TSPC MINUTES
July 28-30, 2004
Page 73
Teacher Standards and Practices Commission
465 Commercial Street NE
Salem OR 97301
/July 28-30, 2004
MINUTES - TSPC MEETING
Southern Oregon University, Stevenson Union facility, Rogue River Room AD
1250 Siskiyou Boulevard, Ashland OR 97520
WEDNESDAY, JULY 28, 2004
1.0 PRELIMINARY BUSINESS
1.1 Call to Order
The Executive Committee met the prior evening at 6:30 p.m. in the Mezzanine Room at the Windmill Inn & Suites. Also on Tuesday, July 27th, from 12:30 – 4:00 p.m., a subcommittee meeting was held to discuss proposed changes to the Continuing Teaching Licenses.
Chair Gwinn called the meeting to order at 8:20 a.m. on Wednesday, July 28, 2004. A public hearing was held at 9:00 a.m. to receive oral and written testimony on proposed amendments to and adoption of administrative rules. It was necessary to adjust the agenda since the entire time allotted to the public hearing was not needed.
On Thursday, July 29th, from 8:30 - 11:30 a.m., the Program Approval, Licensure and Discipline Committees met concurrently. Immediately following, Geoff Mills, provided a tour of the campus and Education Department to interested parties. At 1:30 p.m. that afternoon, the Commission met in Executive Session to consider disciplinary cases.
Chair Gwinn thanked Southern Oregon University for hosting the Commission meeting. The Commission is appreciative of the hospitability extended.
Chair Gwinn asked attendees to sign the Guest List indicating attendance. She requested all cell phones and pagers be turned off during the meeting.
Melody Hanson explained the per diem rate within the Ashland area is $47. That equates to $11.75 each for breakfast and lunch and $23.50 for dinner. Receipts are required to be attached to Travel Expense Detail Sheet. Adult beverages cannot be reimbursed.
Commissioners PresentSusan DeMarsh
Pat Evenson-Brady
Cathy Gwinn
Anne Jones
Carol L. Mack
Katrina Myers
Gary Peterson
Mary Lou Pickard
Marit Pierce
Debra Robinson
Leslie Walborn
Nancy Watt
Commissioners Absent
Aurora Cedillo
Charleen Hoiland
Carolyn Ortman
Richard Steiner
Peter Tromba
Commission Staff Present
Vickie Chamberlain
Melody Hanson
Pam LaFreniere
Keith Menk
Susan Nisbet (Thursday only)
Joe McKeever, AAG (Thursday only)
Cameron Lane (Thursday only via conference call)
Larry Warren (Thursday afternoon only) / Observers
Mark Ankeny, George Fox University
Sherri Carreker, Lewis & Clark College
Sharon Chinn, Lewis & Clark College
Bob Hamm, University of Phoenix
Ana Becerra, Oregon Dept. of Education
Linda Samek, Western Baptist College and Chair of OACTE
Joe Mannion, Concordia University
Dew Anna Brumley, Warner Pacific College
Maureen Musser, Willamette University and Co-Chair of Oregon Middle Level Consortium
Yvonne Christensen, President of Oregon Substitute Teachers Association (OSTA)
Margaret Mahoney, University of Oregon
Bill Smith, Eastern Oregon University
Joe DeMarsh, Guest
Teresa Ferrer, Oregon Education Association (OEA)
Karen Weiseth, OEA Board
Sue Thompson, Western Oregon University
Hilda Rosselli, Western Oregon University
Farah Ibrahim, Oregon State University
Thomas Greene, University of Portland
Maria Ciriello, University of Portland and Chair of OICA Group
Gordon Munck, COSA
Jim Worthington, George Fox University
Kip Gladder, University of Phoenix
Nan Willis, Northwest Christian College
Bill Beck, COSA
Lisa Dion, Portland State University
Nancy Wolf, Lesley University
Dew Anna Brumley, Warner Pacific College
1.2 Introduction and Comments of Agency and Organization Representatives and Guests
Agency and organization representatives and guest present at the time introduced themselves to Commissioners. Robert L. Hamm, University of Phoenix, stated his previous life was Director of Personnel for West Linn-Wilsonville. Ana M. Becerra, Oregon Department of Education, explained that she has filled the position previously held by Brian Putnam. Teresa Ferrer distributed a copy of the Oregon Education Association magazine featuring Debra Robinson, Commissioner, and many other teachers who are doing remarkable work to bring annual yearly progress for students in Oregon.
1.3 Review and Acceptance of Agenda
Chair Gwinn stated that dependent upon the length of time needed to receive oral and written testimony during the Public Hearing on administrative rules, it is possible that some agenda items might be moved ahead. There is a possibility that the Commission meeting could recess before Friday afternoon.
Anyone wanting to provide testimony on one or more of the administrative rules for the public hearing was asked to complete a sign-up card(s) near the entrance.
MOTION, to accept the agenda.
