STATE OF HAWAII
BOARD OF EDUCATION
STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT COMMITTEE

Queen Liliuokalani Building
1390 Miller Street, Room 404
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Thursday, August 2, 2018

PRESENT:
Margaret Cox, Committee Chairperson
Patricia Bergin, Committee Vice Chairperson
Brian De Lima, Esq.
Catherine Payne
David Texeria (student representative)

EXCUSED:
Kili Namau‘u

ALSO PRESENT:
Phyllis Unebasami, Deputy Superintendent
Linell Dilwith, Interim Complex Area Superintendent, Kaimuki-McKinley-Roosevelt Complex Area
Ruth Silberstein, Former Complex Area Superintendent, Kaimuki-McKinley-Roosevelt Complex Area
Stuart Kim, Educational Specialist, Special Education, Kaimuki-McKinley-Roosevelt Complex Area
Alison Kunishige, Executive Director
Kenyon Tam, Board Analyst
Regina Pascua, Board Private Secretary
Irina Dana, Secretary


I. Call to Order

The Student Achievement Committee (“Committee”) was called to order by Committee Chairperson Margaret Cox at 11:02 a.m.


II. *Public testimony on Student Achievement Committee (“Committee”) agenda items Committee Chairperson Cox called for public testimony. There was no public testimony at this time.


III. Approval of Meeting Minutes of June 7, 2018

ACTION: Motion to approve the Student Achievement Committee Meeting minutes of June 7, 2018 (Payne/Bergin). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.


IV. Discussion Items

Phyllis Unebasami, Deputy Superintendent, introduced Linell Dilwith, Interim Complex Area Superintendent (“CAS”), Kaimuki-McKinley-Roosevelt Complex Area; Ruth Silberstein, former CAS, Kaimuki-McKinley-Roosevelt Complex Area; and Stuart Kim, Educational Specialist, Special Education, Kaimuki-McKinley-Roosevelt Complex Area. She highlighted that Silberstein is coaching new CAS as they acclimate to their new roles before she retires in December.

Silberstein stated that the complex area is comprised of 28 schools, including 19 elementary schools, five middle schools, three high schools, and one kindergarten through twelfth grade Hawaiian immersion school. She highlighted that the complex area hosts a diverse population of students and families. In School Year (“SY”) 2017-2018, the complex area enrolled 13,447 students. Students with disabilities comprised 8.4% of the total population, and English learners (“EL”) comprised 14.4% of the total population. She added that 2.1% of students received both special education and EL services.

Silberstein reviewed the complex area’s special education demographics, including its five most prevalent eligibility categories. She detailed that the five most prevalent eligibility categories are specific learning disabilities, developmental delay, autism, other health impairment, and intellectual disability and noted that there are ten remaining eligibility categories. She stated that the top four categories comprise 84.5% of all students receiving special education services in the complex area. Silberstein stated that the complex area continues to strive to increase the percentage of students who spend 80% or more of the school day in the least restrictive environment. Currently, 29.5% of students spend 80% or more of the day in the least restrictive environment. Silberstein noted that 64% of students in preschool classrooms who receive special education services are in a general education classroom for at least part of the school day. She highlighted that the complex area’s special education teachers are creative in trying to integrate preschool students who receive special education services with students in general education classrooms in kindergarten classes, Head Start classes, and other preschool programs on campuses. Silberstein reviewed the top home languages of EL students. She detailed that students who speak Chuukese comprise a quarter of the total languages spoken. In addition, the complex area has a wide range of 32 more languages spoken at home. She noted that this reflects diversity within the complex area as well as challenges for educational programs for EL students.

Dilwith stated that the complex area primarily measures student achievement via proficiency on the Smarter Balanced Assessment. She noted that proficiency in language arts over a three-year period has ranged from 53.1% to 54.1% for all students. By comparison, 12.4% to 15.8% of students receiving special education services met or exceeded standards over a three-year period. Among EL students, there has been a gain over a three-year period from 4.6% to 11.6% of students who met or exceeded standards in English language arts. Dilwith noted that in SY 2016-2017, 47.2% of all students met or exceeded standards in math. She highlighted that the complex area has been providing teachers with opportunities to access professional development in math as a result of trends. She highlighted that although an achievement gap still persists with students receiving special education and EL students, the percentage of students who met or exceeded standards has increased over a three-year period.

Dilwith reviewed graduation rates for students receiving special education and EL students as compared to all students in the complex area. She detailed that in general, graduation rates for each subgroup of students continues to increase. Dilwith reviewed exit data and stated that it is valuable to note the total number of students in data sets, including in categories for students with disabilities for ages three through 21. She stated that in SY 2016-2017, 156 students who receive special education services graduated with a high school diploma or transferred to general education. She noted that the percentage of students receiving EL services who exited increased in SY 2017-2018.

