STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
                                  September 18, 2008
                         Public Service Building, Room 251-A/B
                          255 Capitol St. NE, Salem, OR 97310

Members Present
Duncan Wyse          Chair                          Alan Bruner         Advisor, K-12 Teacher Rep.
Brenda Frank         Vice Chair                     Mary Spilde         Advisor, Community Colleges
Art Paz              2nd Vice Chair                 Paul Fisher         Advisor, Community Colleges
Lew Frederick        Board Member
Jerry Berger         Board Member
Nikki Squire         Board Member
Leslie Shepherd      Board Member

Members Excused

Other Participants
Susan Castillo       Supt. of Public Instruction    Sue Hays            Principal, Scappoose HS
Camille Preus        Com. Colleges Commissioner     Michael Bremont     Asst. Principal, Redmond HS
Krissa Caldwell      CCWD Deputy Commissioner       Emily Anderson      Teacher, Scappoose HS
Ed Dennis            ODE Deputy Superintendent      Susie Erickson      Teacher, Scappoose HS
Doug Kosty           ODE Assistant Superintendent   Val Helm            Teacher, Scappoose HS
Debby Ryan           ODE Executive Specialist       Michelle Parson     Teacher, Scappoose HS
Jan McComb           Board Administrator            Rebecca Steinke     Teacher, Scappoose HS
Salam Noor           ODE Asst Supt                  Sara House          Teacher, Redmond HS
Pat Burk             ODE Chief Policy Officer       Gregory Scott       Teacher, Redmond HS
Cindy Hunt           ODE Legal Coordinator          Colleen Mileham     ODE Director
Drew Hinds           ODE Education Specialist       Phyllis Guile       ODE Director
Susan Daggett        ODE Education Specialist

Preliminary Business
Call to Order/Roll Call/Flag Salute/Introductions
Chair Duncan Wyse called the meeting to order at 9:02 a.m. Wyse called the roll; all members were
present. He then led the room in the flag salute and asked the audience to introduce themselves.

Comments, Agenda Review
Chair Wyse introduced new advisor, Paul Fisher. Fisher said that he was a business instructor from
Rogue Community College. Fisher had been teaching on a part-time basis at RCC since 1989. In
1997, he started teaching full-time. Before that, Fisher was in the California canning industry.

Wyse noted that the afternoon agenda items had been rearranged since the mailing of the packet;
the tour of the two schools was moved up an hour, and the board would hear two agenda items
following the tour: Workforce System Overview and Instructional Materials in K-8 Mathematics.

Chair Wyse stated that it was very important to see the facilities at the Oregon School for the Deaf
and Oregon School for the Blind. He also said that the agenda was great and that they looked
forward to the discussion on credit for proficiency. Wyse stated that there was very exciting work
going on around the state related to policy development around the Oregon diploma and the whole
redesign of the system. Also, the board’s work plan would be on Friday’s agenda; the board retreat
was helpful to get the board focused on work to do for the rest of the year. There was a little work to
do at lunch with NASBE and OSBA elections.

Committee Updates
Commissioner Preus stated that the Joint Boards Budget Committee had met. Chair Wyse said he
was impressed how Governor Kulongoski was developing the education budget this year. This was
the second time where the governor had asked the joint boards to come together to reflect on the
priorities of the whole system, taking all budgets and looking at them as a system. There were more
requests than dollars, as always. They were trying to think of how they could use the school
improvement dollars to focus on the diploma priority work. There was also a focus on college assets.
It was a great opportunity to have a conversation. Wyse expressed appreciation to James Sager and
the Governor for asking the board to think about setting priorities from a system aspect and offering
their insights.

Member Reports
Director Frederick: Frederick reported that he attended a National Association of State Boards of
Education (NASBE) conference, last May, at the Communicable Disease Center in Atlanta, Georgia.
African-American members of the Boards of Education met to talk about HIV and AIDS in the
African-American communities. Over 50% of new AIDS cases had taken place in black communities.
Sixty-five percent did not know they had AIDS. The focus was on what they could to get the
message out and to get people tested. The question was how to address young people. There was a
presentation at the conference by Brad Victor, Educational Specialist from Oregon Department of
Education. Oregon was seen as a model for educating people about health care issues in this nation.

Director Frank: Frank stated that the Oregon Indian Education Summit and Government-to-
Government had made plans to meet on Sunday, September 21, 2008 in Pendleton in conjunction
with the Affiliated Tribes of the Northwest Indians conference. Also, there was an Oregon
Community College Assn. meeting planned for October 3. 2008.

Chair Wyse: Wyse stated that he, Director Frederick and Superintendent Castillo went to the
ACHIEVE meeting last week. There was a great delegation from Oregon. It was very inspiring work.
There was a very large national movement to ramp up diploma requirements. Many states had
adopted the ACHIEVE format. Oregon was a hybrid.

Castillo stated that Vickie Phillips was there from Gates and gave everybody a briefing on where they
are in terms of the work that needed to be done around the country to improve our schools. She
said that Oregon had tried to take a diverse team. Among those there were the Chancellor, Ron
Saxton from the Tigard-Tualatin School District, Salam Noor, Ed Dennis, Doug Kosty and Lew
Frederick. It was great to hear stories from other states and the challenges they have faced as they
worked on the diploma.

    Director Wyse recognized the work of Brad Victor.
    Director Frank stated that Victor was well known in the tribes’ communities. He did a lot of
       tobacco cessation, HIV, alcohol, and high risk teen assessments. Every junior high and high
       school student was assessed. That netted a $6.1 million grant for the county. Tribes had a
       $5.1 million grant to combat methamphetamines.

      Squire related that at the end of the Apollo Space Project, the U.S. was responsible for 75%
       of the technical and scientific innovations in the world and we are now at 25%. That is a
       powerful message about how we invest our public dollars.
      Wyse spent time with the Irish and learned about their educational system. Every high school
       graduate went through a comprehensive assessment for college. It was very rigorous. They
       had high numbers going into college and high graduation rates.

