STATE OF HAWAII
BOARD OF EDUCATION
GENERAL BUSINESS MEETING

MINUTES

Queen Liliuokalani Building
1390 Miller Street, Room 404
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Thursday, October 3, 2019

PRESENT:
Catherine Payne, Chairperson
Kaimana Barcarse
Nolan Kawano
Kili Namauʻu
Dwight Takeno
Kenneth Uemura
Bruce Voss, Esq.
Daniella White (student representative)
Captain Lyn Hammer (military representative)

EXCUSED:
Brian De Lima, Esq., Vice Chairperson
Margaret Cox

ALSO PRESENT:
Christina Kishimoto, Superintendent
Donna Lum Kagawa, Assistant Superintendent, Office of Curriculum and Instructional Design
Teri Ushijima, Ed.D, Director, Assessment and Accountability Branch, Office of Strategy, Innovation and Performance
Glen Nochi, Ph.D, Evaluation Specialist, Accountability Section, Assessment and Accountability Branch, Office of Strategy, Innovation and Performance
Zachary Oliver, Ed.D, Evaluation Specialist, Accountability Section, Office of Strategy, Innovation and Performance
Alison Kunishige, Executive Director
Kenyon Tam, Board Analyst
Regina Pascua, Board Private Secretary
Irina Dana, Secretary




I. Call to Order

The Board of Education (“Board”) General Business Meeting was called to order by Board Chairperson Catherine Payne at 1:30 p.m.


II. Public Testimony on Board of Education (“Board”) Agenda Items

Board Chairperson Payne called for public testimony. The following people provided oral testimony.

Name
Organization
Agenda Item
Position
Cheri NakamuraEquity in Education AdvocatesIV.C. Superintendent’s Report: (1) update on school visits; (2) update on the development of a 10-year Board of Education and Department of Education Strategic Plan, The Power and Promise of Public Education: Focus on Title IX training update
V.B. Presentation on school performance results for the 2018-2019 School Year		Comment

Cheri Nakamura, representing a group of equity in education advocates, testified on the Department of Education’s (“Department”) school performance results for the 2018-2019 school year. Nakamura expressed concern that school performance has remained flat. She asked the Department to explain how it plans to address shortfalls in the new 2020-2030 Strategic Plan. Nakamura asked the Department to provide subgroup data for all indicators, address subgroup performance, and explain whether high-impact strategies affect outcomes at its upcoming data retreat.

Written testimony was also received and provided to the Board members. The following is a listing of the people that submitted written testimony before the testimony deadline.

Name
Organization
Agenda Item
Position
Martha Guinan, Patricia Halagao, Gavin Thornton, Cheri Nakamura, Paula Adams, David Miyashiro, William “Pila” Wilson, Deborah ZysmanEquity in Education Advocates, Special Education Advisory Council, Hawaiʻi Appleseed, HEʻE Coalition, Hawaiʻi Afterschool Alliance, HawaiiKidsCAN, Hawaiʻi Children’s Action NetworkIV.C. Superintendent’s Report: (1) update on school visits; (2) update on the development of a 10-year Board of Education and Department of Education Strategic Plan, The Power and Promise of Public Education: Focus on Title IX training update
V.B. Presentation on school performance results for the 2018-2019 School Year		Comment


III. Approval of Meeting Minutes of September 19, 2019

Note: Board Chairperson Payne took this agenda item after agenda item V.A, entitled “Presentation on Audit of the Department of Education’s Administration of School Impact Fees (Report No. 19-13).”

ACTION: Motion to approve the General Business Meeting minutes of September 19, 2019 (Barcarse/Takeno). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.


IV. Reports of Board Committees, Board Members, and Superintendent

Finance and Infrastructure Committee Chairperson Kenneth Uemura reported that the committee received an update on the working group tasked with ensuring Board policies and structures enable the Department to complete all facilities projects at its schools with the greatest socioeconomic and academic needs as determined by an equity priority order. He stated that he tasked Committee Vice Chairperson Bruce Voss with revising the Department’s draft policy and the Department with presenting a draft repair and maintenance priority list and Capital Improvement Project (“CIP”) execution criteria. Committee Chairperson Uemura stated that the committee took action on the Hawaii State Public Library System’s (“HSPLS”) supplemental budget for the 2020-2021 fiscal year, the Department’s supplemental operating budget for the 2020-2021 fiscal year, and the Department’s supplemental CIP budget for the 2020-2021 fiscal year.