Moved by Jones / Seconded by Evenson-Brady / Carried*
Absent / Cedillo, Hoiland, Ortman, Steiner, Tromba
1.4 Approval of Minutes—June 30, 2004, Special Commission meeting
MOTION, to accept the minutes from the June 30, 2004, Special Commission meeting.
Moved by Evenson-Brady / Seconded by Walborn / Carried**
Absent / Cedillo, Hoiland, Ortman, Steiner, Tromba
1.5 Chair Gwinn’s Report
Chair Gwinn stated she had an absolutely fabulous opportunity to attend the OACTE conference at Salishan on work sample methodology. She talked with other professionals who are using work samples in a variety of ways; who are assessing; who are in the midst of examining their work samples and determining how things work; how things might be improved in other ways; the issues around those samples: political and implementation. On behalf of the Commission, she participated in a panel discussion on politics and policy around work samples. It was a great opportunity to enter into some very thoughtful conversations.
Hilda Rosselli, Western Oregon University, stated that on the final day of the conference, a panel on policy was held. A conversation arose with the Executive Directors for the Education Commission of States. That is the organization that actually advises the Governors and Legislators on policy. Serious conversations were held about being able to collect data across institutions for the purposes of beginning to address some of the big research questions that are missing in teacher education. There is not a strong research base answering imperative questions such as “what good does it do to go through a teacher preparation program; what difference does it make; how valid is a work sample in terms of predicting a teacher’s ability to impact K-12 student learning”. A decision was also made that it is time to talk to NCATE because they have forced institutions to create massive data bases and they are not beginning to sponsor studies in which each institution answers a question and the analysis is done on the results of those studies. Powerful information was presented that could actually change the way teacher education is viewed nationally. Hilda encouraged the Commission to ask for continued emphasis and focus on this issue to keep the pressure on these key national individuals to find ways to fund these studies. With several states doing statewide initiatives, it is a powerful force and on the cutting edge of those aspects.
Chair Gwinn thanked Southern Oregon University for hosting the Commission meeting. Commissioners are enjoying the hospitality and appreciate the generosity of sharing SOU’s lovely campus with us. On Thursday, July 29th, at 11:30 a.m., Geoff Mills is scheduled to provide a tour of the campus and education department. Southern Oregon University will also host a reception after the close of business on Thursday, July 29th.
1.6 Review of Correspondence to Commissioners
No correspondence items to Commissioners were included as part of this agenda item.
1.7 Review of Information of Interest to Commissioners
Ten items of interest to Commissioners were included as part of this agenda item. They included a commentary on Teacher Quality: More Reasons It Deserves Attention that appeared in Education Week submitted by Del Schalock; Human Value and Goodness Approach from the Technical Assistance for Community Services; an article entitled Still Underserved after All These Years that appeared in Issues in Science and Technology; an update on the Chalkboard Project; thank you letter to Vickie Chamberlain for presenting at the Oregon Small School Association Educators’ Summer Institute; news article from the Veneta West Lane News “Charter violates state law”; news article from Hood River News on “Westside teacher’s national certification serves whole school; new article from Albany Democrat Herald on “Oregonians can now check how state agencies are doing”; news article from Salem Statesman Journal on “Half of new teachers are older than 30”; and a brochure from Salem-Keizer Public Schools, Western Oregon University and TSPC on “Transition to Teaching” Career in Teaching Program.
2.0 PUBLIC HEARING
The Commission received the following oral and written testimony to amend or adopt:
2.1a 584-010-0010 Approval of Education Programs for Teachers, Administrators, and Personnel Service Specialists—Amend
No one signed up to testify on the proposed amended rule.
2.2b 584-010-0020 On-Site Review of Licensure Programs—Amend
No one signed up to testify on the proposed amended rule.
2.3c 584-017-0042 Waivers for Student Teaching Requirements—Adopt
No one signed up to testify on the proposed rule.
2.4d 584-036-0055 Fees, Forfeiture, and Expedited Service—Amend
No one signed up to testify on the proposed amended rule.
2.5e 584-036-0067 Temporary One-Year Extension of Initial Licenses—Adopt
No one signed up to testify on the proposed rule.
2.6f 584-040-0005 Standard Teaching License Requirements—Amend
No one signed up to testify on the proposed amended rule.
2.7g 584-050-0042 Reporting Changes of Name or Address—Amend
No one signed up to testify on the proposed amended rule.
2.8h 584-052-0030 Eligibility for Alternative Assessment—Adopt
No one signed up to testify on the proposed rule.
2.9i 584-052-0031 Portfolio Evidence for Alternative Assessment—Adopt
No one signed up to testify on the proposed rule.
2.10j 584-052-0032 Procedure for Initial Commission Review of the Portfolio—Adopt
No one signed up to testify on the proposed rule.
2.11k 584-052-0033 Appeals of Commission Denials of Alternative Assessment—Adopt
No one signed up to testify on the proposed rule.