Dilwith reviewed innovation in school design. She detailed that the complex area’s schools have embraced a range of key initiatives to enhance learning and student achievement for all students. Over the past three to four years, schools have incorporated key components of 21st century learning, including questioning and building learning structures. Additionally, schools are developing design infrastructures for science, technology, engineering, and math learning. Dilwith noted that schools have also embraced the framework of instructional leadership teams over the past four years. She highlighted that high schools are offering dual credit programs, including Early College and Running Start. High schools are also reviewing embedding career and technical education pathways in academy structures in order to enhance college and career readiness.

Kim reviewed inclusion and inclusive practices. He stated that the complex area is working consistently on promoting and increasing participation in an inclusion classroom. The complex area is focusing on strategies that will promote active learning for all students, including differentiated and multi-level instruction. Kim stated that an instructional shift requires ongoing professional development to assist teachers in refining their practice. He highlighted that schools are working with Stetson & Associates on inclusion. Kim reviewed how the complex area is incorporating key EL practices. He detailed that English Language Development Standards allow teachers to adjust and differentiate content. He noted that these standards are used in conjunction with Common Core State Standards and helps to build cohesive instructional framework. English Language Development Standards focus on language domains and connects with instructional practices.

Kim detailed teacher demographics for SY 2016-2017. He noted the complex area had 908 general education teachers of which 99% (or 895) were licensed and 6% (or 54) were first-year teachers. The complex area had 156 special education teachers of which 97% (or 152) were licensed and 10% (or 15) were first-year teachers.

Kim detailed that the complex area has found that professional development has value. He noted that professional development assists teachers in developing and refining instructional practices. The complex area provides professional development to schools, or schools can seek outside consultants to deliver additional professional development in math or English language arts. He noted that professional development topics are based on individual school needs.

Kim highlighted that the complex area utilizes evidence-based practice in order to enhance learning structures for at-risk learners. The complex area assists students struggling with reading through response to intervention (“RTI”) and multi-tiered intervention in primary grades. These practices provide intensive, systematic instruction in small groups to students. He stated that the complex area assists students struggling with math through RTI in primary and middle grades. This practice includes instruction on solving word problems based on common structures. Kim highlighted adolescent literacy in small group settings as an evidence-based practice. He noted that high schools will use advisory periods to target literacy.

Dilwith stated that the complex area’s commitment to quality instructional practices is key for its diverse EL population. She noted that all teachers must be intentional in addressing use of four language domains, including listening, speaking, reading, and writing. She detailed that the complex area used Project GLAD (Guided Language Acquisition Development) as a key area of focus in its schools. The focus is on schools providing interactive, graphic, or kinesthetic support to enhance learning. Schools also employ WIDA Can Do descriptors. These descriptors allow teachers to differentiate curriculum, instruction, and assessment to address learners’ levels of proficiency and address the four language domains. In using these practices, teachers might plan lessons and activities to incorporate and integrate the four domains in a meaningful context of learning. She stated that teachers build effective instructional practices. Dilwith detailed that the complex area has EL coordinators that provide more individualized support to schools to meet the unique needs of EL students.

Dilwith stated that research has documented parent and family engagement as having key impacts on educational outcomes for all students. The complex area’s focus is to continue to engage students, parents, and families through the individualized education program process and to include parents as partners. Dilwith stated that the complex area prompts schools and personnel to be welcome, inclusive, and to encourage parents to be actively engaged. Additionally, educational components help parents to become involved in facilitating learning for their child. Dilwith noted that schools provide opportunities for meaningful parent engagement through programs and activities. Schools help parents to promote language development with their child at home, provide interpreters for meetings and school events, offer parent sessions that focus on relevant topics, and engage parents in Parent and Children Together “Sunday Project.”

Silberstein stated that the complex area believes in the power of relationships. It has a foundational theme of support and understands that it must develop relationships with students and parents and help them to improve their educational goals. Silberstein highlighted that the complex area promotes a growth mindset through communication and relationships. It continues to develop positive relations between teachers and students. She noted that relationships are important because relationships help to enhance learning environments over time and result in positive student outcomes, inclusivity, and support. She stated that the complex area wants parents to feel welcomed and included.

Committee Chairperson Cox asked if the complex area’s three Stetson schools are elementary schools. Kim stated that the complex area’s three Stetson schools include one elementary school, one middle school, and one high school.

Committee Chairperson Cox referenced the high schools using advisory periods to target literacy and asked for more detail. Kim explained that a high school has teachers work with a small group of students during advisory periods in the middle of the day. Teachers go over literacy aspects and work with students that need additional assistance. Committee Chairperson Cox asked if only one high school does this. Kim confirmed that only one high school engages in this practice.

Committee Chairperson Cox asked how the complex area is helping special education and general education teachers with inclusive practices. She asked if schools provide teachers with planning time and if schools assign teachers to teach together. Committee Chairperson Cox asked how many inclusion classrooms or subjects to which schools assign teachers. She noted that it is difficult for high schools to integrate inclusive practices and asked how the complex area is supporting high schools. Kim explained that the majority of schools, especially secondary schools, try to keep teachers in the same content area. He noted that there are instances where special education teachers teach in different curriculum areas or share science, reading, and math classrooms. Kim stated that principals review whether or not teacher pairs will be cohesive rather than randomly assigning special education teachers to classrooms. Kim stated that principals afford teachers with planning time outside of the classroom, for example, in the form of an additional preparation period to promote collaboration. Committee Chairperson Cox asked if principals employ the same inclusion practices throughout elementary, middle, and high schools. Kim confirmed that they do.