Board Chairperson Payne reported that she attend the “Improve Our School” annual meeting hosted by Parents for Public Schools Hawaiʻi (“Parents for Public Schools”). The event focused on sharing views, getting updated on current events, hearing about Parents for Public School’s work and accomplishments during the past year, and determining next steps for the upcoming year. She highlighted that she was the keynote speaker at the event and presented on the Department’s five promises and education issues parents could support. Board Chairperson Payne stated that Parents for Public School’s goal for the upcoming year is to help parents get involved with School Community Councils (“SCC”). She highlighted that she discussed the Board’s efforts at the Legislature and the need to improve recruitment and retention with attendees.


Christina Kishimoto, Superintendent, reported that the U.S. Department of Education named Hickam, Laie and, Waialua elementary schools as 2019 National Blue Ribbon Schools. Kishimoto highlighted that the Department completed its first round of Title IX training and noted that the Legislature allocated targeted funding for training. She highlighted that equity specialists and other administrators received intensive training and certification around how to conduct sexual harassment and misconduct investigations. Kishimoto stated that the Department procured services over the summer to provide employees, including assistant superintendents and complex area superintendents, with training on the athletics provision of Title IX. She stated that the Department’s next step is to create an electronic process to document investigations and reports. The Department is also working with the Legislature to identify funding to create training modules for parents regarding student risk areas.


V. Discussion Items
Note: Board Chairperson Payne took this agenda item after agenda item II, entitled “Public Testimony on Board of Education (“Board”) Agenda Items.”

Les Kondo, State Auditor, Office of the Auditor, introduced Chuck Narikiyo, Supervisor, Office of the Auditor. Kondo reviewed the audit that the Office of the Auditor initiated related to the Department’s administration of school impact fees.

Kondo stated that the Office of the Auditor audited the Department’s implementation of school impact fees. The purpose of the audit is to help the Department and Board understand the program and statute and suggest recommendations the Department could implement to improve the school impact fee program. Kondo stated that the purpose of school impact fees is to require new residential developments to offset the cost of new public schools or additional classrooms needed to serve the new developments.

Kondo reviewed the objectives of the audit. He stated that auditors determined how the Department assesses the need for additional classroom capacity within the next 25 years and decides to recommend the Board designate a school impact district, described the Department’s process to calculate and update fees, evaluated the Department’s assessment and collection of school impact fees, and assessed whether the Department is adequately accounting for school impact fee money. He noted that auditors found that the impact fee program is not a high priority for the Department. Auditors also found that the Department has limited resources and supervision to implement the program.

Kondo reviewed the auditors’ recommendations. He stated that the intent is to make recommendations that are meaningful and could help the Department improve its implementation of statute. Kondo stated that the first recommendation is for the Department to undertake a comprehensive evaluation of its implementation, including assessing staffing and other resource needs. He noted that the Department delegated implementation of the program to a sole land use planner in Planning Unit II. He stated that the Department does not have any documented, written policies, procedures, or administrative rules. The land use planner determines when the Department should present districts to the Board and the size of districts.

Kondo stated that auditors found that the Department might not be properly following statute and recommend that the Department determine whether it should seek a legislative amendment. He noted that the Department is using blended appraised values of multiple parcels of land and rates but statute requires the Department to use the appraised value of land it proposes for specific school sites in its calculation of the fee. Kondo noted that statute also requires the Department to use an appraiser who is licensed and selected and paid for by the developer to determine the value of the land but the Department is not doing this. The Office of the Auditor recommends that the Department reassess its implementation of statute, compliance, and the expressed language of statute.

Kondo stated that the auditors’ second recommendation is for the Department to obtain an Attorney General opinion regarding the meaning of “nexus” in the context of school impact fees. He expressed concern regarding the size of impact fee districts and developments being considered.