Public Comment
No one signed up for public comment

Information – Diploma Update

Salam Noor, Colleen Mileham, Susanne Daggett, ODE; Principal Sue Hays, Emily Anderson, Susie
Erickson, Val Helm, Michelle Parson, Rebecca Steinke, Scappoose High School; Assistant Principal
Michael Bremont, Sara House, Gregory Scott, Redmond High School

Implementation Coordination
Noor gave an update on the diploma, its implementation and rollout. Credit for Proficiency was at
the heart of the diploma work that the board had been doing. Achieve had the blue print for the
initiate. Oregon Department of Education (ODE) learned a lot from Achieve and has continued to
learn from their work. Achieve was the first one that ODE turned to because they represented 32-33
states that were involved in this work. Many research institutions and educational entities around the
country had contributed to that work, including ODE. Noor distributed a two-page high level
summary overview on the Oregon diploma implementation. There were intense internal efforts to
coordinate diploma implementation. ODE offices and staff meet on a monthly basis to look at project
plans and activities and how they supported the diploma work.

Noor stated that there were a variety of methods for diploma communications including the
Superintendent’s Pipeline, Superintendent’s Update, news releases, newsletters, and the
superintendent’s e-mail distribution list. A numbered memorandum and the Oregon Administrative
Rules that outlined the diploma requirements and timelines were distributed in June and August.
Diploma updates were provided in all content area teacher newsletters. The Moving Education
Forward brochure had been distributed to every middle school and high school for each 6th – 9th
grader in the state. There was an updated ODE website, Get Ready Oregon that provided
information for parents and the general public ( There were in-
person diploma presentations/input sessions that targeted administrators from Educational Service
Districts throughout Oregon. Noor stated that ODE had begun to see a high level of awareness on
the new diploma. They mostly saw implementation questions, not questions regarding the goal.

Resources and Tools
Noor discussed resources and tools such as the Administrator Toolkit: 10 Tools to Help Implement
the Oregon Diploma created through an ODE-COSA-OSBA partnership. The Educator Toolkit was
designed by teachers and aimed specifically at teachers. The board allowed districts to issue credits
based on proficiency and to issue credit based on applied learning experience. ODE needed to
provide some guidance for the field.

Core Standards
A critical development of the diploma requirements was a new structure for the content standards.
Math and science standards were in focus. The development of those standards was under way and
had progressed well. They had the first draft of the revised science standards posted on the website
for the public to review and comment. It was planned that the math and science standards would go
to the board for review and adoption this school year. Science was slated for January and high
school math standards were planned for the spring of 2009. Next month, they planned to do a
presentation for the board on the development, review and revision process for content standard so
the board clearly understood the process that ODE used to develop content standards in the state of

Noor stated that the Assessment of the Essential Skills Review Panel (AESRP) work was under way.
Members of AESRP had been selected. There were plans to meet in October, November and
December of 2008. Members included representatives from K-12, and a variety of other interest
groups that had expertise on the topic. It was planned that the criteria for local assessment options
would be developed by December 15, 2008. The additional list of assessment options such as SAT,
ACT, etc. would be available June 1, 2009. Guidance for the assessment of the Essential Skills was
added to the Test Administration Manual 2008-2009. An Essential Skills assessment FAQ’s was
available on-line and was updated regularly.

Professional Development
Noor stated that ODE and ESDs were working together to help districts include Essential Skills
assessments as part of their continuous improvement process. The current projects related to that
work included:
    The direct Access to Achievement (DATA) project
    Teaching Learning Connection (TLC)
    Growth Model
    KIDS (K-12 Integrated Data Systems).

Noor stated that ODE was working with the Northwest Regional Education Lab and ESDs to develop
math and science instruction professional development that was to be delivered regionally. A
diploma video was under development to provide examples of school implementation practices.

Credit for Proficiency
Noor stated that there were two schools that had traveled to share their work with the board. That
work had progressed very well. ODE would bring a set of recommendations to the board next month
to consider as administrative and policy rules.

    The desirability to get feedback from students; the current presentations were left-brain and
       highly administrative.
    The need for students to know early on what was required of them and what their choices
    The benefit of watching the two winning student videos.
    The need for regular board updates and timelines.

Chair Wyse welcomed Mary Spilde, new community college president advisor. Spilde shared that she
was glad to be at the meeting. She stated that she was the Oregon Presidents Council chair and a
part of that role was to be advisor to the state board. She missed the August retreat because she
was in Scotland.

Mileham gave a brief context about what the board would hear. She said that a task force completed
their work this year around credit for proficiency. She wanted to remind the board that the work
really began in 2002 with board adopted policy at that time. There were a series of questions such

      How could a proficiency based system co-exist with a time based system?
      How should we use time if students were engaged in learning at their own rate and level of
      How do we create value for proficiency-based systems?
      What policies would help to empower schools to implement a personalized proficiency based

Critical assumptions:
     A proficiency-based system was essential to learning.
     A proficiency-based system promoted best practice in teaching and learning.

The board would hear from representatives of Scappoose High School and Redmond High School
who would describe how they implemented credit for proficiency options with the traditional
classroom. Department of Education staff would follow up at the October Board meeting with
recommendations from the Credit for Proficiency Task Force.

Daggett introduced the two schools. She said that this had been a developmental process.

Redmond High School
Michael Bremont, Assistant Principal, Shay Mikelson, Ass’t Principal, teachers Sara House and Greg

Bremont shared that they were excited to be at the board meeting. Redmond wanted an assessment
based on standards and true content knowledge, not on artificial barriers. He stated that:
    Redmond started with their freshman class.
    Over time, their goal was to have a comprehensive proficiency-based high school.
    Their teachers were excited.
    They rolled forward to 10th grade this year.
    Forty teachers were involved.
    11th and 12th grade teachers wanted training.

