The video of the meeting is 100MB and 1 hour and 10 minutes long. Click on the image at left to watch the video. The video contains chapter headings which allow quick navigation to each speaker's presentations or different topics.

Public Appearances
There was a public appearance by Larry Winkler, requesting that Administration and the Committee analyze the disaggregated scores from the recently received ACT 2006 test, arguing that the mere disclosure that MMSD student average on the ACT exceeded both the national and state averages, tells us nothing about how well individual students performed, nor does it give us enough information to direct the allocation of school resources. A detailed analysis could do that.

Planning for the Year
Ruth Robarts suggested creating the Fine Arts Task Force, as Shwaw Vang had previously suggested, evaluation the new Strings curriculum and analysis of mathematics achievement based on standard scores, and preparation of middle school students for high school math.

Carol Carstenson suggested covering truancy, suspensions, expulsions, dropouts and general engagement issues. Superintendent suggested that this topic is for full Board. The general sense is that committees would do preliminary work, before taking to full Board, but in neither case is either preempted.

Ensure that the curriculum is challenging and diverse, taking into account changes to the middle school curriculum, its impact on elementary and high school curriculum.

Shwaw Vang officially requested creation of Fine Arts Task Force. Wants truancy issues presented to this committee, though the full Board would also be addressing. Another issue is ESL for Asian students, who are now 2nd or 3th generation Americans; setting goal for ensuring they capable of handling mainstream classes.

Discussion of scheduling of PA meetings.

ESL Report
Presentation by Amy Christianson, Coordinator of ESL program, described progress and improvements in student success and changes in measurement which allows for better measures.
Question and answers followed.

The video of the meeting is 71.5MB and 49 minutes long. Click on the image at left to watch the video. The video contains chapter headings which allow quick navigation to each speaker's presentations.

There was a public appearance by Dr. Barbara Schrank, describing her interaction with Julie Palkowski, Coordinator of Fine Arts, and author of the Report that is the subject of this meeting. In her remarks, Dr. Schrank suggested the establishment of a Fine Arts Task Force, modeled after the recent task forces established in other areas.

Dr. Jeffrey Henriques also made a public appearance to reference a recent published study entitled Music and Cognitive Abilities, by E. Glen Schellenberg at the University of Toronto. The study concludes that there is small but statistically significant "long-lasting intellectual benefits that cannot be attributed to obvious confounding variables such as family income and parents’ education" of music lessons given to 6-year old children as measured by the Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-III IQ test; and for those kids placed in a drama class, there were "increases in adaptive social skills that were larger than those in the other three groups." For other E. Glen Schellenberg reports, link to his website.

The main agenda item for this meeting is a report by Julie Palkowski, Coordinator of Fine Arts for the MMSD, describing the status of the Elementary School Strings program for 4th and 5th graders. The report describes the current schedules, enrollments, fees, expenditures and revenues, the curriculum, and teacher, principal, and parent perceptions of the current program. A copy of this report will be made available on this site for review.

Board questions focused on involvement of low income kids, success benchmarks, and program vision.

The video of the meeting is 61.5MB and 42 minutes long. Click on the image at left to watch the video. The video contains chapter headings which allow quick navigation to each speakers presentations.

There was one public presentation by La Follette student Christina Harper ("Cat") who argued for reconsideration of the MMSD "no hats" policy. She also brought petitions signed by approximately 200 other students in support of her position.

The formal presentation to the Board was conducted by Steve Hartley, Director of Alternative Programs, and coordinator of the Summer School programs.

A number of papers were made available: an Executive Summary, the 2005 Summer School Participation Report, English Language Summer School (ELSS) Identification Process paper, and Summer 2006 Summer School Sites, Programs, and Staffing document. These documents are included in this combined PDF file. Thanks to Barb Lehman for sending this document.

The video of the meeting is approximately 45 minutes long. Click on the image at left to watch the video. The video contains chapter headings which allow quick navigation to each speakers presentations. Please allow time for download to your computer.

