STATE OF HAWAII
BOARD OF EDUCATION
GENERAL BUSINESS MEETING

MINUTES

Queen Liliuokalani Building
1390 Miller Street, Room 404
Honolulu, Hawaii 96813
Thursday, April 18, 2019

PRESENT:
Catherine Payne, Chairperson
Brian De Lima, Esq., Vice Chairperson
Patricia Bergin
Kili Namau‘u
Dwight Takeno
Kenneth Uemura
Bruce Voss, Esq.
Colonel Carolyn Stickell (military representative)
David Texeira (student representative)

EXCUSED:
Margaret Cox
Nolan Kawano

ALSO PRESENT:
Christina Kishimoto, Superintendent
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 1:50 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
Randall PortPuu Panini HuiIV.B. Finance and Infrastructure Committee Report on: (1) Update on the Department of Education’s biennium budget request for Fiscal Years 2019-2021: current status of budget bills in the legislature; (2) Update on Status of Implementation of Act 155 (Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 302A-1151.1, Pilot Program for Lease of Public School Land): February 21, 2019 to April 5, 2019; (3) Update on overview of Department of Education's (“Department”) Office of Information Technology Services and Department's five-year technology planComment
Barry FrancisPuu Panini Hui IV.B. Finance and Infrastructure Committee Report on: (1) Update on the Department of Education’s biennium budget request for Fiscal Years 2019-2021: current status of budget bills in the legislature; (2) Update on Status of Implementation of Act 155 (Hawaii Revised Statutes Section 302A-1151.1, Pilot Program for Lease of Public School Land): February 21, 2019 to April 5, 2019; (3) Update on overview of Department of Education's (“Department”) Office of Information Technology Services and Department's five-year technology planComment

Randall Port, Puu Panini Hui, testified on his concerns regarding Act 155.

Port described concerns regarding optimization, teacher housing, and current property use.
Barry Francis, Puu Panini Hui, testified on his concerns regarding Act 155, including the lack of community participation and engagement, land use issues, teacher housing, and the Board taking action during executive session.

Board Chairperson Payne clarified that the Board takes action during the public portion of the meeting and does not take action during executive session.


III. Approval of Meeting Minutes of April 4, 2019

ACTION: Motion to approve the General Business Meeting minutes of April 4, 2019, and the General Business Meeting Executive Session minutes of April 4, 2019 (De Lima/Takeno). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.


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

Human Resources Committee Chairperson Brian De Lima reported that the committee received a presentation on the workers’ compensation program and asked the Department of Education (“Department”) to present an update in the future on the Department’s efforts to reduce the number of claims, safety issues, and return-to-work programs.

Finance and Infrastructure Committee Chairperson Kenneth Uemura reported that the committee received an updates on the Department’s biennium budget request for Fiscal Years 2019 through 2021, the status of implementation of Act 155, and an overview of the Department’s Office of Information Technology Services and the Department’s five-year technology plan. He noted that the committee asked the Department for a report regarding finalized budget requests once the legislative session ends on May 2, 2019.

Christina Kishimoto, Superintendent, reported that Future Schools Now is an initiative to modernize the Department’s facilities and planning capabilities and noted that the Department announced a strategic effort to modernize and streamline its facilities management plan the previous year. Kishimoto detailed that the Department launched Future Schools Now with three major strategies, including implementing job order contracting to streamline processes and prioritize projects. Kishimoto stated that the Department needed six years to repair Radford High School and to move through the procurement process and construction and building phases. She highlighted that the Department has completed eight school roof projects and repaired Castle High School in less than two months since the implementation of its job order contracting in January. Kishimoto detailed that the Department procured more than $2 million in roof construction in the past three months and is planning to complete additional projects over the summer.

Kishimoto stated that the Department’s second strategy is to expand its online project database. She explained that the Department initially used the database as an internal tool and shared its database with lawmakers and Board members. The Department’s next step is to expand access to the project database for members of the public.

Kishimoto stated that the Department’s third strategy is to complete a data-driven and community-driven facilities master plan guide. She highlighted that the Department received input from community members, teachers, students, and principals and is working on the development of the final draft. Kishimoto stated that more information regarding Future Schools Now and the Department’s strategies is available on the Department’s website.


V. Discussion Items
Kishimoto reviewed the 2020-2030 Strategic Plan planning process and highlighted that the Department is incorporating themes regarding the promise and power of public education. Kishimoto stated that the Department plans to build on recent progress, identify areas in need of improvement, and identify a vision of where the Department wants to be in 2030.

Kishimoto reviewed guiding questions that the Department used when it began the strategic plan planning process in January, including how to engage communities in conversations regarding promises and how to use student-centered language. She stated that the Department’s goal is to make five promises to students about what they can expect from their public education experience. She detailed that the Department designed guiding questions around what the Department values in a PK-12 education experience, how it could measure values, and how it could support students to experience success.

