bulletins regarding banking scores for middle
school students who score mastery or advance on high school 2020 202 assessments. Need a motion to receive. We have a motion from Dr. Joseph and a second from Mr. Gu.
So at the um last meeting of the state board there were um there was interest in this conversation around students who take um high school courses in eighth grade and the way in which uh those the performance of those students is counted
in the accountability system and the way in which it will be counted in the revised system. And so our board um conversation around that uh at their last meeting and I don't think that they were at a level of of comfort around what decision needed to be made at that
point and so they deferred that item so that we could gather additional information uh from them and so we could have conversation uh or present some data here to you all we'll do the same thing for the accountability council um and so hopefully as a result of that our
board will have the information they need decision relative to the way in which these forces in eighth grade impact accountability. So uh our our goal here today is is to just to provide some
information uh to you all around this topic and as I've shared with leadership of the superintendent association there's something else that you'd like to know or want to know uh just add us and let us know that you have interest in that. Um, we may not be able
to turn it around in 24 or 48 hours, but we'll certainly do our best to try to support whatever needs you may have. Mr. Lambert do a really good job of of that. And they're constantly crunching numbers. And so, uh, Thomas, at this point, you can just work through these
data slides. Everyone can get a sense of the request that was made and what those numbers. Excuse me, Mr. L. Dr. Before we get into his presentation, I I specifically wanted to ask the the motion says consideration of revisions to bulletins
regarding this topic, but there's no backup with any suggested revisions for us to be considering. Is is there a copy? I think the um I think the the motion that was made at the last meeting would have prompted revisions to the bulletin.
Um but before they before making any of those revisions they wanted to receive data such as this. So the back the backup is essentially the data and if there and if the board chooses to you know go this way or that way then we
would we would then know the way in which we needed to adjust policy to reflect that. So essentially this we're just fixing to receive a report from I just want to make sure we're clear on that. a little different from what the actual motion says, but we we accepted
to receive this motion, but it's it's simply to not revision any bulletin is to receive what Mr. L. That's right. So what you'll see here is uh some data around the the students who are taking algebra one. It's about 15%
of Louisiana's eighth graders are taking algebra one. Um and of those 15% about 85% score mastery or advanced on this uh chart which you'll pardon that it is a little bit difficult to read. Um
We've experimented with different types of graphs, but by the time you explain how to read the graph, you could just explain the chart. So, uh what we're going to do is we're going to look at that uh advanced column at the top. The advanced column at the top tells you the kids. That column is all the kids who
scored advance in eighth grade. The row going across is what they scored in seventh grade. So, so where you see the intersection that tells you that the kids scored advanced in seventh grade, advanced in grade
kids who scored advanced in seventh grade, kids who scored mastery in eighth grade to seventh. So, you're seeing some shifting down, you also see some shifting up in here. Um, but at its core, you're seeing 85% of students
scoring proficient. It is not surprising that students would score better on the eighth grade algebra or the algebra one exam they did on seventh grade math. Seventh grade math covers five or six different mathematical domains. Algebra one covers two algebraic thinking and
functions. Um and the it's not surprising that students might do better in a course that is highly tailored to two particular domains that are taught over the course of a year than five or six. So it's not surprising to see students uh sliding forward. There was a
study published in 2000 the mid to late 2000s um that that talked about students uh longterm effect in algebra that for some students it's really good and for some students you see a shortterm bump and then a longterm decline in terms of
pre-calculus calculus algebra 2 because they miss geometric thinking functions and algebra one doesn't cover those any questions on the slide I had one question. When you look at compare slide 17 and 18, it appears as
though there were about math about 8,500 students or so that took algebra one in the eighth grade, but then the chart on page 18 only counts 6,900 because they needed the seventh grade score to go on the second chart. So you had about 600 students
that took algebra in the public school setting in last year that did we did not have a seventh grade score for the previous year. Any other questions on that are the seventh grade scores. The columns are the eighth grade. So
yeah, so 771 students scored mastery in seventh. Yeah. Yes. Uh we we went around around and around on a couple different ways to display this and uh decided that this was best through it. If I could just add
add to that Mr. Chair, we took the same table and put percentages for those students in seventh grade that were advanced. Seventh grade, 77% of them remain advanced. For those that were in mastery, 18%
remain mastery. 76 or 76% remain mastery with an additional 18% moving up to advance. For those that were basic in seventh grade, they took the eighth grade out one. Those that remain were 37% yet 48%
increase to mastery from basic to mastery. And for those approaching basic, 46% remained approaching basic, 27% increased to basic, 7% an additional 7% increased to mastery, 0% advance. For
those unsatisfactory, um it seems as though 41% remained unsatisfactory, 26% moved up to approaching basic, 13% an additional 13% move up to basic 18%
moved up to matching 3% up to to advance. So just represent represented maybe a little bit easier than numbers. And that is if you if you sat down with who's a math teacher. Yeah. So like the mathematical concepts
that are taught in seventh and eighth grade are very different from what's done in algebra. Seventh and eighth grade covers statistics and probability. Statistics and probability is not covered in algebra. There's there's uh angle relationships that are taught in seventh and eighth
grade that you need when you get to geometry and algebra 2 that are not covered in algebra 1. So what you're seeing there is a test that has a bunch of things that are being assessed across basic arithmetic all the way to ratios
in seventh and eighth grade that does not occur in algebra one. So you would see a bump I mean I'm sure if you look at your eighth grade to 9th grade scores for your non selected alpha one students you see an increase from their
eth grade and I'm not I mean you'd have to go and look at your data and look at the teaching and learning and you you decide whether it is like much better teaching and learning or it might algebra one scores are higher than the eighth grade math scores pretty
significant. I'll just say say this because you referenced a study. I'm not sure what study you're referencing relative to how well those students prepared for calculus whatever may be but I do know from our data from the 23 24 data following a cohort of students that took
seventh grade leap eighth grade out of one those students from whether it was basic master advance on average scored higher on the ACT which is a combination of college readiness standards than those that did not.