During the Public comments, Jeff Henriques requested analysis of the West 9th grade English curriculum before embarking on similar changes to the 10th grade English curriculum. Larry Winkler suggested that only standard curriculum across schools and common assessments would ensure rigor in the curriculum in the middle schools.

Pam Nash, then, updated the Board regarding the progress of the Middle School Design Team, emphasizing the role of focus groups in the evaluation process. The focus groups included parents, two teachers from each middle school, and students. Parents, teachers, and community in general emphasized one must not lose the understanding that the middle-school years are a critical developmental time for students. The report from the Team will include specific recommendations in the areas of fine arts, life skills and technology. Mathematics offerings will be clarified, as well as amount of class time. Same for languages. Support services - bullying concerns were mentioned
frequently by focus groups.

Ruth Robarts asks Pam Nash to clarify the members of the focus groups and participation as the report received by the Board did not cover that information.

Next, the concept of consistency and rigor was discussed. What does consistency mean, how does the District define rigor?

There was discussion of when the Board would be allowed to see the report, if the Board would be allowed to see drafts, and the pro and con arguments that make up the rationale for the decisions. Arguments were made that the Board's role is minimal, and such decisions are a matter for internal experts.

The Quicktime video of the meeting is approximately 1 hour 10 minutes long. Click on the image at left to watch the video. The video contains chapter headings which allow quick navigation to each speakers presentations. Please allow time for download to your computer.

After taking care of initial business, Superintendent Rainwater discusses definitions of "heterogeneous" and "homogeneous" in the context of students in classrooms, and the difference between these terms and "tracking". It is acknowledged that there are pros and cons to both homogeneous and heterogeneous groupings. Because there is truly no homogeneous grouping, since all classes contain students of differing preparation, the real question to keep in mind is at what point does the range of student preparation exceed the ability of teachers to differentiate instruction to serve the needs of the students in that class.

Dr. Adam Gamoran is introduced. Dr. Gamoran is a Professor of Sociology at UW-Madison, and the Directory of WCER. One of his areas of expertise and study is heterogeneous/homogeneous instruction.

Dr. Gamoran presents an overview of his and others research on the topic. To follow along with his presentation, download his PowerPoint presentation in either ppt, or pdf formats. His paper, Gamoran, Adam. 2004. "Classroom Organization and Instructional Quality." Pp. 141-155 in M. C. Wang and H. J. Walberg (Eds.), Can Unlike Students Learn Together? Grade Retention, Tracking, and Grouping, Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing. , is included.

Board questions and discussion followed, including discussions of the role of the Board in decisions of curriculum direction and evaluation.

The video of the meeting is 55 minutes long. Click on the image at left to download and watch the video. The video contains chapter headings which allow quick navigation to each speaker's presentations. Please allow time for download to your computer.

The first speaker is Michael Lipp, West HS Biology instructor. He describes the heterogeneous biology classrooms that have been part of West for 12 years. He describes prior experiences of dead-end biology courses at West, and the need to teach all students.

The second speaker is Linda McQuillen, MMSD Math Resource Teacher, who explains a new heterogeneous model for teaching Algebra-Trig at East High. The new model requires teachers to shift focus from what they will teach to what the students are expected to learn, and contains a differentiation component. The documents given to the board include the Planning Pyramid, a Sample Preplanning guide, and a Sample Differentiaion Plan.

The third speaker is Jenny Ruef, an East H.S. Algebra-Trig teacher. She presents the teacher view of the new East H.S. algebra-trig model, and importance of the work of the previous speaker, and current successes of the new model.

The fourth speaker is Lisa Wachtel, MMSD Science and Environmental Coordindator, who discusses embedding honors into the regular Freshman classroom. The model is based on West Biology. She notes that the content for all is the same but the abstraction level and depth is greater for the advanced (honors) student.

The fifth and final speaker is Pan Nash, Assistant Superintendent of Secondary Schools, who presents to the Board how the new heterogeneous 10th grade English class will proceed, and details the implementation that will take place.

