State Board Work Session Update

The State Board of Education met in a work session today, February 12,  in Montgomery with all Board members in attendance with the exception of Betty Peters and Jeff Newman.  Items on the agenda included the following:

Mathematics Standards Review – Mrs. Sherrill Parris, Dr. Julie Hannah, Mr. Steve Ricks, and Ms. Andrea Von Herrman, Jefferson County Schools, Mathematics Course of Study Member, shared an overview of the review process.

After careful review there was unanimous agreement by the Mathematics committee that no actions were needed on any of the comments from the public review.  No action by this committee affirms the quality of the current COS for Mathematics.  Additionally, the committee believes the COS is well written and standards are appropriately placed to ensure students become college and career ready. We would recommend that many of the concerns expressed in the comments be addressed by teacher and community education.

English Language Arts Standards Review – Mrs. Sherrill Parris, Dr. Julie Hannah, Ms. Judy Stone, and Ms. Lindsey Kissic, Sylacauga City Schools, English Language Arts Course of Study Member, shared an overview of the review process.

The committee considered and discussed each comment individually and agreed on whether to recommend action or no action.  There was unanimous agreement that no action should be taken on the majority of the comments from the public review.  There were 2 recommendations from 128 disagreeing comments.  The comments fell into three main categories of concern related to the standards.
o Grade-level placements of the standards: There were many suggestions for moving standards to a higher grade level. The committee felt this is an indication of a lack of understanding about the increased rigor which leads to college and career readiness and about how the standards build from one grade level to the next. 
o Local implementation of the standards: There were several comments about instruction (how the standards are being taught, materials, etc.) and about assessments. The standards state the expectations for what students should know and be able to do by the end of each grade level.  Both instruction and assessment are local decisions.
o Lack of understanding regarding the meaning of the standards: Some comments did not address the content of the standard. Some questioned the value of certain literacy standards which the committee felt are critical skills (e.g., naming characters, setting, main idea, supporting details, retelling the story, naming the author and illustrator)
Two minor edits were recommended for clarity.  
o The first recommendation is for Kindergarten Language Standard #37.  Add “begin to” to the standard. – Begin to – demonstrate command of the conventions of standard English grammar and usage when writing or speaking.
o The second recommendation is to add a clarifying example to First Grade Standard #17 for Reading Informational Text. - (e.g., eating a balanced meal, obeying safety rules, engaging in recycling projects).
Recommendations other than edits for the COS:
o Consider the implications for on-going professional development and support (e.g., parent meetings, CCRS Quarterly Meetings, local differentiated PD and support). Clarify that the standards call for increased rigor at all grade levels with knowledge and skills now appearing in earlier grades than in the past. Emphasize how the standards build from one grade level to the next. Clarify that standards are expectations for what students should know and be able to do. They do not specify curriculum nor assessments.  These are local decisions.