 |
|
State Board and Department of Education
School
Funding
A good portion of the last two State Board of Education meeting
was devoted to the current and future education budget picture.
The Board heard school funding alarms from several quarters suggesting
that many public school districts, including the well- publicized
Detroit story, are in a fiscal crisis. Schools have had a flat
per pupil allowance for the last 3 years because of the continuing
decline in state revenues. In the meantime, they have experienced
escalating cost in purchased services, primary health care, pensions,
and minimal inflation-related salary increases. Tom Clay, Director
of state affairs for the Citizens Research Council of Michigan,
said nearly 15 percent of school payroll went toward health and
pension costs this year and that this cost is projected to increase
by 20 percent by 2008.
Tom
Watkins, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, in a memorandum
to the State Board of Education entitled, “Structural Issues
Surrounding Michigan School Funding in the 21st Century”,
called for an introspective look at Michigan’s public school
system “that may entail consolidations, joint operating
agreements, and drastically modified business processes.”
Watkins is proposing that the State Board request a meeting with
Governor Jennifer Granholm and bi-partisan legislative leaders
to crate a unified action plan; a bi-partisan appointed commission
to review current school district boundaries, sizes and costs
and costs and to identify administrative inefficiencies and optimize
allocations of resources; and that the Legislature and the Governor
be asked for funding to conduct a thorough school funding Adequacy
and Equity study—the last one was done in 1968.
The full Watkins report can be accessed at (MDE
web site)
A
Review Estimating Conference held in December and January projected
a School Aid Fund shortfall in the current 2004-05 year of about
$100 million. The problem was resolved for the current year when
the Legislature recently transferred nearly that amount of money
from the general fund averting a pro-rata reduction in the per-pupil
grant.
The General Fund budget problem for the current year is pegged
at $406 million. Medicaid, prisons and revenue sharing are prime
targets for cuts as the state looks to balance this year’s
budget.
|
|
Social
Studies
The Board of Education approved six of the ten policy
recommendations that were put forth by the Social
Studies Task Force in the fall.
-
Include
social studies in the Merit Scholarship. This will
be included in the new Michigan Merit Exam that
takes effect in the 2005-2007 school year.
-
Design of the MEAP test to follow Policy on Learning
Expectations
-
Make available a list of resources, both contextual
and item specific, that are used by the test developers.
-
Collaborative communication and professional development
plans.
-
Invite two or three volunteers form the Social Studies
Task Force to join the Curriculum Advisory Committee.
The
Department of Education didn’t support task
force recommendations calling for the Department to
investigate and make recommendations on creating a
set of grade level tests to be administered by local
school districts to evaluate yearly student achievement
in social studies; that the Task Force on Social Studies
be continued; that the Department make available to
the public an annotated list of the social studies
content materials; and that inquiry and essay questions
remain on the Social Studies MEAP test.
Adequate
Yearly Progress
Nearly 80 percent of Michigan’s public school
districts (about four in five) met the federal guidelines
for making Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP), as required
by the No Child Left Behind Act.
This was the first year that District Adequate Yearly
Progress reports were issued to local school districts,
Public School Academies (charter schools), and Intermediate
School Districts (ISDs). Some school districts were
not included due to federal guidelines that waive
this requirement for small districts consisting only
of one building.
Girls’
Sports Season Switch
The State Board of Education moved to support the
recent federal court ruling that requires the state
high school athletic association to readjust its sports
schedule so girl athletes play at the same time as
the boys.
The federal court had ruled that the policies of the
Michigan High School Athletic Association (MHSAA)
on the scheduling of the seasons for girls sports
violated the equal protection clause of the United
States Constitution. The MHSAA is continuing to appeal
its efforts on a few grounds on the belief that the
staggered seasons are a better logistical fit for
the schools and students.
Reading
First Annual Performance Report
Michigan’s Reading First grant program for low-performing
elementary schools (Subpart B of Title I of the No
Child Left Behind Act) has completed its second year
of implementation in the 2003-2004 school year. During
the first year of implementation (2002-2003) forty
nine buildings were funded and 50% of the students
in the program were scoring below the 25th percentile
on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. Seventy more buildings
were added in the second year for a total of 119 participating
buildings with 38% scoring below the 25th percentile
on the Iowa Test of Basic Skills. Six buildings were
discontinued from the program in July 2004 because
they did not make Adequate Yearly Progress for two
years. Three buildings were closed by their districts
and one building notified the Department of Education
that it would not continue its participation for a
third year. Therefore, the current count for participating
buildings is 109.
The State receives about $22 million every year from
the U.S. Department of Education to share with the
participating schools who must then adopt one of five
identified comprehensive reading programs.
http://www.michigan.gov/mde
MEAP
Cuts Probable
Under the budget for the 2005-2006 school year, the
Department of Education has been asked to cut $10
million from the Office of Educational Assessment
and Accountability.
Possible cuts being discussed to meet the financial
cut include:
Grade
Level Content Expectations
The State Board of Education received the Social Studies
Grade Level Content Expectations at its January 12th
Board Meeting.
The Science expectations are a work in progress and
they will be presented by grade span and not by grade
level.
School
Performance Indicators
School Performance Indicators for Education Yes! are
being revised for the next (not this!) school year
as requested by the State Board of Education. Districts
will be submitting their indicator ratings through
MI-Plan again this year. Submission of the school
performance indicators is tentatively planned for
April.
Note!
For this year only! There is a change in the
final composite grade for schools: Achievement plus
the Indicators can raise the composite grade only
by one level.