Kondo detailed that the Board has designated five impact fee districts since 2010. The Board designated the West Hawaii impact fee district in 2020, followed by Central Maui, Leeward Oahu, and the Kalihi to Ala Moana impact fee district. He noted that the Leeward Oahu District is comprised of five high school complexes. Kondo explained that statute requires new residential developers to pay impact fees and the Department can use these fees within any area of the designated impact fee district. He detailed that the Department can use fees from development within one complex in other complexes because the impact fee district includes five complexes. Kondo stated that the purpose of statute is to require developers to contribute to new classrooms and schools that are required as a result of development. He recommended that the Department consult with the Attorney General whether this is sufficient nexus. He suggested that the Department review the purpose of the statute and reassess whether it achieves the purpose by creating large impact fee districts. Kondo expressed concern regarding the size of the Kalihi to Ala Moana impact fee district. He noted that there are very different demographics within this designation but developers in one area must pay the same fee as developers in another area. Kondo expressed concern regarding the arbitrary nature of the Department’s designation. He stated that the Department’s boundaries do not include the entire school complex within the impact fee district. He noted that students in various areas would attend the same high school but not all of them would be required to pay impact fees. He stated that the Department determined the boundaries based on elementary school service areas but expressed concern regarding the fairness of the situation. He suggested that the Department reassess its application of the statute.

Kondo recommended that the Department obtain an Attorney General opinion on the stage in the development process a proposed residential development can be included in the Department’s consideration of classroom capacity requirements. He referenced the Kalihi to Ala Moana impact fee district and noted that the Department is considering development along the proposed rail line in its calculations, analysis, and recommendations to the Board. He noted that the Department’s reliance upon transit oriented development is too speculative because there are currently no developers or concrete plans. He detailed that the City and County of Honolulu is determining whether it is necessary to make infrastructure improvements and noted that these improvements are projected to cost $1 billion. He stated that developers might pay impact fees for capacity that will not be needed for 20 or 25 years. He suggested that the Department consult with the Attorney General regarding the intent of the impact fee statute.

Kondo expressed concern regarding the gap between the designation of school impact districts and assessments of impact fees. He stated that the Department has delayed collection until counties implement a collection process which leads to a gap between designation and collection. He stated that the statute is clear and directs collection of impact fees upon designation. He noted that gaps between designation and collection have varied due to no set timeframes or deadlines. He detailed that the Board designated the Kalihi to Ala Moana district on May 23, 2017 but the Department began assessing and collecting impact fees 493 days later on October 1, 2018. Kondo stated that developers pulled roughly 32 building permits for multiple residential units during this gap period and noted that the Department lost out on $10.7 million by not assessing the fee upon designation.

Kondo stated that auditors’ recommend that the Department seek Attorney General guidance regarding how to collect impact fees. He detailed that the Board designated the West Hawaii impact district in April 2010 and the Department suspended implementation after the mayor did not cooperate rather than take additional action. He noted that the Department did not collect any impact fees even though the Department’s projection of the need for a new school did not change. He stated that statute requires counties to cooperate and delay issuing building permits until the Department confirms that applicants satisfied the impact fee requirement. He noted that statute requires developers to pay the fee and counties do not have to participate for the Department to assess and collect impact fees.

Kondo stated that auditors’ recommend that the Department create written policies and procedures. He noted that the Department currently has no policies or procedures in place and the land use planner uses her personal judgment to make decisions. Kondo emphasized that clear and consistent written policies and procedures are necessary for government programs to operate efficiently and effectively and for consistent and uniform application of the law. He stated that the Department bases many aspects of the impact fee law on judgement. Kondo stated that buyers of units pay impact fees during the closing process and the Department does not document instances of payment or application. Kondo emphasized that written policies and procedures serve as a control and help to create a process in which management can ensure that implementation occurs as intended. He added that written policies and procedures also provide auditors, internal auditors, and other organizations with a roadmap to understand whether implementation aligns with policies and procedures. He stated that government agencies are accountable for funding and written procedures ensure accountability.

Kondo detailed that the Department initially proposed an impact fee of $9,374 per unit for the Kalihi to Ala Moana impact fee district. The Department reduced its fee to $5,858 after discussions with the Board regarding vertical schools and the building of schools in vacant lots. The Department further adjusted its fee to $3,864 after the Board adopted a policy with exceptions for urban schools. He stated that it is unclear how the Department determined these fees because there are no written policies and procedures. He added that it would be helpful for the Board to adopt policies regarding how the Department could spend funds because there is no criteria regarding how the Department could use collections. He noted that the Department has collected $5.3 million in impact fees and it costs $80 million to build a new school. He stated that the Board and Department should determine how to spend this money and document determinations in written policies and procedures.