Board discussion follows. The basic topic is the role of the Board in such curriculum changes.

I have included below the video of the meeting (in Quicktime format), broken into segments for easier viewing.

NB: The last clip is truncated by 5 minutes -- I ran out of video tape at the end of the meeting. My apologies.

1. Presentation by Jeanette Deloya on Hmong school attendance
   • (Quicktime Clip (26MB))
   • Attendance Trends of Hmong Students (ppt)
2. Board/Superintendent discussion with Ms. Deloya (Quicktime Clip (36MB))
3. Presentation by Diane Crear on minority student survey of racism/acceptance in Madison schools (Quicktime Clip (13MB))
4. Presentation by Diane Crear of anecdotal responses of minority students in Madison schools (Quicktime Clip (7MB))
5. Board/Superintendent discussion of racism and non-acceptance in Madison schools (Quicktime Clip (35MB))

These rubrics do not directly relate to Districts but to individual schools. It does seem to offer, along with the National School Board Association guidelines, a consistent approach to school and District improvements in these areas.

Therefore, it is the responsibility of the Board, Administration, staff and teachers to ensure student achievement is monitored, supported and ensured. The following is a list of suggested goals for the PA committee, derived from discussions with others, published ideas from educational associations and my contributions, as there may be.

1. Ensure students at least meet the standards as determined by State and Federal standards
2. Ensure compliance with college standards
3. Ensure students do equal the international standards of top countries using the PISA/TIMSS studies as the baseline
4. Set standards such that every child will get at least 1-year of education every year, based on the child’s current level
5. Include significant public contribution to setting standards
6. Publish new standards as single document for public access
7. Ensure teachers have the skills and resources to meet the standards
8. Ensure the teachers are able to and do exercise the skills and use the resources to meet the standards
9. Evaluate programs to ensure effectiveness in meeting the standards

1. Align assessment to standards
2. Do not align assessments to curriculum.
3. Ensure assessments are frequent and diagnostic
4. Ensure assessments are readily available to students and parents to ensure diagnosis can quickly lead to remedies, and teacher, parent, and student involvement in implementing those remedies.
5. Ensure assessments feed back into curriculum decisions.
6. Ensure assessment data provides information on the individual student.
7. Involve significant contingent of public in setting and monitoring assessments process, alignments, etc.
8. Perform longitudinal analysis by individual student using current data.
9. Enhance collection of assessment data to assure quality of the data for the purpose of assessment, accountability and student diagnosis.
10. Ensure assessments can allow year-to-year comparisons, disaggregated
11. Align textbooks and educational resources with student assessments, and goals high level of student achievement

1. Board, staff, superintendent, teachers, parents, and students are all accountable for student achievement.
2. Use assessment data
3. Accountability must be data driven
4. Use data to evaluate curriculum effectiveness
5. One measure of accountability must be based on analysis disaggregated by demographics
6. Other measures of accountability must be based on analysis disaggregated by classroom, teacher, curriculum, school, etc.
7. Accountability measures are a function of both proficiency on standards, and also an individual student’s growth.
8. Use student growth to evaluate teachers, staff, principals, curriculum.
9. Consequences shall be incurred to responsible parties for both exceeding student achievement expectations and failure to reach expectations. Remedies shall follow

The Chairman of this committee for the 2005-2006 year is Schwaw Vang. Other Board of Education members are Bill Keys and Ruth Robarts. Staff Liason is Mary Ramberg.

-------------------------------
Schoolinfosystem.org will regularly provide information on each of the committees of the MMSD Board of Education.

We'll post the following:

a) Committee goals for the coming year.

b) Calendar of meeting dates.

c) Agendas and any materials provided with the agenda.

d) Videos and audios of any meetings we might be able to record.

e) Minutes of committee meetings and notes when we're able to attend.

f) Links to relevant articles on issues under consideration by the committee.

I'll be the "page master" for the Performance and Achievement Committee, and I hope that the board and the general public find the blog's committee posts to be a valuable resource.