Bremont informed the board about process, results, proficiency-based grading, standards-based
instruction, Essential Skills, process for implementation, artificial barriers, and reasons for creating a
proficiency-based system.
     Too many students dropped out of school because their current educational model did not fit
        their needs.
     Students learned to play school requirements, rather than learning to think critically and
        demonstrate their learning.
     Administration provided ongoing data.
     There was a recovery system for students who needed support.
     There was ongoing training and support for additional teachers to join the proficiency model.
     One result was that 0% of freshman dropped out of Redmond High School with no planned
        destination compared to 18% from the previous year.
     Students would not fail unless they elected not to complete the work or do not make progress
        toward the goal of demonstrating an understanding of the concepts needed to be learned.
     Teachers would be accountable to insure all students were proficient in each standard.
     Teachers calibrated scoring rubrics both within the curriculum area and with teachers outside
        the curriculum area.
     Students had the option to complete a course via an independent study method using pod
        casts or other models chosen by the teacher.
     There were multiple opportunities given to students to demonstrate proficiency.
     Standards were posted for each lesson.
     Personal traits like timeliness, tardiness, classroom behavior and appropriate interaction with
        colleagues were graded under the Essential Skills, not the content standards.
     The assessments had to be aligned to the standards.
     Students were assessed based on what they really knew.

Scott said that he was a second year teacher. He spent many years in a prior career before deciding
to teach high school. When he looked at standards-based lesson planning and proficiency-based
assessment, it made a lot of sense to him. He said that they identified the specific standards that
they were teaching. Students could tell you what they were working on. There was a direct tie
between the standard, the assignment and the assessment. Scott did not see this as revolutionary
as others did.

House stated that she did see proficiency-based learning as revolutionary. She had taught school for
six years. The light bulb went on when she looked at the data. She said that it was not okay for a
student to get a high grades, make it into college and then not be successful. That was not serving
the students. She started looking at what they were doing. She discussed artificial barriers and how
the traditional point system, which allowed students to earn grades based on completing work,
rather than on demonstrating true proficiency of the assigned standard. She said that kids should be
able to try until they were successful. House stated that learning does not always take place from
7:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m. Students should be allowed to be online, to have forums and to discuss the
standard. Students then have more flexibility to take control of their learning.

    Reaction of parents; parents had been overwhelmingly supportive. Redmond High School had
       a collection of evidence and at conference time parents could see what their student knew.
    At the end of the trimester, the student who was not proficient in standards received an “I”
       for incomplete and then went into a credit recovery program. They did not get an “F.”
      The change in focus to success rather than failure increased student self esteem.
      How middle school teachers were responding to this shift (still resistant).
      Whether the new approach was on video (yes, on the Redmond High School website. Multiple
       schools throughout the state had asked for that).
      What other teachers thought about the new approach. (Some teachers loved it, some still say
       they should have the right to fail a kid).
      If there was an actual assessment, teachers had to create three, four, five assessment for
       those kids. That had been an issue for some teachers. Some teachers said they didn’t have
       the time.
      Teachers had to continue tracking kids that got an “I” to make sure they stayed in the
       recovery system.
      Teachers had to know if they needed to create another project, create another assessment.
       Sometimes it took weeks for kids to understand a concept. Kids got to think and take time to
       demonstrate their knowledge.
      Teachers had to become more efficient and create more meaningful assessments.
      Administrative support was great – teachers could not do it without that.
      The administration had been willing to commit resources.
      Whether the approach would be extended through grade 12 (likely; they had hired a full-time
       person to assist teachers with tracking student progress.
      They would need to hire more staff to do that as they moved into 11th and 12th grades. They
       did not anticipate needing additional resources.
      They were figuring out at the district how to make the system work so that teachers were
       compensated appropriately.
      They did not anticipate it would be a huge cost. There were some up front costs when they
       first began the planning process.

Daggett introduced the Scappoose High School presenters: Sue Hays, Principal, Emily Anderson,
Susie Erickson, Val Helm, Michelle Parson, and Rebecca Steinke, teachers.

Hays said that she was excited to share what was going on. She had been in the education
profession for 30 years. Hays said that their grant money was the only staff development money
they had to get the new graduation requirements on board, which had been implemented and 100%
successful. She said that today, the board would hear stories from teachers in the classroom.

Parson, teacher at Scappoose High School, said that she taught social studies. She had always
aligned instruction and curriculum to the content standards, but she did not always know if the
students understood the content. The idea of credit by proficiency sounded good to her. It made
sense to get students to demonstrate what they had learned. Those authentic assessments based on
the standards were what were missing. One big thing credit by proficiency did was build in relevancy
for students. Students understood how they connected to the content. Social studies were skilled-
based. Standards focused on skills. When that was explained to students, even when students
scored well, they still wanted to do it better. They were in charge of their learning. They were
assessed on what they knew and what they could do.

Anderson taught business and math. She taught 63 incoming freshmen at pre-algebra level. She
described how the students were well organized. Those were skills the kids had to learn. The kids
got grade printouts every Monday. Their organizational skills were assessed. The calculator was
really important as a resource. Students also did many mental computations; they were really
engaged. The students trusted the teachers enough to know that the skills were important for the
assessment. The big picture was not that the teaching changed so much, but really the assessment.
They tried to make the class work as real life as possible.

Steinke discussed how credit by proficiency worked in the classroom. Steinke just started her 4th
year of teaching. Her first year at Scappoose High School she taught biology. With her traditional
training she was prepared for the old system. She quickly realized that the old system was not going
to work for her. She didn’t feel that the curriculum was connecting. She changed the focus so that
every day was deliberate—not a flat two dimensional lesson plan. She wanted to teach kids how to
think and problem solve. She wanted to take all good assessments and tie them into a higher
purpose. In the real world, you don’t get a paycheck for points. You get a paycheck because you are
proficient at what you do. Her students did well on state tests.