Kondo stated that auditors recommend that the Department promulgate administrative rules. He explained that an administrative rule is a pronouncement of an agency’s interpretation of statute. He detailed that statutes provide a general framework for how the Legislature intends for programs to work and be implemented but administrative rules provide additional details. Kondo explained that administrative rules are outward facing and policies and procedures help staff understand how to implement a program. Kondo emphasized that administrative rules could help counties, developers, and members of the public understand the program, including the process to provide the Department with information regarding building permits, collection of impact fees, and so forth. He suggested that administrative rules could help the public understand how the Department interprets statute and intends to implement statute.

Board Member Bruce Voss detailed the Department’s lack of resources, limited expertise, and priorities. He asked if the impact fee program should remain with the Department or be transferred to another agency. Kondo stated that he does not know whether the program should remain with the Department or be transferred. Board Member Voss emphasized that the Department’s mission is to educate children. He asked if the Legislature should assign the impact fee program to a different agency. Kondo stated that the Department would need to address this question to the Legislature. He stated that the Department would need to review its implementation and resources and seek additional resources if the program were to stay within the Department’s jurisdiction.

Board Member Voss asked whether the Office of the Auditor would provide its opinion to the Legislature on whether the Legislature should assign the impact fee program to a different agency. Kondo stated that the Office of the Auditor would not weigh in because the audit did not review whether the Department has the expertise to administer and implement the impact fee program. He stated that auditors’ determined that the Department was not prioritizing the impact fee program, implementing the program incorrectly, and delegating the program to one individual who was unsupervised and attempting implementation without administrative rules, policies, or procedures. He stated that auditors did not assess whether individuals within the Department have the necessary skills to correctly administer and implement the impact fee law. He stated that auditors’ assessed what is currently occurring and determined that the Department is doing a poor job of administration and implementation.

Board Member Kawano asked about funding to build schools. Kondo detailed that the Department has not expended the $5.3 million in impact fee collections. He noted that the Department has expended some fair share funds that it collected. Board Member Kawano asked if the Department expended fair share funds to build schools. Kondo detailed that the Department expended funds to improve classrooms and covered school construction shortfalls.

Board Member Kawano commented that the Department failed to collect $10 million due to gaps between designation and collection but it costs $80 million to build a school. He asked about the purpose of the statute and stated that the statute is not achieving the purpose for which the Legislature intended. He stated that the program does not work and is not fulfilling its intent to build schools in areas of need. He commented that perhaps the Legislature should repeal the statute. Kondo stated that he is unsure whether the intent of statute is to use impact fees to cover the entire cost of new school construction or additional classroom capacity required because of residential development. He stated that the Legislature created a means for the Department to fund parts of construction. Kondo detailed that the statute is based primarily on a working group study conducted in 2007. The working group recommended that developers of new residential construction contribute ten percent of the cost of constructing a school. He stated that the Board and Department would need to determine whether amendments are necessary and whether to ask the Legislature for amendments.


Teri Ushijima, Director, Assessment and Accountability Branch, Office of Strategy, Innovation and Performance, reviewed the Department’s school performance results for the 2018-2019 school year. She detailed that the Strive HI system reports school and student performance indicators that comprise the first ten of the 14 statewide student success indicators of the Board and Department Joint Strategic Plan. She noted that there are indicators to reflect unique stages of the grade spans but most measures are applicable across grades. The Department uses some measures for federal accountability under the Every Student Succeeds Act. In the Strive HI school reports, schools have the option of reporting additional local measures around their school design that are important to their school communities. Ushijima noted that full reports are available on the Department’s website.

Ushijima reviewed the Department’s three guiding questions, including what student performance data says, how student performance data is predictive of college and career readiness, and how the Department is continuing to redefine student success and support all students.

Ushijima reviewed academic performance and three-year trends in proficiency using state averages by subject, including English language arts (“ELA”), math, and science. She detailed that states assess these three subject areas for academic achievement. Ushijima noted that ELA proficiency rates have remained steady. She explained that the Department is progressing to full implementation of Next Generation Science Standards which might affect data for science.

Ushijima reviewed the achievement gap and an analysis of three-year trends in academic performance, including side-by-side high need and non-high need proficiency rates. She stated that there is a performance differential between high need and non-high need students in ELA and math. Ushijima compared these rates to state averages.