2.12l 584-060-0001 Purpose (Twenty-First Century Teaching Licenses)—Amend
No one signed up to testify on the proposed amended rule.
2.13m 584-060-0002 Definitions for Division 060 (Twenty-First Century Teaching Licenses) —Adopt
No one signed up to testify on the proposed rule.
2.14n 584-060-0005 Effective Date and Conflict Resolution (Twenty-First Century Teaching Licenses)—Amend
No one signed up to testify on the proposed amended rule.
2.15o 584-060-0012 Initial Teaching License Requirements (Twenty-First Century Teaching Licenses)—Adopt
No one signed up to testify on the proposed rule.
2.16p 584-060-0022 Continuing Teaching License Requirements (Twenty-First Century Teaching Licenses)—Adopt
The following people signed up to speak in favor of or in opposition to the proposed rule:
Bill Smith, Eastern Oregon University. Thank you. I probably ought to follow my notes since if you speak from the heart you get loud and sometimes obnoxious. In speaking with the continuing teacher licensure I haven’t seen what you did yesterday, I was here. Did it ever come out yet? (Due to technical difficulties, the new proposed version of the administrative rule is currently unavailable.) Basically, the competencies “went out”, so that’s kind of what I’m speaking to here. I think you are losing a great opportunity that’s already been created and it’s almost like what we wouldn’t want to teach our students, that we’ve turned tail and run because we had a difficult task ahead. I do wish yesterday, I arrived an hour earlier with some overviews from some of our teachers on the CTL. Yeah, they are still in a stack. I wished you would have been able to look at those because that’s the heart of the whole thing that somehow got lost, and that is the teacher training to make our good teachers better. Somehow through the power and control we got into this giant shadow boxing where we started swinging at opponents that aren’t there and nobody asked the programs that were being successful, what was working, why was it working. Many of the ghosts out there just weren’t there. So, I think you are making a tremendous mistake by dropping the competencies. You had the framework in which to put them. You’ve made adjustments on time. You’ve make other adjustments probably that needed to be made and you still have the framework to keep the competency training there and hopefully you’ll take advantage of that. I’m not advocating because our teachers are doing poorly for competency training, I’m advocating and as you can look through those overviews because it’s making our good teachers better and that’s what they are telling us. Our teachers are doing a good job, but our teachers are frustrated. They are overwhelmed, they have unrealistic expectations put on them. What the CTL has done is it has allowed us to bring these teachers together to vent their frustrations and zoom in on what they have control over, and what we have found they have control over are the ten competencies. They can actually control those in their classroom and it’s enabled the teachers to come together as a cohort and express the problems they have with each other so they understand they’re not on an island onto themselves, and it’s been very beneficial that way. I want to just reflect very very briefly on some of the perceived problems I heard a month ago from some of the representatives from some of our State organizations. One of them was on the assessment. The assessment is not a problem, but yet that’s all that’s talked about, who is going to access. The good programs have developed an assessment system where you have your teachers assessing themselves and once you do that you have wonderful assessment. The good programs have developed assessment between the schools, the administrators in the school and the college. There is no power and control there. It’s working together. It hasn’t been a problem and yet I keep hearing what a terrible problem this is. It’s not there folks. Through videos, through peer collaboration, assessment is happening. And yesterday you covered the one on initial license, basically the CTL looked a lot like the initial and I think you talked about that yesterday and basically you zoomed right in on it. How in the world can you develop competencies with student teaching? Some of you were student teachers. When you were a student teacher, as I was, you were trying to survive. You were trying to please your college, supervisor, your supervising teacher, through the tons of paperwork you are required to do, that’s a survival mode. You weren’t able to reflect, you were just trying to get out of there alive. In wrapping up, this is what I’ve observed happening, I hope I can go back to that table when I get done here with this wrap-up, because they may remove my seat there. Basically, what happened here is the State organizations told their membership to defy the lawmakers and the TSPC because the CTL would go away. That caused unbelievable problems both for the universities and our teachers. It caused a sense of urgency on your behalf to do something about it because we had this glut of teachers because the organization was saying don’t worry about it, it will go away. The credibility, when they were thanking you last week, they were thanking you for helping them maintain their credibility with their membership and letting your credibility go wherever you want to put your imagination, it could go. If in fact the CTL drops, these moving targets for these teachers is going to expand and the credibility with the TSPC is going to take one giant step backwards. Certainly, in the name dropping, with the Oregon School Board Association wanted it to go away also. Folks, 99.99% of the school board members in this State want highly qualified teachers. 99.99% of the school board members in this State haven’t got a clue of what we are talking about today. So, basically, two or three people made that decision from the Oregon School Board Association. So I guess in conclusion here, I would say, please, look the universities, the teachers, the administrators in the eye, say you are professional people, this is good, it’s making good teachers better, go out there and make it happen and save a little bit of credibility here and please keep those competencies in there. They are doing wonders. Thank you for the time.