Helm stated that about the 20% of kids in math and science class were on an IEP. Accommodations
were built in for this system. She believed that there will be fewer students on IEPs with credit by
proficiency based learning. She lets students know what is expected of them, so students know
exactly what they have to do. Credit by proficiency takes students where they are and takes them
higher. Students who need more time and help get it. Bright students don’t become bored because
they are challenged.

Erickson stated that she can now tell parents the specific standard their child needs to learn; before
students were not sure. Students can identify what they need help on. Once parents understand,
they are very supportive. Now she has kids coming in before and after school because they want to
do learn what they are missing. Kids don’t see failure, only that they have to work on a standard and
their teacher will help them. State standards broken down content into skills they need to know – if
you pass my class you can do these things. One student came in every day for two weeks. She felt
responsible for her learning and was empowered. This same student returned to talk to pre-algebra
students to tell them how she succeeded. Credit by proficiency makes teaching very transparent.
There are no surprises. Anything you do requires time initially.

 That students who knew how to game the system complained the most.
 That most students embraced the new model.
 Whether teacher colleges should be teaching this approach.

Standards for Intermediate Education Districts OAR Re-Write
Nancy Latini, Cindy Hunt, Bob Burns; ODE

Hunt explained that 2005 legislation modified requirements for education service districts. The rule
amendments reflect these changes. The amendments also clarify rule language relating to Education
Service District’s (ESDs). In addition, the existing rules were reviewed to see if they had any basis in
statute. She noted that the section on service plans was adopted in an earlier, separate rule
adoption. The proposed revised rules have been broadly circulated. There is still one issue she and
Burns are looking at regarding boundary changes and mergers; there will be a recommendation on
this issue at next month’s scheduled adoption.

 What role should the board play regarding the pilot district experiment? Could it make
   recommendations before the legislature?
 Whether to hear a general briefing on ESDs.
 Responsibilities of an attendance supervisor.

NASBE Board Election
MOTION: Squire moved to vote Isis M. Castro as president of NASBE and Mark Cluff for the Western
Area Director. Paz seconded the motion.

VOTE: The motion passed 7-0.

OSBA Board Election
MOTION: Krista Lemons for District 11 and David Beeson for District 12.

VOTE: The motion passed 7-0.

Virtual Charter Schools update
Cindy Hunt, Phyllis Guile; ODE

Guile introduced herself; she is the new charter school director and was previously with the Salem-
Keizer School District. Hunt updated the board on the requests to waive the requirement that at
least 50 percent of the students who attend the school must reside within the sponsoring district.

On June 19, 2008, the board granted ORVA a waiver of the “50 percent statute” with conditions. One
of these conditions is that students who do not reside in the sponsoring district receive permission
from their resident district prior to attending ORVA. The waiver letter sent to ORVA is attached. In
July, 2008, the Sisters Web Academy and the Marcola Web Academy withdrew their waiver requests
from the board. On July 23, 2008, after receiving several questions about ORVA, the department
sent a guidance memo out to districts and others about ORVA. (attached). On September 4, 2008,
the board received a waiver request for the “50 percent rule” from the Oregon Connections
Academy. This matter is expected to be in front of the board for the first time in October.

Hunt stated that there was some confusion in the field regarding parent requests for their children to
attend ORVA and what criteria districts should use in granting or denying permission. ORVA has
given the department an update on their enrollment and what districts the students are coming

 The desirability of a legislative framework for virtual schools.
 The creation of a survey for stakeholder input.
 How drop outs would be reported.

Students with Disabilities OAR Language Update; 581-010-0200, 581-015-2000, 581-015,2200,
581-015-2240, 581-015-2255, 581-015-2390, 581-015-2400, 581-015-2555, 581-015-2575, 581-
015-2580, 581-015-2815, 581-016-0920, 581-019-0005, 581-019-0030, 581-019-0075, 581-021,
0200, 581-021-0260, 581-022-1340, 581-006-0005, 581-070-0220.
Cindy Hunt, ODE

Hunt stated that the 2007 Legislature reviewed all laws’ wording to ensure that they put the person
before the disability. Advocates worked hard to make this change. She noticed that the
administrative rules needed a similar update. This change fits within the board’s work plan to make
the education system equitable. Hunt’s legal intern went through every rule and updated them.

 How the rules mesh with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Oregon School for the Blind/Oregon School for the Deaf Co-location
Cindy Hunt, ODE

Hunt stated that the board would be asked to uphold, modify, or overturn the decision of the
Superintendent of Public Instruction to pursue enabling legislation for the co-location of the Oregon
School for Blind (OSB) and the Oregon School for the Deaf (OSD) on the OSD campus in Salem.
Hunt reviewed the timeline of the Superintendent of Public Instruction’s proposal to co-locate the
School for the Deaf and the School for the Blind and a brief history of the two schools.

The superintendent’s rationale for co-location was that given the current cost per student, she did
not believe the existing structure of having two schools was sustainable. The physical buildings are
also badly in need of repair and seismic upgrades.

Advisory boards for each school were created by the legislature and both boards are appealing the
co-location decision. The Board of Directors of the OSB voted to appeal the decision of the
superintendent; its rationale was that the decision was premature when considered against the
legislative charge of both boards of directors to conduct a comprehensive review of the schools and
to adopt a master plan; that their board has not yet had adequate time to complete its charge; and
that the State Schools Study and the report from Innovation Partners, Inc. used in making the
Superintendent’s decision raised many questions.
The Board Directors of the OSD voted to appeal the decision of the Superintendent; its rationale for
the appeal is that cost alone was an insufficient rationale for co-location; the work of the board to
review current practices and programs and to adopt a master plan should be the foundation for any
decision to co-locate, upgrade and possibly redesign both facilities and programs; there was a
demonstrated need for more complete information before going forward with a decision to co-locate;
and that a decision to co-locate must be accompanied by a comprehensive and sustainable plan for
the future.