Kishimoto reviewed current foundations that helped the Department focus on what it has learned in the past few years, including the Board and Department Joint Strategic Plan, the Governor’s Blueprint for Education, and community meetings and feedback. She detailed that the Department adopted a learning organization design and is using the concepts of power and promise to review equity and access and speak to communities about the power of public education. She detailed that teaching and learning fall under power and are part of the core of the learning organization and highlighted that the power component also integrates Board Policy E-3, entitled “Nâ Hopena A‘o” (“H”). The power component also uses the flexibility of the Every Student Succeeds Act to identify metrics that reflect what the Department values. Kishimoto detailed that the promise component provides schools with the opportunity and flexibility to design based on students’ passions, goals, and aspirations.

Kishimoto stated that the Department used guiding questions aligned with the concepts of the promise and power of public education and the learning organization design to develop promise themes. She noted that data review, discussion, and input resulted in common themes. Kishimoto detailed that the five key promise themes are Hawaii, including grounding schools in HÂ, empowerment, equity, school design, including portfolio approaches for school models, and innovation. She noted that the Department attached statements to each promise theme and explained that the Department intends to use these statements to have discussions with communities. Kishimoto stated that the Department might revise these statements. She noted that each statement includes sub-themes that are consistent with input that the Department received.

Kishimoto stated that the Department plans to engage stakeholders and community members during the next few months around three questions, including where Hawaii’s education is now, where Hawaii’s education system is going, and what it will take to achieve specific experiences in every public school in Hawaii. The Department’s next steps include finalizing promises, creating benchmarks that are critical to achieve those promises, and revisiting existing and additional metrics. She stated that it is difficult for schools to identify metrics that assess whether a student’s experience is empowering and noted that the Department plans to have discussions regarding how to measure these experiences. She stated that schools typically focus on growth metrics but noted that growth percentages in different areas do not necessarily resonate with students or let students know whether they are ready for their career of choice. Kishimoto stated that the Department is planning a number of community engagements that would include legislators, parents, community members, business leaders, and higher education leaders. Kishimoto stated that the Department could hold a Board retreat regarding data, policy, and implications or separate Board meetings if the Board wants to be involved and engaged in the planning process.

Board Chairperson Payne encouraged Board members to review how the Board could develop or amend policies to support public education.

Board Vice Chairperson De Lima expressed support for the Department’s planning process, outline, and vision. He stated that the Department should not lose sight of the foundations that resulted in improvements, including empowering school leadership and funding the Leadership Institute. Board Vice Chairperson De Lima stated that the top one-third of the student population is succeeding and already has access, voice, and choice. He emphasized the importance of the Department continuing to focus on struggling students who are having difficulty in schools. He noted that students receiving special education services are performing poorly compared to their peers around the country and emphasized the importance of the Department continuing to make efforts to provide these students with access and voice. He stated that students who are struggling need additional engagement. Board Vice Chairperson De Lima stated that the Department needed to focus on absenteeism because teachers cannot teach children who are not attending school. He detailed that the Student Achievement Committee has been focusing on successes and difficulties that complex areas are addressing. Board Vice Chairperson De Lima stated that he wants the Department to move forward but also wants the Department to recognize that it has a long way to go.

Kishimoto emphasized the importance of equity and focusing on students who are struggling, including students who are economically disadvantaged, students who are receiving special education services, students who are receiving English learner services, and students experiencing homelessness. She noted that the Department would be receiving feedback from the community on its language and descriptors. Kishimoto stated that the Department is aware of the achievement gap and the need to provide quality support. She discussed ways in which the Department could bring the Board together in different formats to help.

Board Member Bruce Voss asked what the role of teachers is in school design and how teachers would be able to make changes to curriculum and core values in schools. Kishimoto stated that school design and empowerment focus on how to empower key constituents who are internal designers, teacher leadership, and teacher voice. She noted that from the student perspective, school design occurs because teachers have voice and are strong leaders.

Board Member Voss commented that teachers know best regarding student needs. He stated that he wants the Department to solicit feedback from teachers regarding their experiences and what they think students want as the Department continues the planning process.

Board Chairperson Payne described an event she attended where teachers presented with students. She stated that teachers expressed that it was important for them to have principals understand their own personal vision. Board Chairperson Payne emphasized that leaders in schools that allow teachers to take risks are key to success.

Board Vice Chairperson De Lima emphasized the importance of teachers and principals feeling valued. He commented that the Department modernizing and improving its technology is key to a supportive infrastructure. Kishimoto described resources that the Department is providing to schools, including toolkits where schools could document conditions and assumptions for success, and highlighted the importance of modernized systems and technology.

Student Representative David Texeira stated that promise statements are currently just statements and are not fulfilled promises until there are results. He stated that the Department could prove promises by showing transparent results. Student Representative Texeira stated that he would like to see promise goals from each school and hear feedback from schools on the Department’s statements.