Increased
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) Achievement Targets
The following are the new AYP achievement targets
for 2004-2005:
-
Elementary Math from 47% to 56%
-
Elementary
ELA from 38% to 49%
-
Middle School Math from 31% to 43%
-
Middle School ELA from 31% to 43%
-
High School Math From 33% to 44%
-
High School ELA from 42% to 52%
MEAP
and MI-Access Assessments for Ungraded Students
State Board policy, the No Child Left Behind Act,
and the Individuals with Disabilities Education
Act require that state level assessments be administered
to ALL students in required content areas. District
policy determines grade assignments for students.
However, when the district identifies a student
as ungraded in the Single Student Record Database
(such as some programs for students with disabilities
and alternative education programs), the state will
assign students to a specific grade based on the
following table.
| Student
Age* in Ungraded Programs |
Grade
Assignment |
Required
Content Areas to be Assessed in Academic Yr
04-05 (MEAP, MI-Access) |
Required
Content Areas to be Assessed in Academic Yr
05-06 (MEAP, MI-Access) |
| 9 |
3rd |
|
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics |
| 10 |
4th |
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics |
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics |
| 11 |
5th |
-Science**
-Social Studies** |
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics
-Science** |
| 12 |
6th |
|
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics
-Social Studies** |
| 13 |
7th |
-English
Language Arts |
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics |
| 14 |
8th |
-Mathematics
-Science**
-Social Studies** |
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics
-Science** |
| 15 |
9th |
|
-Social
Studies** |
| 16 |
10th |
|
|
| 17 |
11th |
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics
-Science**
-Social Studies** |
-English
Language Arts
-Mathematics
-Science**
-Social Studies** |
| 18 |
12th |
|
|
*
Students must be these ages on or before December
1st of the school year in which the assessment is
administered.
** For students with an IEP requiring an alternate
assessment, the IEP Team will determine how the
student is assessed in these content areas until
the state develops MI-Access assessments in these
content areas.
Federal
Education
2005
Federal Education Budget
Overall, education programs have been the beneficiaries
of ongoing regular increases in funding through several
Presidential administrations. The FY 05 budget is a
significant departure. In addition to Title I and IDEA,
major winners in this appropriations were:
-
Early Reading First $9.7 million
- 10.3% increase
- Mathematics
and Science Partnerships $29.4 million
- 19.7% increase
- School
Leadership $2.5 million - 20.5% increase
- Advanced
Placement Fee $6.2 million—26. %
increase
- Strengthening
Historically Black Colleges And Universities
$15.8 million - 7.1% increase
- Strengthening
Black Graduate Institutions $4.9 million
- 9.3% increase
Programs
that received the largest cuts were:
-
Educational Technology State Grants
$195.8 million or 28.3% cut
- State
Grants for Innovative Education $98.1 million
or 33.1% cut
- Community
Technology Centers $5 million or 50.1%
cut
- Perkins
Loans $99.3 million or 60% cut
- Teacher
Quality Enhancement Grants $20.6 million
or 23.1% cut
Professional
Learning Opportunities
 Another
chance to participate in this high-demand workshop
with Deborah Wahstrom, nationally
known expert and best-selling author.
March
8 - 9,2005
Macomb ISD
Cost: $399 per person (includes materials, breakfast,
and lunch)
Click
here to register online now!
 This
high-powered, data-intensive workshop is geared to
central office staff, school administrators, and school
improvement team members who desire to increase their
level of knowlege in order to use data to make solid
decisions with respect to curriculum, instruction,
and assessment. Deborah has customized this program
to meet the needs of Michigan educators and will use
examples from the MEAP assessment.
Deborah
will present the basics of data as well as select
advanced analysis techniques. You'll leave with ideas
that will infuse energy into your school improvement
efforts and ready-to-use materials for your school
district and staff.
- Distinguish
key terms and concepts for Michigan's MEAP data.
- Distinguish
between different data sources and types of data
- outcome, deomgraphic, and process.
- Disaggregate
and triangulate data and explain why these techniques
are important.
- Link
school- and district-level data to student achievement,
school improvement, Education YES!, and No Child
Left Behind.
- Determine
types of data for data packets in each content area.
- Facilitate
the protocols for developing a data poster for each
content area.
- Identify
and analyze information ni select data analysis
reports.
- Review
Deb's model for using data for school improvement,
which includes the familiar Path to Student Success.
- Identify
factors that are critical in aligning curriculum,
instruction, and assessment.
- Facilitate
faculty discussion and analysis of process data,
using school strategy cards.
- Link
data from the data posters and school strategy cards
to the school (or district) improvement plan.
- Develop
data-driven improvement plans by tying information
from the data posters and school strategy cards
to the school improvement plan.
(757) 539-6513
www.successlineinc.com
mark.wahlstrom@successlineinc.com
 Assess
for Success: Practical Ideas for New MEAP Tests
March 10, 2005
Macomb ISD
$199 per person (includes materials, breakfast, and
lunch)
Click
here to register online
This
high-impact professional learning opportunity is designed
for central office staff, principals, teachers, district
assessment coordinators, building assessment coordinators,
and ISD staff.
You'll
walk away with powerful ideas and tools, as well as
a practical handbook for training district staff about
the changes in the MEAP assessments.
During
this interactive workshop, participants will:
- Analyze
expectations of the MEAP assessment.
- Review
principles of high-quality multiple-choice and constructed
response items.
- Learn
ways that student learning in the area of writing
can be assessed through multiple-choice items (new
for Michigan this year).
- Learn
to make effective curricular decisions related to
fall testing.
- Identify
effective review strategies for different types
of tests.
- Distinguish
between appropriate and inappropriate assessment
review practices.
(757) 539-6513
www.successlineinc.com
mark.wahlstrom@successlineinc.com
Michigan
Association for Supervision and Curriculum Development
1001 Centennial Way, Suite 300
Lansing, MI 48917-9279
517-327-9259
|
|