We're all calling out our data points of interest also basic or unsatisfactory that are taking algebra one in 8th grade. So if you look at approaching basic and unsat, you have
203 and 39 kids. So you had 242 kids that scored unsat or approaching basic in seventh grade that were placed in algebra one eighth grade. I don't understand that. Um because it seems to me like those students already have gaps
in math skills that are only going to get worse if they're not addressed with the eighth grade skills. And so my my data point that I wanted to share is just that if you look at those students um about 67% of them uh remain at that
approaching basic or unsat on their algebra one. So I mean I know that with the leadership association we talked a good bit about which students might benefit from algebra one eighth grade and which ones might not. And so just to call out that those are the ones that I would be concerned about making sure
that they're in the right course. Looking at the basic the students who scored basic that group of students also students who are definitionally in seventh grade because they're basic. They are
it's good to move them to eighth grade, but they are likely going to need additional support. And we not only move them to the next grade, we skipped the whole thing. And you're seeing that the the lion share of them actually
performed better on this one exam, which should point to something else that's right. There's something else beyond like acceleration is the answer here. Acceleration is something that is really good for a subset of students. It's a
small group, but I wonder if you tracked those kids for a long time or you met with their math teachers. They might tell you that this kid required a lot of gap filling that other students didn't have. Um and and that that group of students if they're not getting a very tailored and different type of
instruction than the rest of the students in the class, they're fall. So before we move forward, I want to point out two things. I think and and as Dr. Brley said, there may be a request after this meeting from superintendent for some additional data points as we get ready for the Bessie meeting. Uh to
your point, um Mr. Lambert, regarding seeing data for these students over a longer period of time, like comparing their geometry scores and or some of the other assessments that we may have, similar to what Dr. Hordling just talked about with ACT. Obviously, that's going
to take a deeper dive, you know, following students for multiple years. Um, but the other thing is to Dr. Brumley's point to point out that if you go back to what this motion says, I believe the motion that Bessie will be considering for sake of the council is that there there could be some policy
language that would give districts direction on who we select for these classes. So, as you can see from the data, there were students that had scored unsatad approaching basic basic for for whatever. I haven't I don't know the reasons that school systems would would put those students in, but there
may be a recommendation for some policy language that would require that systems only consider students who make u mastery or advance in seventh grade. Uh those are the only students that are considered for algebra one in the eighth grade. So I do want to make sure that
everybody understands that is as I understand it the language that that's could be considered at the Bessie and I just want to point again based on this data specifically regardless of how students perform in seventh grade on the seventh grade leap the achievement shows
for 23 24 students students who scored basic in seventh grade almost half 48% moved up to master grade one 48%. Okay. So, when we're using achievement levels, we need to
make sure that we're looking across the board. For some students that don't perform well on that test in seventh grade for whatever reason, there are situations for the approaching basic students, 34% move at least one achievement level, much more than the
20% that either maintain. So, while certainly that is the motion that's on the table and as you mentioned, We're going to request additional information. I think it's it's important for Bessie to consider all ranges of growth, not just the achievement levels, but even the half achievement level since we're
moving into the new accountability system. Where were students at relative to at least half of achievement level too? Now that is a new standard relative to growth. So where is it? You know, that could be another point data for so that Bessie has a full range of data to
look at. The other thing I just did so Um 85% of them were proficient in eth grade. Um when you look at the seventh grade it was 81%. So we're talking about
a 4%. So not not huge. It is a difference but it's not massive. Um double testing uh what the actual federal uh law that enables early math
is actually of double testing. So we did want to illuminate that uh about a fifth of the students who are taking algebra one course in eighth grade are also taking the eighth grade. So we're not testing
and that's not because of state policy that's um so what would happen to scores if you didn't and you see essentially 17 schools would see an improvement between zero and 6
points 111 would see decrease of none to less than one to 49.5 decrease. So you see that uh the the amount of change or impact on a score is
actually fairly small. Any questions? Yeah, M. I know one question that came up with that uh was is this based on current accountability or this based on new accountability? New account. And for those
districts that don't offer one now, are those folks in this mix? They would have been a no impact. Correct. So for example, they would be no impact because they
have no eighth grade banking to be considered. Correct. I'm just making If you took those out then what percent would have to be 100% correct? You understand what I'm saying?