The first step for the board is to tour both campuses, today. Next month, she recommended that the
board hear from all three sides, 30 minutes for each side with a 5 minute rebuttal time. A December
decision will enable the superintendent to introduce legislation by her deadline of December 15.

 Whether the board process was fair, adequately informative, and a decision could be made in

Wyse recessed the board and reconvened at 2:05 at the School for the Deaf where the board toured
the campus.

Tour – School for the Deaf
Patti Togioka, Director

Togioka led the board members and advisors on a tour of the School for the Deaf campus, located at
999 Locust St., NE, Salem, Oregon. Tour highlights included the high school, the elementary/middle
school, the track and football fields, community garden, an auto shop, art classrooms, and the
student dormitories. She noted that the brains of deaf students have greater visual abilities and are
often drawn to the visual arts as careers. Touring classrooms, Togioka stated that the school was
working to give students vocational training for high wage, high demand jobs. Classes were small to
meet students’ special needs. Their catering program was popular with students, as were the print
and photography classes. They had a winning robotics program in the middle school.

Togioka reported that a portion of the dorms had been closed due to seismic safety concerns. Boys
share a room, which can lead to conflict. The dorms have fire sprinklers with yellow strobe lights to
alert residents. While the school currently has an auditorium, stage, pool, and locker rooms, Togioka
stated the school would like to have a better auditorium. The high school was built of concrete and
not seismically sound. One hundred and eleven students attend the School for the Deaf. Morgan
Allen, ODE staff, noted that a firm had been hired to examine the buildings and that report would be
available soon.

Tour – School for the Blind
Don Quimet, Director

Quimet led the board members and advisors on a tour of the School for the Blind campus, located at
700 Church St. NE, Salem, Oregon. Members were shown a “motor room” where students had the
opportunity for a variety of sensory input; the computer room; the lounge; the radio and web
programs, which were part of the vocational program; and the vocational work area (recycling of
technology parts); the track and therapy pool; and the sensory garden. The computer room features
synthesized speech, Braille, and printed materials with large fonts. Music therapy and orientation
and mobility lessons were also important features of the school. Students were also placed in the
community to learn vocational skills such as house keeping, janitorial, and restaurant worker.

About one-half to one-third of the students used Braille in some form. In addition to orientation and
mobility, the school teaches activities for daily living, social skills, standards for interpersonal
communication—these were critical to obtain and maintain future jobs. About half of students had
some vision. Students were 9–21 years old; most were 16 years or older.

Regarding buildings, Quimet explained that the dorms were built in 1936; one dorm was empty to
save costs. The school leased 20 spaces to the nearby hospital, and the campus housed the
Commission for the Blind, which helped transition students out into the community. They were not
using the infirmary this year to save costs.

When asked why the school had both a director and a principal, Quimet explained that the principal
was responsible for the school and the dorm, while the director acted as a liaison between
community partners such as regional programs and the National Federation of the Blind.

Wyse reconvened the board at 4:30 in the boardroom.

Workforce System Overview
Commissioner Preus, CCWD; James Sager, Office of the Governor

Preus gave an update on recent events related to the workforce education system, specifically
focusing on efforts by CCWD and workforce partners. She provided a statement from Winning in the
Global Market that provided a frame of reference and departure point for a conversation about the
current effort that was underway to align the demands of the workplace with the supply of highly
skilled workers. The statement mentioned that the keys to effective competition were agility, fast
response to market shifts, continuous innovation and focus on customers.

Preus discussed the WorkSource Oregon Annual Report. The Department of Community Colleges and
Workforce Development (CCWD), the Oregon Employment Department (OED) and partner staff
performed oversight, preparation and design work that resulted in the production the of WorkSource
Oregon Annual Report to the U.S. Department of Labor (DOL) and other Oregon Stakeholders. The
report contained information on the progress of the State in building a workforce system that
provided universal access for job seekers and employers through One-Stops. This year, the report
featured a regional focus; workforce and education partners in each region submitted narrative,
which included Regional Highlights and Success Stories that created a region-by-region examination
of five categories:

       Unique Characteristics
       Accomplishments
       Challenges
       Innovations
       Sustainability and Future Plans
       Clusters and Industry

Preus discussed integration, which was the catchall term the Oregon workforce used to describe the
alignment of services and processes between the partners that comprised their one-stop system.
She said that the intent was to provide workforce investment activities that increased the
employment, retention and earnings of participants. The plan was to increase access to skill
development opportunities, which included occupational skill training. Preus provided a handout that
described some of the basic components of integration:
     A Common Intake Registration process for all physical locations was designed. That process
       allowed for the elimination of paper hard copy participant files, which resulted in a statewide
       savings of resources and staff time.
     There was a creation of a Common Customer Pool.
     Oregon Employment Department and WIA Title IB staff was cross trained in each other’s
       programs and processes. Their goal was to provide a seamless delivery of services to
     Local areas redesigned their customer and service delivery flows to incorporate cross-
       functional staff and teams.
     There was consolidation of the Statewide Management Information Systems (MIS).
     Procurement of a statewide skills review tool that measured basic math and language skills
       was nearing completion.

      There was a creation of a statewide list of skill enhancement, career readiness and
       employment services.

Preus stated that further information would be provided to the Board periodically. State and local
staff was working to implement Common Intake Registration in October, 2008.