Stephen Schatz, Hawaiʻi P-20 Partnerships for Education (“Hawaiʻi P-20”) Executive Director, reviewed Hawaiʻi P-20’s college and career readiness indicators. He stated that more students are graduating high school on time, and graduation rates continue to climb. Schatz highlighted that the graduation rate improved from 83% to 84% between School Year (“SY”) 2015-2016 and SY 2017-2018. He noted that the Board changed high school graduation requirements and requirements became more rigorous as of 2016. He stated that more students are taking advanced coursework, including Advanced Placement (“AP”) courses and dual credit, such as Early College or Running Start courses. Schatz highlighted that the AP exam passage rate is improving as AP course taking is improving. Schatz stated that more graduating seniors are earning honors certificates. He noted that students receiving various kinds of honors increased from 16% to 18%. Schatz noted that students receive honors certificates based on sequences of courses and particular grade requirements. He highlighted that more students are graduating with higher levels of competence, grades, and grade point averages. He noted that colleges review grade point averages in addition to test scores as indications of future success.

Schatz reviewed ACT benchmarks and noted that the percentage of high school completers who met the ACT college readiness benchmarks has significantly improved. However, the percentage of high school completers who met the ACT math and science benchmarks has remained flat. Schatz reviewed college-going rates, including two-year college-going rates and four-year college-going rates. He noted that Hawaiʻi P-20’s data regarding college-going rates is from the National Student Clearinghouse and includes universities and trade and technical schools. Schatz stated that between 2009 and 2018, the overall number of students attending college, graduating from school, and attending four-year universities increased. He detailed that most students who attend two-year colleges in Hawaii attend one of Hawaii’s community colleges.

Schatz reviewed the percentage of students enrolling in college-level English and math courses. He highlighted that the percentage of students enrolling in college-level English courses has increased and noted that schools offering Early College courses in English 100 and Math 100 to students is helpful. Schatz explained that the University of Hawaii revised its placement policy between 2015 and 2016 and now allows multiple measures for placement, such as grade point average, grades, and test scores. He noted that policy changes might influence trends. He stated that students who the University of Hawaii placed using multiple measures are performing just as well as students who the University of Hawaii placed under the previous model. Schatz stated that more high school completers are enrolling in college-level math courses at the University of Hawaii. He detailed that about one third of students who attend community colleges do not enroll in these courses and noted that data shows that earlier engagement and support in high school could help students succeed as they progress in the educational pipeline.

Schatz reviewed spotlight schools, including Honokaa High School, Kaiser High School, McKinley High School, Waiakea High School, Kapaa High School, and King Kekaulike High School. He summarized that more students are attending college, more high school completers are taking AP exams and earning honors certificates, and more students are enrolling in college-level math and English courses. Schatz reviewed Hawaii’s college and career readiness indicators (“CCRI”) dashboard and stated that CCRI reports, subgroup performance, and data are available on the dashboard.

Schatz reviewed college-going rates and persistence, which measures whether students remain in college year after year. He noted that Board members previously asked if Hawaiʻi P-20 could track this data and highlighted that it now can. He detailed that the data reviews postsecondary completion six years after high school. Schatz noted that the denominator is the total number of completers. He detailed that for the Class of 2011, 31% earned a degree or certificate. Schatz noted that this is 31% of the Class of 2011 rather than 31% of students who attended college. Schatz emphasized the importance of schools reviewing the larger picture rather than one data point and highlighted that schools are becoming interested in reviewing data across the educational pipeline.

Board Chairperson Payne commented that the data has become more specific and thus more valuable over the years.

Board Member Voss commented on ACT scores and noted that while English scores are improving, math and science scores remain stagnant. Schatz explained that math and science scores are difficult to move. He noted that some districts have improved every other data point, but their math and science scores continue to plateau. He stated that the educational community would need to review other metrics related to math and science—such as Smarter Balanced Assessment (“SBA”) trends, grades, and college placement—in order to understand ACT test scores and identify the schools that need to focus on math.

Board Member Voss commented that ACT test scores are a good metric because students voluntarily take the ACT unlike the SBA, which is mandatory. Schatz detailed that presently 86% of high school juniors take the ACT.

Board Member Voss asked how the Department could move forward and improve scores. Kishimoto stated that the Department plans to engage students and teachers in math challenges, competitions, and discussions during the Department’s Innovative Teachers Engage and Collaborate (“iTEaCH”) conference, and the Department then plans to convene a taskforce to review math performance. She stated that teacher preparation, principal preparation, and student engagement are key to improvement. She stated that the Department has observed that math is a challenge across various assessments and plans to bring together an integrated taskforce, including teachers and charter schools, to help address issues.

Student Representative Texeira stated that schools do not necessarily lack a strong foundation in math but might need to teach students techniques regarding how to complete the math portion of the ACT. He noted that students need to answer 65 questions in 45 minutes, and while students might understand the questions, they might be uncomfortable with the speed of the test.


VI. Executive Session
This portion of the meeting was closed under Section 92-4 and Section 92-5(a)(4), Hawaii Revised Statutes.
ACTION: Motion to move into executive session to consult with the Board’s attorney on the matter described on the agenda (De Lima/Takeno). The motion carried unanimously with all members present voting aye.

The meeting recessed at 2:56 p.m. and reconvened at 3:24 p.m.

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


VII. Adjournment

Board Chairperson Payne adjourned the meeting at 3:25 p.m.