I think what Mr. V is the 17 at the top that says improved is at 02.6. Is that what you're saying? So, so what I'm saying is if you leave the districts in this chart that don't have eighth grade alpha one now there are a bunch of those folks out there.
it's going to skew these numbers because they're not considered right these are numbers not percentages we gave the numbers for a reason right so it's like what is the actual impact on your individual school scores right so like
the other thing is that it would be really hard for us to know without telling us because almost all of you are being impacted by banking even if you don't offer it because when a kid moves in if they already have a score you take that I understand that but let's say for
example I don't think the number of kids who move into let's say would be very small compared to leaving this chart where Vermillion is going to skew this number because
Vermillion doesn't offer these right so this number gets skewed a little bit if you leave the schools or the districts rather however you want to in this chart who are not offering a great
let's ignore all the right you're still looking at um 111 that were less than a half a point you're still looking at less than 50 49 that are between a half a point
right so we're talking about a very small impact Yes. for it wasn't quite that tight. So this what this shows you. So same data just instead of looking at how many points of change how many were
imped go from a B to a C and one goes from a C. But I guess the challenge with any of this, the projections on accountability system that's not currently in place or processes and programs that have not been shifted to align to component to
give you an accurate representation of the school performance score. We're talking about data points that fundamentally don't exist by taking one set of data and applying it to a formula that hasn't even been implemented yet in the school year. You cannot make projections on programs that haven't
been the and how they impacted the school performance for itself. So you shouldn't do any simulations for future accountability changes, right? Like for that respectful comment, but that's not the point I'm getting to, Mr. Thomas. The point is for this
particular point you're talking about projections and simulations of of applying something to SPS where you truly do not know because we have not implemented it yet. We have it's going to take us two three years to truly align ourselves with the new accountability system
to make to make a a an accurate judgment or present to to us that we're that this is going to be only a very small we don't really know. So what what can we provide that would help you high school um and just kind of show the
impact compared for us and just a couple follow-up questions. I do think it's very important that you know you select the right students and that they're prepared to go into algebra geometry at the middle school. Um, we had 118 students who did that out of a cohort of
412 eighth graders. And out of that group, all but one student made an advanced or mastery. And out of that, 91 of the 118 made an advanced. So, we're very particular about, you know, we don't have a lot of kids going in there who aren't scoring well. Um, but what
that also means is the 118 kids out of 412 who moved to high school, that's a 29% of my nth grade kids. So when we go to report out high school proficiency overnight, I can look like my high
school proficiency just fell 25 or 30% overnight. So I'm try trying to explain to my public that that's not really indicative of what's happening. But on the flip side of that, do as a district I start saying I may as well go ahead and take an advanced or mastery at the
middle school and then just move all kids into algebra one at the ninth grade level or higher. But then that slows the math progressions. One other thing that's important about that is we've added some really well-intentioned and good idea courses whether it's computer science or financial literacy. But as a
school, we also offer a ton of extracurricular opportunities, a ton of uh, you know, arts, theater, you name it. As kids take more courses, they begin to happen to take less of these electives, they have less opportunity.
So again, if we start pushing that back to try to make an accountability piece at our school reflective of what's happening on campus, that hurts. The last thing is um I think the tight ranking is important too. While we may not see a huge shift in accountability,
those numbers do translate to you could have a school go from 20th to 40th. But people care about rank. So again, that I think that could reflect too. So I think one consideration no matter where we land would be can we at least
show proficiency at the end of high school to include those middle school scores even if the ultimate decisions not to roll it into banking or accountability which I would hope that's not the case but if it is we need to show that there were kids that were you know proficient in in middle school but
never had a chance to show that at high school because they progressed too far. So I think that may be a middle of the road consideration too because we don't want high schools to look like you have massive drops of proficiency when really it's kids have already tested out and no longer have the opportunity to show.
Thank you Mr. D case. We have Mr. Ber who's been patiently waiting. Thank you Mr. B. I just have a question about simulation whatever but we need to recall that we're setting cut scores on the data we just did. We're setting cut scores on the year we bank scores but then we're
looking at information for not banking. So I don't I I don't think I think it would be foolish for us to say we're not thank I mean we've already changed the system enough. This is just another I mean number one we didn't find out till February and so schools had already made
decisions. I I just think I mean my personal choice would be that we delay it a year and and everybody would have time. I just think it's we're setting cut scores because we said we're setting cut scores on by what we score this past year and
those kids are taking I mean you're not setting cut scores on kids who didn't take algebra one. That's not that's not part of the formula. That's not part of the the policy. The policy said we're setting cut scores on what our kids did on this last test. So they those eighth
graders are counting in our cut scores which are going to be higher. then next year we don't count them. I mean, we're not comparing apples to apples there on the accountability side because we set cut scores with them and then the next year we're going to go first year new accountability without them. I just
think we're rushing into that. That was my only concern. Our implementation of this, if that's where we ultimately fall, we ultimately fall there. But the idea that this happened in I mean March or April is when we really truly understood this, I mean the schools that
is I don't have a dog in that fight, but the schools that do it, they number one, selling that to your community. Number two, I mean, and I shared that earlier, and I'm glad Mr. MK's backed it up because I ran the numbers. They could drop a school 20 to 25%. And remember,
we made an easier accountability system. Every box is so if you just take a 25% drop in a box, his school will drop. And it's not indicative of what his school offers. He's got 120 kids making advancing
mastery in the eighth grade and they're one of our highest achieving school systems and his kids are taking a fifth year calculus math that he's gonna have to make a decision, sell his public and say, "Yeah, we're not going to do it in the eighth grade because we don't like being 45th because we can't convince the
public that his school system is still great." I just feel like the implementation, my preference would be for us to hold it for a year, see what it does in the new accountability system. We always said when we started this process that we would move to a new accountability system and we would look
at it and if we had to make tweaks, we would make tweaks. I feel like if we do this, we're creating too many variables and for us to truly look at yeartoear on where the tweets can be made. It's a whole new system and now we're throwing another kink into that system last
minute, I don't think we're really making I don't think we're making great decisions of truly using data points that are happening. So that's just that's just a stance on when you look at those numbers. Are you we don't even know what those do we know
what the cut scores are. Was it based on 2324? It was based on 2324. Correct. So with with Thank you. So that's just my only point. We're not we're not comparing apples to apples when we look at the scores. Thank you, Mr. Bor. Mr. Dr. Bartholomew.