Sager discussed the big picture of what the governor had asked for in coordinating the workforce
agenda. He said that there were four areas of focus. Those four key areas were economic drivers for
the state. He stated that the governor was excited about the career readiness certificate. They
worked with different agencies and looked at policy options packages that had to do with the
workforce to make sure they aligned. Sager stated that there would be a reinvigoration of career
technical education systems with community colleges used as a pivotal point. They were asking for
resources for community colleges to buy the technology that was needed. One of the challenges that
they faced was that almost all workforce dollars had been federal dollars with a lot of strings
attached. There were proposals from the employment department to do deeper research. This all
helped to build the correct platform for 2011. The education system was trying to address the needs
of Oregon business.

    The purpose around this integration was so individuals would know their skills, improve their
       skills and get better jobs.
    Every office would have a welcome team so customers would want to be there.
    It was asked if people would need to re-do their information. If the customer was active, they
       would remain active.
    Twenty-thousand were estimated to register.
    The piece that was new was the initial assessment. The hope was that everyone would be
       encouraged and avail themselves to know their skills.
    There needed to be human contact.
    The registration part was not difficult.
    It was more powerful for people to know what their skills were and how they could translate
       those skills into the local work market.
    Career pathways and connections to universities were very important.
    There was a change in the director of economic development. Was communication
    Was this a voluntary service—no need for someone to go through the system if it wasn’t
    There were concerns at a consumer level—was it a barrier that would prevent someone from
       getting a job?
    An example was if someone came into the system as a state engineer and did not have a
       degree, they needed something to demonstrate proficiency.
    Cascade steel just hired a new batch of employees that were required to have the career
       readiness certificate.
    It was asked how well educated were those coming into the market. Who were the ones
       getting the jobs? Do they look like a community?
    There were huge gaps in levels of education by gender and ethnicity.
    There was 10% of population that got any kind of real skill development. This was offered to
       everyone. There was a better chance of scaling up individuals.
    It was stated that this would motivate students to achieve.
    The career readiness certificate was proctored.
    They were testing to make sure that when they went to statewide rollout, they had worked
       out all the kinks.

Instructional Materials in K-8 mathematics. 581-011-0141
Phyllis Guile, Drew Hinds; ODE

Hinds explained that the State Board of Education reviews and adopts, for periods established by the
board, a list of textbooks and other instructional materials for use by school districts. Before them
was the updated list of basal instructional materials for mathematics, grades K-8 for the adoption
cycle beginning July 1, 2009 and ending June 30, 2015. The board would be asked to adopt the list
at the next meeting.

 Whether districts may independently adopt their own texts (yes, but they notify ODE)
 The textbook/materials evaluation process.
 Whether the materials represent best practices.

Chair Wyse adjourned the meeting at 5:37 p.m.


                                 STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION
                                      September 19, 2008
                             Public Service Building, Room 251-A/B
                              255 Capitol St. NE, Salem, OR 97310

Members Present
Duncan Wyse        Chair                            Mary Spilde     Advisor, Community Colleges Pres.
Brenda Frank       Vice Chair                       Paul Fisher     Advisor, Community College Faculty
Art Paz            2nd Vice Chair
Lew Frederick      Board Member
Jerry Berger       Board Member
Nikki Squire       Board Member
Leslie Shepherd     Board Member

Members Excused
Other Participants
Susan Castillo     Supt. of Public Instruction
Camille Preus      Community College Commissioner   Paula Merritt      ODE Executive Specialist
Andrea Henderson   OCCA Director                    Jan McComb         Board Administrator
Andrew Fries       OCCSA                            Salam Noor         ODE Asst Superintendent
Connie Green       CCWD Special Projects            Cindy Hunt         ODE Legal Coordinator
Donna Lewelling    Executive Specialist, CCWD       Tony Alpert        ODE Assessment Director
Krissa Caldwell    Deputy Commissioner, CCWD        Cynthia Risan      CCWD Education/Workforce

Preliminary Business
Call to Order/Roll Call/Flag Salute/Introductions
Chair Duncan Wyse called the meeting to order at 8:37 a.m. led the room in the flag salute and
asked that the roll be called. All members were present. The audience introduced themselves.

Comments, Agenda Review
Consent agenda items 4.1 and 4.4 were pulled for review.

Superintendent Report
Superintendent Susan Castillo updated members of the past month’s activities.
    A number of data reports have been issued in the past few weeks, including Oregon
     Assessment of Knowledge and Skills (OAKS) and Annual Yearly Progress (AYP). There is a
     concern with what is happening with middle schools students. We are performing strongly in
     elementary levels, but not seeing that level of performance in high schools. Too few students
     are taking classes in the core curriculum. There are 14,000 students who are not on track to
     meeting benchmarks in math and reading in 9th grade classes this year. A letter will go to
     superintendents reminding them that these students are the first class who will need to meet
     the new diploma requirements and ask what their plans are to get these students back on
     track to meeting the new requirements. This information will then be used for conversations
     with the legislators.
    Superintendent Castillo attended the Achieve Conference last month. The day before the
     Achieve Conference Superintendent Castillo was invited by Senator Harry Reid to moderate a
     US Senate Panel for Latinas in Education with Senator Patty Murray and Congressman Ruben
     Hinojosa. The Achieve Conference allowed for some quality time to discuss challenges and
     implementation of diploma requirements. Achieve is about the technical aspect of moving
     forward. The challenge is how to change the culture of the general public to get everyone to
     move forward for successful implementation of the diploma. All states are struggling in
     building this support and level of awareness.