Ushijima reviewed the achievement gap and an analysis of three-year trends for high needs subgroups, including students who are economically disadvantaged, English learners, and students receiving special education services. She emphasized that the Department is committed to equity and noted the importance of subgroup data and measures. Ushijima reviewed the percentage rates for each group and noted that the data shows that an achievement gap exists. She highlighted that the Department’s inclusion rate is 44% which is an increase of three points from the previous year and an increase of seven points from baseline data in 2016. Ushijima emphasized that the Department would continue to focus on these areas. She stated that the Department would need to determine how to exponentially increase the achievement of all subgroups to close the achievement gap.

Ushijima reviewed chronic absenteeism rates and school climate surveys, including a side-by-side analysis of the school environment. She noted that the Department defines chronic absenteeism as 15 or more absences. She noted that the state average is 15%, 13% for elementary schools, 14% for middle schools, and 19% for high schools. She highlighted that the Department is reviewing and addressing chronic absenteeism rates. Complex Area Superintendents and other administrators are working together to develop strategies to reduce chronic absenteeism.

Donna Lum Kagawa, Assistant Superintendent, Office of Curriculum and Instructional Design, reviewed college and career readiness, including indicators on Advanced Placement (“AP”) participation and dual credit. She stated that the central focus of instructional design is to ensure students’ readiness for college and careers. She noted that preliminary data indicates that there is an increase in the number of students who take AP courses. She stated that there have been positive trends and a steady incremental trajectory. Kagawa highlighted that students who score a “3” or higher on AP exams has increased by four percent which means that more students are receiving college credits.

Kagawa reviewed Career Technical Education (“CTE”) data, including CTE concentrators, graduation trends, and college-going rates. She stated that CTE rates have increased over the last three years and the Department met its goal of 50% participation by 2020. She highlighted that 56% of students participated in the 2018-2019 school year. Kagawa reviewed graduation trends and noted that the data measure is lagging and is from 2018. She emphasized that the Department has seen a significant increase in graduation rates over the last five years. Kagawa noted that college-going rates have remained steady at 55%.

Kagawa reviewed how to redefine student success and support for all students. She stated that the Department is focusing on how to refine approaches and deliver math instruction to narrow the achievement gap and attain results for all students. She detailed the Department’s tri-level learning organization, curriculum, instruction, and design. She emphasized the importance of schools moving away from hard copies and prescribed material to dynamic opportunities. She stated that the Department is emphasizing student voice, viewing students as leaders, shifting to the integration of insightful discourse, encouraging teacher collaboration, and initiating a math taskforce to identify actions, short-term goals, and systemic long-term recommendations. She noted that the Department is also focusing on building core school designs and implementing tier instruction, intervention, and support.

Kagawa reviewed science transitions. She stated that the Department is shifting science practices and instruction and moving from a fragmented curriculum to a curriculum that embeds social issues and needs of communities. The Department is making learning interesting for students through discourse and virtual representation. She emphasized that science is foundational and contributes to students’ abilities to be competitive and innovative.

Ushijima reviewed the Department’s next steps. She stated that the Department is using the gap analysis to inform targeted supports; ensuring alignment between results, strategies, and implementation; and building and strengthening capacity to support complexes and schools. Ushijima stated that the Department is hosting a Board Data Retreat on November 7, 2019 to further discuss academic performance and data.

Board Member Uemura commented that it is unclear what the Department is attempting to portray through its presentation. He stated that it is unclear whether students are performing well or poorly. He stated that he would like to see the Department compare school year results to strategic goals and national averages. Board Member Uemura stated that the Department did not provide enough information and analysis for the Board to interpret the results.

Ushijima stated that the Department compared its rates for ELA, math, and science to states that have already released results. She stated that the Department is not on the high end or the low end but is in the middle. Ushijima noted that progress varies across grade levels and is dependent on grade levels. She explained that the Department presented a larger snapshot but the detailed Strive HI report, which includes all indicators, is available on the Department’s website. She detailed that the Department’s ELA proficiency rates remained steady for third grade and sixth grade but is slightly lower for eighth and eleventh grades. There were slight increases for fourth and fifth grade. She stated that results and performance vary across subjects. Ushijima stated that the Department has been making steady progress.

Board Member Uemura stated that he would like the Department to provide concise information and presentations. He noted that Ushijima’s information is not available in the Board’s materials. He stated that the Department is presenting information in a vacuum so the Board cannot determine how students are performing. He stated that the Department should provide detailed information at its data retreat.

Kishimoto explained that the Department was unable to provide all of the data due to embargos and timeframes. She stated that the Department reviewed limited data and year-to-year performance but would provide detailed data regarding subgroups and Smarter Balanced Assessment (“SBA”) at the Department’s data retreat.