Okay. Any other questions or comments from the council? I just want to echo what Mr. Violet stated is that provide a launch. I'd like you know best consider a launch pad relative to the banking policy to be
able to come back perhaps in a year look at the data to make you know more informed decision relative to this part not the score itself. It's not about the score but it certainly is about how we presented to our especially the environment that our public schools are
operating relative to school choice and all of those things that impact our communities. Thank you, Dr. An. I'd also like to add I I really don't have a problem because we do offer eighth grade. I don't necessarily have a
problem with limiting formally who's allowed into alpha one. So, for example, we keep it right and continue to bank. And part of the concern is we've got kids in there who are not prepared. Fine. Like, let us
we're we're self-limiting already, right? But if we want to formally limit those who are allowed into algebra one in the eighth grade to be mastery plus, let's do it, right? I've got no problem with that at all. Um, and that I think
that would hopefully eliminate some of the concerns um that the department has in terms of allowing kids in there who aren't ready, right? So, if that's the case, then let's let's focus on that piece because one of the things I do see is if
the Vessie board and and the education department as a whole wants to continue to push kids, right, I think eliminating banking is gonna pretty much be the the the death nail for having
districts who don't have eth grade algebra or English to add that right while we have it already. Eliminating banking is going to stop a district who doesn't offer eighth grade from ever considering
Dr. I just have a question and I might have missed this somewhere along the way. If if a student is in eth grade with the new accountability system and whether they double block math where they take eighth
grade algebra or eighth grade math and they take algebra one or they just take the algebra one course but take both tests. If they take both tests in the new system, do they both go somewhere
in the old system? We'll start with the old system. In the old system, if the student took both tests, the score that counted at the middle school was the eighth grade score and then the algebra score. Yes. In the new system, one of them does
not count. Correct. Because it's not. So why wouldn't it count in the one school for the same year? It's that would be a very different thing from what the old policy was. Right. But we
have new policy and if the kid is taking the ninth grade algebra, we can have a kid in 10th grade that takes algebra one for the first time. We could have a kid who moves in somewhere else, whatever, and takes it in whatever grade. It would
count in that algebra one score. It doesn't seem as though it should matter what grade the student is in. What should matter is the course that they're in, which is no different than civics. If a kid is in ninth, 10th, 11th, or
12th, they take the civics exam. And as things progress with where those civic scores land, it doesn't go into a 10th grade social studies test. It goes into a civics test. Why can't algebra one English one work
the same way if a kid has taken the eighth grade leap and they're taking the high school assessment in eighth grade? So you're saying to count it in the at the eighth grade school count one of them count them both at the eighth
grade school or I'm trying to understand where you're asking me to to put that score. I've got seventh through 12th grade camp or kindergarten through 12th grade campus. They're on the same campus.
So if a kid is in eighth grade and they took the eighth grade math leap, that score should go in the eighth grade math school and they took the algebra one exam. Doesn't matter what grade they're in.
It's it's course driven. Then that should count in the algebra one high school. I mean, has there been any consideration to that? Now, it may take you one year of lag of data for it to be longitudinal
all the time, but whatever the kid did on there, and then it's up to the district if they want double test them or not, it's up to the district already if they want to double test them or not. But, I think it would solve some of this
concern where the the first year would see this jump and then over the second year over time it would just make sense at that point. But I think we we're categorizing these things by grade levels. Averageable one is not a
necessarily a grade level exam. So you're saying count the eighth grade score where the eighth grader was and then carry the algebra one score forward. Not carry it forward. Place it in the algebra one score for the testing
year. Well, that's the ones I'm advocating for. Dr. Bartholomew is ready to speak this time, so I'd like to give him an opportunity to have the microphone. Couple people follow Tom. Two two concerns. Uh, well, two points here. The data that you showed us was
high school, right? So, you're saying that it's not going to impact the high school scores as much or based on whatever those numbers are, right? It won't impact elementary schools in the simulation at all, right? Because there's no change to the way that they're impacted. It only would impact
high school scores or schools that have high school grades. So a seven through 12 would be impacted, but a K anybody that has just K through eight noted. We're saying that our students are scoring higher on the eligible one test than there are
than they did on the seventh grade assessment. Correct. Yes. So in fact, they're scoring higher meaning that their scores are increasing at the high school level, but but not at the middle school level.