Commissioner Report
Commissioner Preus updated the members on her activities of the last month.
    Commissioner Preus attended the National Council of State Directors for Community Colleges
     meeting in Chicago. The College Board was one focus of the meeting as they are looking to
     expand relationships and partnerships with community colleges across the nation.
     Commissioner Preus led a discussion regarding the Reach Higher America Report and the
     positive role of community colleges in the delivery of literacy services. The reaction of the
     directors was positive. Preus will co-present the recommendations of the Reach Higher
     America Report with Gail Melow, President of LaGuardia Community College at the OCCA
     Convention in November.
    National Commission on Adult Literacy has received some additional foundation funding and
     will be able to continue some targeted work on the recommendations from the Reach Higher
     America report. Commissioner Preus has been asked to assist in the next step of gathering
     community college leaders to have a conversation on how to engage community colleges who
     currently do not have a role in adult literacy. Oregon is a leader in community colleges who
     have a strong connection to adult literacy.
    Commissioner Preus attended the OEA & AFT UniServ Retreat to talk about the Student
     Success Report, the work of the PSQEC that is looking at full-time, part-time and the quality of
    Rounds of meetings with college boards have begun. Commissioner Preus has been to Mt Hood
     Community College, using the Student Success handout as primary talking piece. She spoke
     with the board about the budget notes, Key Performance Measures, and to answer their
     questions. Commissioner Preus Cam invited board members to join her on these meetings.
     Cam will be at Klamath Community College next week. Chair Wyse encouraged the board
     members to attend the meetings in their area.
    Preus attended the Columbia Gorge Community College ribbon cutting ceremony for the new
     Health Sciences Building. Representative Huffman, Senator Ferrioli, the board chair and others
     were in attendance.
     Preus shared an update on other colleges who are making progress in their capital
     construction. Clackamas recently held a ribbon cutting ceremony for the Harmony Campus.
     Tillamook Bay held the groundbreaking for their new college. Due to the current market
     conditions, the Tillamook Bay bond sale has been postponed.
    CCWD has been given the nod to continue with a proposal to the Gates Foundation with the
     Community College Research Center on student success. CCWD has spent some time thinking
     about the policy questions the research may answer.
    There will be a request to the Emergency Board to set aside 4 million for the Oregon
     Opportunity Grant, as they expect to be fully expended with their current funding. There has
     been an FASFA filings, the colleges are reporting 15% increase to 30% increase from 2007 to
     2008. Students who are most hurt by the cutoff of funding will be community colleges as they
     often enroll late and when the funds are expended, they are gone.

Discussion: Director Frank mentioned that the tribes are interested in taking a look at the Student
Success Report. Director Frank requested that CCWD present the material to the tribes.
Superintendent Castillo called the board’s attention to the Homeless Student Results. The numbers
continue to climb. Currently 1,774 seniors are homeless. Advisor Spilde shared that the community
college presidents will have speaker from Casey Institute to talk about emancipated minors in

Public Comment
No public comment.

Stakeholder Reports
Andrea Henderson, OCCA

Henderson thanked the board for its support of the capital construction projects throughout the
state. Community college presidents are calling legislators to encourage them to support the
Emergency Board request for $4 million in additional funding of the Shared Responsibility Model and
the Oregon Opportunity Grant. The total number of applicants has increased and we need the
additional money to serve these students.

OCCA is working on the messaging for next year: many legislators are supporting no additional
investments this time, so the message has been pulled back to focus on investments for the future
but also the present. There will be a focus on the importance of educational attainment in Oregon.
OCCA is working on legislative positions for next session. The OCCA board adopts these positions.
Henderson will come to the October SBE meeting to ask for SBE comments.

The New Market Tax Credit (NMTC) Project with Clatsop Community College is slated to close this
coming Wednesday. OCCA will act as the leveraged lender for Clatsop Community College. This may
be a potential model for other colleges to help public dollars stretch as far as possible.

The OCCA Convention is November 21-23, 2008 at the Salishan Lodge, running Friday through
Sunday. Guest speakers include Gail Melow, George Boggs, David Longenecker, Joe Cortright and
Wayne Newton.

Oregon Community College Student Association
Andrew Fries, OCCSA (MHCC)

Fries shared that he is new to the OCCSA but is very interested in being engaged. Fries shared his
appreciation for the $4 million to support the Clatsop Community College capital construction project
(to meet ADA standards and to keep accreditation) that was obtained with a lot of grassroots
lobbying during the February session.

The Oregon Community College Student Association Retreat was held in Newport in early
September. There were many workshops. One of the workshops focused on how to increase student
voter registration, the message centered around the idea that when students vote, students win.
The OCCSA joined the Student Vote Coalition. There was a student vote workshop held at
Chemeketa to learn how to increase student voter participation. There was a speaker from the
Veterans and Non-Traditional Students Association to raise awareness on how to welcome veterans
on campus. A presentation on the consumption of bottled water and the effects on the environment
was also given. Several colleges are looking at becoming smoke-free campuses. Portland Community
College is committed to going smoke free by next September. Mt. Hood Community College is also
beginning the conversation. There was discussion on how to make the OCCSA more effective. Some
of the ideas have included hiring a staff member to help with the dissemination of information. The
first official meeting will be held on October 18th at PCC Rock Creek with a focus of setting goals and
selecting a chair.

Student Success Report and Plan
Commissioner Preus, CCWD

The final version of the report was shared with the board. A CD was distributed with the full report
and appendices. Commissioner Preus directed the board to the Action Plan of the report.
Commissioner Preus reviewed the work plan with emphasis on Phase II of the plan. Although it was
an aggressive timeline, there was a lot of interest generated at the institutions.

    Who will do the work of phase II? (Preus will provide leadership, Connie Green will help guide
       the work, and the colleges will actively participate.)
    Collection of information that is data driven. Information that will give picture of what is
       inside the FTE.
    This is not an unfunded mandate as colleges are collecting some if not all of the data.
    The increase in the numbers of veterans who are returning from Iraq.

Mark Endsley from OUS shared information on pilot work that is going this biennium and the policy
option package for a virtual policy warehouse.

Motion: Director Squire moved to approve the Student Success Report and work plan as presented.
Director Paz seconded the motion.

    Chair Wyse would like to have the colleges come to future board meetings to talk about data
       and the new measures.

Vote: The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.

ACT & SAT Oregon Results Review:
Pat Burk, ODE

Burk distributed SAT Oregon Summaries and brochures. Burk presented an overview PowerPoint
presentation of the Annual summary of SAT and ACT Performance.