Board Member Kawano asked about students who are proficient and students who are not proficient in various subjects. Ushijima stated that Board Member Kawano is referring to third grade literacy rates. She explained that the Department includes students who are approaching proficiency and students who are meeting proficiency. She noted that there was a slight increase this year. Board Member Kawano stated that he would like disaggregated data for this measure at the Department’s data retreat, including students who meet proficiency rates and students who are approaching proficiency rates.

Glen Nochi, Evaluation Specialist, Accountability Section, Assessment and Accountability Branch, Office of Strategy, Innovation and Performance, explained that the Department reports proficiency rates for ELA, math, and science for Strive HI and reports whether students meet standards for SBA. He detailed that the Department has four proficiency levels, including “does not meet,” “meets,” and “exceeds.” He stated that the Department provides specific data for its reports but could disaggregate data.
Board Member Kawano asked how many students pass AP tests with a score of “3”. Kagawa stated that there has been an increase in students passing with a score of “3”, test taking, and proficiency. She stated that the Department could provide Board Member Kawano with this data. Board Member Kawano asked how many students out of 9,800 received a score of “3” on an AP exam. Ushijima stated that 4,745 students received a score of “3” or higher in the 2018-2019 school year and 4,560 students received a score of “3” or higher in the 2017-2018 school year. She stated that the 2016 baseline was 3,634. Committee Member Kawano commented that half of the students passed their AP exam in the 2018-2019 school year.

Board Chairperson Payne stated that she is also interested in reviewing this data during the Department’s data retreat. She stated that she would like the Department to provide information regarding how many students achieved college credit through early admission programs, dual credit courses, and other higher education initiatives.

Military Representative Captain Lyn Hammer asked about the Department’s assessment of school climate. She noted that 74% of students reported that they feel positive about their school and stated that the Department’s data lacks interpretation. She stated that there appears to be room for improvement and noted that surveys typically cover a variety of subjects. She stated that she would like the Department to provide disaggregated data for school climate at its data retreat so that the Board could review areas in need of improvement and promising practices.

Ushijima explained that the Department administered the Tripod survey to students for the last two years. The survey includes climate of instruction, which asks about students’ perception of teacher behavior, instruction, and safety and relationships, which asks about teasing and bullying. She stated that the Department previously administered the School Quality Survey. This current school year the Department plans to administer the Panorama survey which will measure teacher-student relationships, perceptions, whether students feel valued, safety, and so forth. She explained that this year is the baseline year.

Board Member Voss commented that the SBA rates are disappointing and noted that other states performed similarly to the Department, including Oregon, Delaware, and Connecticut. He stated that other states continue to struggle and asked whether the SBA is an accurate, credible, and reliable measure of proficiency. Kishimoto explained that the Department is reviewing its current work and measures that capture a student’s experience and college and career pathways. She explained that state assessments measure discrete skills in ELA, math, and science. She highlighted that the Department’s new science standards are interdisciplinary and reviewed ways in which students apply science using engineering concepts, ethics, and values. She stated that it is important for proficiency rates to increase but it is equally importance for students to be able to apply what they learn.

Board Member Voss asked when the Board should expect to see test scores reflect instructional practices and shifts in practices and approaches. Kishimoto emphasized the importance of whether students’ experience education positively and how their educational experience translates to persistence in college, careers, and communities. She stated that these areas align with academy designs, exposure to career pathways, college pathways, and critical measures. Kishimoto detailed that third grade literacy proficiency is critical because it would affect students in fourth grade through eighth grade when they would need to apply literacy skills to access content areas. Kishimoto stated that state assessments present one measure but the Department has many critical measures to review performance. Kagawa stated that the Department is not satisfied with current results and has to work harder as a system. She stated that the Department is integrating multi-disciplinary approaches, targeting its focus, and structuring a math taskforce.

Board Member Kawano stated that half of the student body is passing SBA tests and attending college but he would like the Department to focus on students who are not passing exams, not enrolling in AP classes, and not attending college. He stated that he would like the Department to provide information regarding the characteristics of these two groups of students at its data retreat, including measures for rural schools, geography, students who are disadvantaged, and chronic absenteeism. He stated that the Department needed to focus on success differently and review what data it might need that it does not currently have. Ushijima stated that the Department’s focus is on all students.