Most kids in eighth grade are not taking the algebra exam. They're taking the eighth grade exam. Like 85, what was it? It was 15% of them take algebra 1 and eighth grade. So 85% of them are taking eighth grade math. So it would be a small impact on those on those scores.
And um it's the banking goes the banking impact is on the high school because that's where the scores getting used again. Does that make sense? Yes. So, those kids going to take the eighth grade test, what we're saying is
they're going to they're going to score the same from seventh grade to eighth grade, their scores are going to be the same. Yeah. But we don't have that data. But we have the high school piece. But we're saying that the high school from a seventh grade from a seventh
grader taking the high school algebra one test, the scores are going to increase. a large percentage of those kids. What I'm concerned is what I'm concerned with is we don't have the data on with those kids taking the eighth grade test. We know that this algebra one test is going
to increase, but we don't know if the eighth grade test those kids take the eighth grade test will they increase at the same rate. I think that'd be a hard hard question to answer if a kid Well, I guess we could look at there's that thousand kids
took both We could look at that. We I guess the you know question is you know we understand that the high school peace kids are increasing but I don't know if those kids going to eighth grade are they're increasing because at the same rate because if they're not increasing
at the same rate and we're accepting them in the algebra one class that means our scores we're receiving a I guess a higher score for that kid than we would normally get in eighth grade because the rate of increase is not the same. if there is a increase because we're
testing and I think I'm your analogy was that our kids focus really on two domains for algebra one but they're focusing on several different domains for eighth grade and part of the reason why our kids are doing better I'm assuming this that's what you meant is because they're focusing on less but if
they're taking the eighth grade assessment they're focusing on more so I'm using that that correlation that's saying I don't think they're going to do better because they're focusing on more domains versus the one test which they're only focusing on two.
So that's the that's the question. Also, I think it's important for us not to eliminate parent choice when it and hurt the school system because I have several parents. I sent out a survey to my parents and I said, "Hey, would you
prefer your child taking algebra 1 in 8th grade and a lot of our parents, students who can perform well on algebra one test, they requested that their child take algebra one in eighth grade. I'm concerned that if we are not
receiving any type of points or any banking, I'm concerned that we don't offer that to the parent and that eliminates their choice. So, I'm just putting that out there as as well. And I don't want the school system to suffer if a parent decides to say, I'm pull my
kids and send them somewhere else so they could take out those. So, we've got a couple people in queue. I want to want to remind the council of a couple things and then we'll also open up to public comment. Again, this council has the ability to just accept
the information that's been provided to endorse not endorse. But in in this particular case, we can make a recommendation that comes out of sack if anybody wanted to offer something that we this this council could then send to Bessie as the recommendation from the
superintendent advisory council as this is this is something that's been put on the agenda at the request of Bessie. Bessie will be considering this at the next Bessie meeting and so we can make a recommendation uh for Bessie to consider that recommendation that comes from sack. So I just want to kind of put that
out there. So I know we had a couple more people Mr. Dr. Orland, did you also have something to say before we open up to public comment as well? Just from Dr. profile because I did run we did run the numbers the 1346 students that took uh both the LEAP and the
algebra 1 and these these are the statistics according to 2324 data the students scored advanced and seventh grade LEAP who took the eighth grade leap and the algebra one leap 98% of them remained advanced 99 in eighth
grade leap 99% went up to advanced in um algebra one Mastery those who were mastery in seventh grade 788 students 86% of them scored mastery or above 80 in eighth grade leap 88% scored mastery
above and alpha one uh master above um basic students 285 students scored basic and seventh grade leap on the eighth grade leap 23% of those students scored mastery above while 31% of them scored mastery above
on the algebra one. So in every category down the line, all students regardless whether it's approaching basic, basic, mastery or advanced tended to do better on the algebra one lead, which to Mr. Lambert's point, you are assessing
slightly different standards, but I go back to my original point with the ACT. What standards are really preparing our students for college and career readiness based on the other data points relative to where those students are by the time they took the ACT? The ones that took the algebra one earlier, the
ones that don't. To me, that's when we're talking about student achievement and how we're growing students, preparing them. Those correlations are also important. I just wanted to share that because you asked that question. Any additional comments or questions from the council? Dr. Fountain, just a quick question. What was the
original reasoning for for not wanting to do the banking? I'm just curious of the rationale originally, Mr. Lambert, if I if I can address this just for and then you can give us the the what what happened is when
accountability was approved and the department began to start explaining to districts, okay, here are all the implications to accountability. As I understand it, this question was posed and nobody had
addressed it prior to the question being posed. there there may have been some understanding that this was a natural implication to the new accountability but no nobody really knew that and so once the question to Mr. Ber's point from earlier nobody none of us knew this particular implication to the pol
whether whether we agree with it or not the the main issue for us as systems at this point is we completed our staffing we have our master schedules and so now this this obviously whatever decision Bessie makes here is going to make a make a difference to that so I think it was one of those things that Once it
became a realization that this was one of the whether intended or unintended consequences of new accountability, that's that's why it's now part of this discussion of whether or not that was the intention or whether it wasn't. Should we do it? Should we not do it? That's so I don't know if that specifically answers your question. That's how we got here with it.