    Students who have taken an academic core have higher SAT tests both nationally and
       statewide. Oregon scores are above the national level.
    The overall Hispanic population taking the test is increasing although the overall numbers
    The scores have remained consistent over the years. The national average is 510, Oregon’s
       average is 525.
    The aggregate numbers of students taking the SAT and ACT were increasing, although the
       total number for SAT is decreasing. This may be due to the cost of the SAT and that it takes
       place on a Saturday.
    There has been a 65% increase in number of students taking ACT. Many districts offer this
       test free of charge.
    There is broader participation in the ACT, but this has brought in lower performing students.
       There will be a need to be able to defend the averages as they decline as we open the testing
       to others who would not have self-selected. There is an expectation that the number of
       students taking the ACT will increase from 6,500 to 45,000. There will be a need for three
       years of data in order to look at trends within the sophomore class. There will be a huge
       amount of data.
    Comparisons of state and national data trends of the SAT and ACT tests.
    Comparison of students who take an academic core v. those who don’t, and effect on ACT
       test scores.
    Participation rates have shifted slightly.
    More minority students are participating, especially in the area of Advanced Placement.
    Oregon Performance is flat overall, but is at or above national averages.
    Bright spots include overall participation and performance and minority student participation.
    Rigorous core set of classes has a positive impact on performance and college readiness.

Unified Education Enterprise Update
Commissioner Preus & Connie Green, CCWD; Jerry Berger, UEE

Director Berger noted that he was re-elected as chair of UEE.

Green reviewed the 2008-09 UEE Work plan. The work plan focuses on two main points.
       1. Understanding of educational opportunities through improved communication.
       2. Alignment of curricular content and academic expectations.

Director Berger pointed out that UEE strives to look at issues from a student point of view rather
than an institutional point of view. Members were adopting that point of view.

Discussion: Castillo stated that she would like to see UEE become more pre-K through 14 focused in
the future.

Consent Agenda - Action
   4.1 Division 22 OAR Re-Write
   4.2 August 2008 Board Minutes
   4.3 Commissioner’s Travel
   4.4 Apprenticeship Program Approval
   4.5 Rogue Community College: Computer Support Technician, Association of Applied Science
           o Related Options in Computer Support and Health Care Informatics
           o Related Certificate of Completion in Health Care Informatics Association
   4.6 Tillamook Bay Community College
           o Industrial Maintenance Technology
                  Associate of Applied Science Degree
                         With a related Certificate of Completion and Career Pathway Certificate

Director Squire requested that items 4.1 and 4.4 be removed from the consent agenda for further

Motion: Director Berger moved to adopt the consent agenda with the exception of items 4.1 and 4.4.
Director Frank seconded the motion.

Vote: The motion passed unanimously, 7-0.

Consent Agenda item 4.4, Apprenticeship Program Approval:
Commissioner Preus explained that there were content errors in this docket item and changes to the
docket item. Chemeketa appears on page 3, page 6, and page 9. Chemeketa was previously
approved for statewide apprenticeship. She asked that BMCC be removed (page 3) from certificate
of completion in manual trade apprenticeship, because they are not offering this certificate.

Motion: Director Squire moved to amend item 4.4 as described. Director Berger seconded the
Vote: The motion passed unanimously.

Motion: Director Squire moved to adopt item 4.4 as amended. Director Paz seconded the motion.

Vote: The motion passed unanimously.

Consent agenda item 4.1, Division 22 Re-write:
Squire asked about the wording in 581-022-0606 (3)(i): Education Service plans for students who
have or have not exceeded all of the academic content standards. The wording suggested that all
students would have education service plans. Hunt and Maguire clarified that it did cover all
students, but did not have to be a formal, written plan (unless required by other rules and laws).

Maguire clarified that the board was not being asked to repeal alternate routes for demonstrating
Essential Skills; this rule would be replaced with a new rule.

Motion: Director Squire moved to adopt consent agenda 4.1 as presented in the docket. Director
Berger seconded the motion.

Vote: The motion passed 6-0; Frederick excused.

Credit for Oregon Assessment of Knowledge and Skills, OAR 581-022-1132 (temp.)
Tony Alpert and Cindy Hunt, ODE

Alpert distributed new suggested temporary rule language for OAR 581-022-1132. He explained that
given how the statute was worded, school districts could conceivably award diplomas to students if
they passed the math or English portions of the state assessment. Staff did not think this was the
intent of the statute, but rather to recognize accelerated learning. Parents and students may soon
approach their districts and be requesting diplomas based on this statute. The proposed temporary
rule would fix this problem by not allowing a student who met standards in one subject area to be
exempted from all other diploma requirements. The proposed rule would allow students to substitute
up to two credits for a passing state assessment score in the particular content area.

    The need for clarification in the statutory language.
    Credit for proficiency is dealt with in another piece of the statutory language.
    Permanent rulemaking process.
    State tests were not meant to substitute for course work.
    Whether students should be limited to one credit rather than two.
    The Credit Proficiency Task Force is meeting to address these types of issues.

Motion: Director Berger moved to hold this discussion until next month; Director Squire seconded
the motion.

Vote: The motion passed 4-2; Frank, Paz voting no; Frederick excused.

Board Management
Revised Work Plan
Jan McComb, Board Staff

The Executive Committee will work on the revised work plan. Send edits or suggestions for the use
of the work plan to Jan McComb or Chair Wyse.

Updated Liaison Assignments
Jan McComb, Board Staff

McComb stated that she will forward Lew Frederick’s nomination to the OSAA.

Written Reports
    Strategic Fund: Clackamas Community College
    Strategic Fund: Portland Community College

Chair Wyse adjourned the meeting at 12:27 pm


These meeting minutes were
unanimously approved by the state
board on October 17, 2008.


To top