Board Member Uemura asked about college graduation rates. Kishimoto confirmed that the Department is able to track persistence data for college graduation through the National Clearinghouse.

Board Chairperson Payne commented that the Department’s math taskforce should review identified practices that do not appear to be working, targeted interventions, and focused strategies. She stated that the Department implements new efforts frequently, all of which do not always work, and should continue trying new initiatives to determine which ones do. She stated that investments in new initiatives do not always produce results and the Department would need to review these different areas.

Board Member Kili Namauʻu asked about connections between third grade reading proficiency and early childhood education. She stated that the Department has adjusted kindergarten start times for children and asked if the Department is tracking the results of its changes. She stated that children are entering the Department’s system with more maturity and would like to know if there are connections between the age in which a student enters kindergarten and third grade proficiency. Board Member Namauʻu described her personal experience as an early childhood educator and asked the Department to review whether it could track this data. Ushijima confirmed that the Department would review whether it is possible to review this data.

Board Member Namauʻu emphasized the importance of early childhood education and stated that increasing early childhood education rates might help to close the achievement gap. She stated that the Department should review opportunities to accommodate students with learning disabilities at lower grade levels and determine whether this focus could reduce the achievement gap.


VI. *Public Testimony on Board Agenda Items

Board Chairperson Payne called for public testimony. There was no public testimony at this time.


VII. Action Items

ACTION: Motion to approve the Hawaii State Public Library System’s supplemental budget for Fiscal Year 2020-2021 as described in the Hawaii State Public Library System’s memorandum dated October 3, 2019 (Finance and Infrastructure Committee/no second required). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.

ACTION: Motion to approve the Department’s supplemental operating budget request for Fiscal Year 2020-2021 as described in the Department’s memorandum dated October 3, 2019 (Finance and Infrastructure Committee/no second required). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.

ACTION: Motion to approve the Department’s supplemental capital improvement projects budget for Fiscal Year 2020-2021 as described in the Department’s memorandum dated October 3, 2019 (Finance and Infrastructure Committee/no second required). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.

Board Chairperson Payne stated that the 2019 Legislative Session ad hoc committee did valuable work by building relationships with legislators and having policy conversations with the Legislature as the Board’s co-policy making counterpart. She recommended that the Board form a 2020 Legislative ad hoc committee to continue the Board’s legislative efforts. Board Chairperson Payne suggested that Board Members Namauʻu, Dwight Takeno, and Voss serve as 2020 Legislative Ad Hoc Committee Members and she serve as 2020 Legislative Ad Hoc Committee Chairperson.

ACTION: Motion to approve the assignment of Board Chairperson Payne and Board Members Kili Namauʻu, Dwight Takeno, and Bruce Voss to a permitted interaction group formed pursuant to Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 92-2.5(b)(2), entitled “Permitted Interactions of Members” to present, discuss, or negotiate the policy positions the Board adopted at its September 19, 2019 General Business Meeting and any new or amended policy positions the Board adopts for the 2020 Legislative Session with the authority described in Board Chairperson Payne’s memorandum dated October 3, 2019 through and until July 31, 2020 (Voss/Barcarse). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.

Board Chairperson Payne stated that delegate assembly of the National Association of State Boards of Education (“NASBE”) will convene during NASBE’s annual conference in Omaha, Nebraska on October 19, 2019. The delegate assembly will consider proposed revisions to NASBE’s Public Education Positions as presented by its Public Education Positions Committee.

Board Chairperson Payne stated that at its September 5, 2019 general business meeting, the Board designated her as the Board’s voting delegate and Board Member Namauʻu as the alternate delegate to represent Hawaiʻi and vote at the delegate assembly, pursuant to NASBE’s by-laws. Board Chairperson Payne stated that the Board should review the proposed changes that she could vote in accordance with the wishes of the Board.

Board Member Voss asked if NASBE’s policy positions align with the Board’s policies. Board Chairperson Payne stated that she does not believe the Board’s policies conflict with NASBE’s positions although the Board has not thoroughly analyzed its policies in the recent past. She suggested that the Board review its policies and noted that she would report back to the Board after attending NASBE’s annual conference.

ACTION: Motion to approve the proposed revisions to NASBE’s Public Education Positions as shown in Exhibit B of Board Chairperson Payne’s memorandum dated October 3, 2019 (Voss/Takeno). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.


VIII. Adjournment

Board Chairperson Payne adjourned the meeting at 3:08 p.m.