Yeah. No, that Well, I mean, I'm just I mean, from a philosophical standpoint, what what's the I think people can make a lot of a lot of good reasoned arguments on both sides. I heard some really good ones today around like why it's import for the public to not see their high school
score decline so rapidly because of the makeup of their testing population. So that's one really good argument on that front. Um I think other people might say that you didn't teach that child, right? That high school didn't teach that child, so why should that score go in
which is why the old accountability system had all of those weird if they scored below this then you don't have to bank the score. But there were some the old system actually hurt their score. Magnet schools particularly would get
kids that came to them with a bank algebra one score and it was a basic and because you got points to basic that school had to carry that basic forward. So a school that had 100% of their kids at mastery and some of them at advance
actually got hurt by this policy historically. So there's I think that would be the most reasoned argument that somebody make. It's not a advice my my only because that that was one of the reasons as I spoke to people that I kind of heard and I said I mean
it goes back to the whole coherence piece kind of like Zachary we're one feeder school so obviously what's going on in the middle school impacts the high school and we're one system it's they're not two totally separate schools so my my argument in that case would be we're
we're one system we are really working on this coherence piece which I love and we've done a lot of work on that like And so I'm just wondering philosophically that that that's why I said it if there's a reason I think we're smart enough to look at that and think through that. I was just curious
because to me if they're taking an eighth grade I I don't understand the argument that because it was taught at my eighth grade school that the ninth grade school would not benefit potentially from that. That was just the point. Any other questions or comments from the
council? Dr. Joseph saying at the end of the day for me and my district um I just had this question. So if we decide to continue providing uh algebra one in eighth grade this school year
will in what's going to happen that's my question what's going to happen with regard to that kind of what's going to happen with the kids scores uh current accountability the scores would stay at the eighth grade so the
eighth grade would be the place and they would be considered an initial taken if they were initial testers. Yes. So to the benefit for the benefits that I looked at for this it was about the kid. I'm about the kid. So my eighth
graders would uh take their eighth grade test and then they would take the eligible one test. Um if they were not successful on the test then they would move to nth grade and they would take algebra one full course in ninth grade
and they would be considered an initial test taker. They would not be an initial test taker because they had already taken the test when they go to high school if they took so if they took uh what was told to me is that when they took the
eighth grade math test the test and they took eligible one they not successful on the test, they were an they would not they would they would be considered an initial test taker in ninth grade. So it won't it won't count against them.
That was the old policy. Correct. So now you're telling me if I no matter what grade that they take the test, they are going to be considered an initial test. Yes. Really like killing us. Okay. Uh, wait. I want to respond to
that. Nobody's killing you, Dr. Joseph. What is hurting is when kids are gradu What is hurting is whenever kids are graduating high school, not ready for college or career. And we have nuanced conversations to have. We're having them in this room. We've had them with leadership. We're having them with
Bessie. We have a revised accountability system that could be a catalyst for growth academically of students in the state of Louisiana. No one here is killing you or kids. And I and I think that's an exaggerated use of language
that coming from you is rich right now. So I think we need to tone that down. Deal with the nuance of the situation, provide besting with information so that more kids are graduating high school ready for career or college or service.
And that's exactly what we're trying to do. and I will not apologize for the terms that I am using because that's exactly what is happening. So at this point from the council, is anyone willing or interested in making a recommendation from this council to Bessie?
Before that, I just have one last comment because I heard about the score wouldn't count if the school didn't teach the kid. In the scenario that I'm referring to in our district, the school
does teach the kids depending upon subgroups the denominator may be different anyway with the new accountability system. So I would just ask for consideration that in those seventh through 12th grade schools
if I've got a subgroup that is very tiny that's going to account for 8.3% of the score because they have 15 E kids if I've got a that's testing 40 kids in algebra one and they test in e grade
that that then counts in an accountability system as well where both scores accounted for that kid. I think I understand what you're asking. Come talk to I'd like to make to make a motion to um
we have the option to receive endorse. We have the option to receive endorse or not endorse or we can offer in this case this was sent to sack by bessie for consideration. So, we I believe we can make a recommendation to Bessie as far
as from this council what we would like to see them do. I'd like to make a a motion as a recommendation to Bessie uh to continue using the current practice as aligned to the old accountability system relative to those scores being retained at the
high school level. You come back in at least a year to to re-evaluate after the collection of the actual data going into next year. Can can I offer you a potentially helpful information. If you do exactly that, you will force the banking of
basics to the high schools, which would give them a zero. So, you would want to say that slightly differently to not continue to practice, but I'm just trying to avoid um a nuance we should be appreciate. Can you repeat
what you said? So, the existing polic was that if a student scored basic or above the score carried forward period. So when a score came to the high school, if they were a basic, that's what we score
in the new accountability system, basic gets you zero, not 80, right? So if we so however you all want to word that, but so the motion should say something to the effect that we would they would bank
only proficient scores for the high school. I I disagree with that. I I I think it needs to be the it's the same policy that we set the cut scores on. We need to go a year with the same policy that we set the cut scores on. We set the cut scores with that same policy that if you
got a basic, you got a zero. If you think a kid is going to be a basic goes to Dr. Brumley's point, we got to put the right kids into the course. If we're putting kids at approaching basic and unsat that we saw and to get a basic, that's a school system's fundamental issue. We got to put the right kids. We
got to teach them the same way in the I mean, I I don't think we should I don't think if a kid makes a basic, he makes a basic. We shouldn't give them a second chance for that. I think we go with the policy as as Dr. Ortland said. That's just my opinion.