Committee Chairperson Cox stated that the Board of Education (“Board”) and the Department of Education (“Department”) try different approaches, but gaps still exist. She noted that it is difficult to determine what the Department and Board could do differently to improve achievement gaps. She stated that a gap will always exist, but it needs to improve. She asked how the complex area is addressing the achievement gap. Committee Chairperson Cox asked what the complex area’s philosophy is and how it helps schools to understand that inclusion is necessary in order to address problems. Dilwith stated that the complex area focuses on more than inclusion, including inclusive practices. The complex area emphasizes the importance of including all students, including students receiving special education services and EL students, in inclusion classrooms. She detailed that when she was a principal, her philosophy was that the entire school was responsible for all students. She noted that when she hired teachers, she informed them that the expectation is that they may be part of an inclusion team. Dilwith emphasized the importance of schools servicing all students. She emphasized the importance of leadership messaging expectations and schools making inclusive practices for all students part of the school’s culture.

Committee Chairperson Cox asked if Dilwith would make her expectations clear in her new position. Dilwith confirmed that she would. She stated that the complex area is moving in the right direction and has supports in place. She added that multiple schools are moving in the direction of inclusive practices, and more than three schools are participating with Stetson.

Committee Chairperson Cox asked if any of the complex area’s schools are Title I schools. Dilwith confirmed that there are Title I schools within the complex area.

Committee Chairperson Cox commented on the complex area’s strategies regarding building relationships with parents and asked if the complex area helps parents to understand how they can help their children at home. She asked if the complex area is providing these engagement services through its Title I schools. Dilwith confirmed that it is. She noted that the complex area has held a series of workshops for parents regarding tips on parenting, how to help their children, and how to understand systems. She stated that the complex area partners with schools and provides many opportunities across schools.

Committee Chairperson Cox stated that the federal government is putting an emphasis on EL students, and the Department is working on its services. She stated that she hopes that the complex area is receiving additional resources to help in this area. Committee Chairperson Cox expressed appreciation for the complex area’s inclusive practices but noted that it needs to determine how to change its gap so that it is not as severe as it is now. She noted that the complex area is improving and she does not expect each student to have inclusion in the same exact way. She stated that some students need aides, some need co-teachers, and others need different methods. Committee Chairperson Cox stated that she does not want to see schools only have inclusive art and physical education classes. She stated that she wants to ensure that leadership is sending messaging regarding inclusion and is clear on its expectations.

Silberstein stated that inclusive practices includes all students, including students receiving EL services, students receiving special education services, and students with low proficiency, having access to rigorous content areas. Committee Chairperson Cox noted that the Department and complex areas did not receive funding in past years from the U.S. Department of Education and she is hoping that this will change.

Committee Vice Chairperson Patricia Bergin commended the complex area on its improvement in graduation rates for EL students and asked to what it attributes this. Silberstein explained that educators are more cognizant of what they need to do with best practices for all students and inclusiveness for every type of student. She noted that teachers’ attitudes have changed and communities are coming forth to support schools. She highlighted that she believes the complex area’s graduation rates will increase as time goes on and as individuals are more aware of changes in education. Committee Vice Chairperson Bergin stated that the complex area’s graduation rate might have improved because families have remained in the same complex area for some time. For example, the complex area has a large Micronesian population that has been in the area for years. She stated that these students were in the complex area from elementary school and are now going into high school within the complex area.

Committee Vice Chairperson Bergin noted that a large percentage of students are not in inclusion programs and asked what the complex area’s plan is to move students to inclusion classrooms. Silberstein stated that the complex area is encouraging schools to place students in the least restrictive environment for 80% of the school day or more. She noted that sometimes schools need to pull EL students from the least restrictive environment due to lack of total language. Schools place these students back in the least restrictive environment as soon as possible, integrate them in general education classes, expose them to content and standards, and offer necessary support. Silberstein detailed that 71% of the complex area’s population is Micronesian and 21 schools are Title I schools.

Committee Vice Chairperson Bergin commended the complex area on its different programs and strategies, including Project GLAD. She stated that at-risk children could benefit from these strategies. Committee Vice Chairperson Bergin noted that it would make a difference for students if all teachers were familiar with these strategies.

Committee Chairperson Cox commented that the complex area is not having issues with a shortage of teachers who are certified or licensed or teachers for special education classrooms. She noted that the complex area still needs to work on moving its achievement gap. She expressed appreciation that the complex area is initiating strategies throughout elementary, middle, and high schools because this ensures that children have the same vocabulary and do not have to relearn material once they are at the next grade level. Committee Chairperson Cox noted that common vocabulary is important for children because they do not always make the connections that adults do. She noted that this strategy would make a difference in the future.


V. Adjournment

Board Chairperson Cox adjourned the meeting at 11:36 a.m.