So, thank you for the the input that Mr. So, so back to the recommendation from Dr. Wling, seconded by Mr. G is to recommend to Bessie to continue the current practice of banking for at least another year
until we can review how the data is impacting. All in favor I'm sorry we have not opened up public comment. This is slightly off the subject, but I think this is really this is what by the
way my name is Conrad Appel. at large member of Bessie and previous member of the Senate Education Committee for uh if we could focus on the very bottom line and we look at the statistics that are
there if you add up the unsatisfactory approaching basic and basic that represents nearly 75% of students in eth grade that's big picture problem we have it's off the subject
this motion, but it's not off the subject of this motion. So, what what we at Bessie, what we're looking at is how do we how do we ratchet up those numbers? Because let me tell you something, I've spent 50 years in business. Basic ma basic and math is
useless. That's about as good as you got out of kindergarten as far as business. So, that means you're you're dooming graduates. And by the way, the numbers I've seen, which I don't have today, maybe Thomas comment on it, is the gradu the high
school graduation numbers aren't much different from this. We really don't see any progress from this point forward. So, what we're looking at, Bessie, is you you can't make a quality citizen have a had a have a quality job in this
world if you're basic or below. So I don't know this was just poignant to me when these numbers were were popped up a few seconds ago how big the significant data is. So what what I'm challenging you all are is help us find
ways to change that worldview. Help us find ways to improve. We need mastery. We need a lot of mastery. Then this subject of of whether the banking or not becomes somewhat more insignificant.
Um right now we're not doing well. Um we can rank better in this in the national averages and all that, but we're not graduating kids that can have the math skills to go into the real world and make a difference for Louisiana. And
that that's all I want to say. Um I know tutoring is is a big focus and that's great, but that's a band-aid. We're putting a band-aid over a fundamental problem. Maybe maybe the problem is early childhood preparation isn't enough. Maybe the problem is that early
uh early grades of school education, mathematic education is not enough. So, we're having to apply the band-aid of tutoring to make up for some fundamental problems that exist earlier. I don't know what they are. I'm not an expert in
this. Uh but I I just wanted to point this out. U despite all the discussions about rankings and statistics and all that that 75% jumps out at me and bites me right where it hurts. And I just wanted to point
that out to everybody and let you know that's what we at least I and others on Bessie are focused on is how to improve that number so that at the end of the day we don't have 75% basic and below. We have 75% basic and above. Anyway,
that's all to say. Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Any other public comments of clarification? So are we going to go back? Are we asking to go back to the old system of
banking? Because what was deferred to the accountability was the policy that we were looking at that the students had to be master. And so what
was that? So that's I'm just wanting point of clarification. Are we looking at who can take the algebra one in grade? Are we looking at everybody and going back to the old system? That's all I need. Thank you. Dr. Orling clarified his
the motion to was to keep in place the old policy which to your point Dr. would remove the mastery and and above because we haven't discussed that part about what criteria would be required for those students to
remain in eighth grade algebra. With that understanding, Mr. G, you had seconded that motion or you still in favor of seconding that. Anybody offer any other recommendation? That's the motion. Thank you.
Just remind your comment card. I get reminded of that routine. U so that there are no public comments. I'm just kidding. Yeah. So, uh I want to start out with a positive note and just say that
appreciate the uh spirit of the conversation. Uh we're obviously all focused here on the best interest of our students. Um so I want to start out by just recognizing that um you know we do have the opportunity for
eighth grade students to take the one that provides them an opportunity to take advanced math class this year which is critical to our state. There's certainly demand for that going forward particularly with all the high-tech investment coming to our state
engineering uh requirements with that math is going to be required. So we need to address that fundamental need in our state going forward. So so it's important that we do have that opportunity and the positive note here is that with the 15% of our students
that are taking algebra in eth grade that we've got such a high success rate proficient and above. So, kudos to all you guys that have uh made that opportunity available to our students and kudos to you guys for the outcomes that that we received. Um what I heard
was uh you know there's very small percentage here. Um they're probably not um in their best interest to be in the class, but it's a relatively small percentage. So at 85% uh that's almost an A on our new tit
scale. So, so we got a B+ on that one. I think that's a that's a positive and just want to recognize that. Um, when I look at Bessie's role here, and I consider the superintendent's perspective, operation of the school
district, I consider the students perspective, and I consider the parents perspective. We're all super excited about the academic achievements our students have made the last four years. Um, a lot of questions are are up in the air right
now. Where are we going next? Uh and how are we going to get there? Uh in my mind, basically the efforts that you guys have put in place, the student outcomes, it it really reflects the policy changes that have been made, it really reflects a rebranding of K
through2 education in the state of Louisiana. And it's really important now that we've got this opportunity to to rebrand our product that people appreciate that it is a quality product. It's not we're 49th in the country.
Thank God for Mississippi, right? That story doesn't exist anymore. It's a new paradigm. We're 32nd in the country. The question is now what's on the next hilltop and how do we get there? Personally, I think one of the key fundamentals we need to think about with
that is u the foundation that we set to get there. We want to make sure it's transparent. We want to make sure it's credible and there's no question about our integrity. I think those are essential fundamentals regardless of whatever we decide.
Um whenever we look at this one particular issue uh I just want to thank my colleague Senator Appel uh because while it is important that 15% of our students get this opportunity
when I talked to Mr. Lambert about uh the student population that's taking the algebra one in ninth grade it's 50% of that 90% that's for proficient or better. So, how are we addressing that 50%. It's
obviously a larger number than the 50% of the entire population. To me, that's where uh we should we should focus our concern. How how do we address that? We get those students in in a place where they're set up for success because as he
said, if they want to be competitive in the workplace, basic is not going to is not going to do the job. So, so I'd like to hopefully refocus some of our attention to that student population. Um, but with regard to this particular
conversation and the conversation around banking, the primary concern again that I have is transparency and and the credibility that comes with that. If I'm a parent and I'm shopping high schools, then yeah, I'm going to look at the
letter grade. I'm going to look at what is the potentially offer for my child. But in my mind, the accountability system is about some way to quantify value in that system. And if I've got a high school that is taking credit for
work that's done in a middle school, that that value doesn't reflect what I'm advertising to the public. I think that's extremely important is that we're transparent with the public. we're uh the message we're bringing to the public
is the value that we provide in our school. Um and so when we get to this down in the weeds about the calculation for banking whatnot a couple questions for Mr.
The first one is the simulations that are run. The purpose is to provide a base case. The base case is a do nothing case. If everybody in this room does nothing, then we're not going to progress. But we have to know where do
we start. So the simulations are purposed to provide a base case. school systems are given a year with a new accountability system in place to invest resources, invest funds appropriately so they improve the base case. The numbers
that are running the simulation provide the do nothing case. So if I do nothing, I would expect my score is going to go down. I don't know how seven increase, but I don't think anybody in this room plans to be in the do nothing case, but
That's what the simulation does is it provides the base case which is do nothing. Um and then if I look at the significance of this one particular issue my understanding is that the widest gap was a six that correct Mr.
based on previous slide. Can you go? Yeah, there you go. That's right there. That's the largest uh on the for the improved. You're showing 0 to 6 to 05
sorry to 0.5 111. So those numbers are on point scale. Is that right? So I'm looking at one 2% on 100 point scale. Okay. So if I'm looking at a one or a two on 100
point scale, what is the range of each bandwidth? So in that A frame, B frame, C frame, they vary. Uh schools are chunked pretty close together in some cases, but they're 10ish points. There's not very many places
where it's less than It's 100 scale and you got five ranges, right? So if they were all the same, that would be 20 each, right? Right. But also the the curve is skewed or the population is skewed this
way. So you're really putting them between lower much lower than 100 as your top like your top 10% is going to range from the 50s to 95. I don't know what the highest
My point was just simple simply the order of magnitude that we're talking about this whole conversation right it's a point6 point scale um and um my next question was
using the 23 24 data which is for the base case and using banking does that raise the cut points or lower the cut points using banking. If you remove banking, I said using banking. If you remove banking, but my question was if you use banking,
if you use banking, it raises the cut point. So if you use banking, it raises the cut points. So that makes it more difficult for a school system to achieve that next letter grade. Is that right? It's a higher cut point. It's a higher cut point. So it's a higher bar to achieve. So if you use
banking using the 23 24 data for your base case, it raises the bar for everybody. Correct. Correct. Thank you. Um and if school systems want to raise the bar for everybody, then I guess we can
do that. But I just want to make sure everybody's aware of that. Um going back to the parental perspective and where's the value uh in this
and how do we make sure that we do provide those opportunities for uh those students that are prepared and are interested in the algebra one course. Um my my uh
suggestion would be that we consider other approaches to make sure we have the appropriate incentive to offer those classes in the middle school. We put certain criteria around students that are qualified. Uh maybe there's
something in the system where we recognize the incremental value in the middle school for the middle school so that the middle schools get credit for the work that's done in the middle school. Um I'm certainly open to other
approaches to recognize value where it exists. We need to put in middle school to recognize that value because we believe there is significant value there that is required incentives are required all for the class let's
have that conversation but I I cannot support from a parents perspective from the Bessie perspective artificially inflating high school scores on work that's not done in the high school just
for the optics um whenever As an adult, I think we we're the model for our children. We set the example. Um, students go to school, there's an honor code. Uh, they're expected to comply with the honor code. The honor code is you're accountable for your
work. If you use somebody else's work and you want to take credit for somebody else's work, you either fail the class or you get kicked out of school. I can assure you that's the policy of Vanderbilt University right now. Um, and so as we think about path forward here,
uh, how we're going to build a foundation for our future, I would just encourage us all again to think about how we're going to get there. Let's make sure that it's a solid foundation and we're not inflating it just for
Thank you, President Morris. We have a motion and a second on the table. All in favor? Any opposed? With that, the motion carries. I'll entertain. That was the last item on our agenda as I understand it. The next uh
superintendent advisory council meeting is scheduled for September 18th, 2025. We hope everybody is able to make that. If there's no other business, I'll entertain a motion to adjourn. I got a motion by Mr. Van Meter and a second by
Dr. Stokes. Thank you. Good job.