HB 5: “It's year 2, so what do we do?”

Now that we have completed our year one obligations under HB5, it's time to begin focusing on what we must do in year 2.  Much like other aspects of HB 5, the legislation does not specifically define what we must do other than to provide guidelines for areas to assess, and deadlines for reporting of results relating to the Community and Student Engagement requirement. 

So what do we do now as we move into 2014-2015?  Remember that the single greatest risk relating to HB 5 is not simply the ratings themselves, but the failure on the part of school boards and districts to act upon the requirements defined in Section 46 of HB 5, which includes an evaluation of:

√  The level and quality of engagement between the community and its students;

√  Showcasing where districts and campuses are excelling; and

√  Determining opportunities for districts and campuses to improve.

There are certainly some within the legislature who are just waiting for inaction as a reason to repeal HB 5 requirements and, once again, push for even greater state oversight.  It's up to us to ensure that this does not happen.

Put simply, the first year of self-reporting for Community and Student Engagement (CSE) could be classified as a "process" focused effort.  Districts had to determine the process they would follow in defining those metrics that address each of the nine areas defined in HB 5.  Did we use an existing committee or did we form a new committee to define the evaluation criteria?  Did we already have a set of criteria or did we look to other resources, including our regional service centers, for references on how to construct these criteria?  And once we defined the criteria to be evaluated, how did we then assign a rating at both the campus level and the district level?  Not an easy effort to go through but it truly was about process, wasn't it?

With process behind us, we can now look to a different focus, this time on "outcomes".  More specifically, instead of looking back at how we did compared to the defined evaluation criteria, we now have an opportunity to look forward to specific accomplishments we strive to achieve.  For many of us, we may simply use the same criteria that we did in completing the evaluations in 2013-2014.  For others, we may choose to modify those based on our current environment or recognition that there are other elements that can positively impact our performance as a school district.

So how will your district decide “what to do in year 2” and how will you approach this?  While still only a consideration, my district is looking at a two-step approach.  Step one is to look at the relevance of last year's evaluation criteria and determine what changes need to be made for the CSE 2014-2015 rating submission.  This likely will involve the same district committee approach adopted in the first year.  Step 2 is to undertake an effort to move forward and establish the 2015-2016 school year CSE tool and consider new criteria that the district might target over the coming months and into the next school year.  This would allow next year’s committee to evaluate a CSE tool that was established for a reasonable amount of time to accomplish each goal or criteria.

Looking at how we evaluate our performance, this may be an opportune time to blend several different data elements, including, as an example, CSE evaluation criteria, district improvement plans and a district’s strategic plan.  There is likely a commonality across each of these resources, and the opportunities presented by the HB 5 CSE requirements may provide a great vehicle for stepping back and looking not just at where we are but, more importantly, where want to be in each of the nine areas defined within HB 5.

One other consideration worthy of discussion is to expand the participation of our students in the discussions.  Who better to help us frame our efforts than the students, our primary customers, who actually reap the benefits.  We can talk ad nauseam about what we think is good for students but let's understand their perspective; we will all be better for it.

There certainly is plenty to do relating to HB 5 as we move into year 2.  Don't let this opportunity pass you and your students by.  The time is now for us to aggressively embrace HB 5 and to take those steps that will help ensure fulfillment of the long term opportunities presented to us.  Our students deserve nothing less!

School Choice and the Need for Advocacy

Well, after a hiatus to celebrate the success of HB 5 implementation, it’s time to reengage.  And I do mean “reengage”!

Faye Beaulieu, immediate past president of the Texas Association of School Boards (TASB), wrote an article in the August, 2014 edition of the Texas Lone Star magazine that pointed out what should be a very key consideration when we discuss the topic of “school choice”.  Quoting Faye from the article, “… too many times (we) talk about “choice” in the education arena as a list of alternatives to our public schools.  Public education is a choice, and it deserves to top the list.”  Wow, is that a change in mindset for many of us.

Although now serving in my 10^th year as a trustee in Carroll ISD, I know that I have generally centered the school choice discussion as most have, namely that school options other than public education really comprise “school choice”; that really couldn't be farther from the truth.  Thanks, Faye, for pointing that out to all of us.  So how do we reposition the conversation?

It starts with a change in mindset.  The Texas Constitution defines the requirement for us to make a free public education available to all children in the State of Texas.  But it does not entitle those of us in public education the absolute right to be the sole entities delivering education.  Trustees, staff and administrators in our public school districts must earn the right to do so, and we all must do a better job of communicating our story.

In her article, Faye continued her comments that public education is a “choice” by encouraging each of us to better equip ourselves to tell the story, regardless of the audience.  We have numerous organizations helping but, if you’re like me, you may not be fully tapping the resources that are at our fingertips.  Think about some of these for a moment and how they can help you craft and deliver your message.

Just to name a few … TASB created a site called truthaboutschools.org.  At the national level, the National School Boards Association (NSBA) created a campaign earlier this year called Stand Up 4 Public Schools (standup4publicschools.org).  And there is a complimentary site, Stand Up 4 Texas Public Schools (standup4txpublicschools.org) that promotes advocacy.  Locally, Friends of Texas Public Schools (fotps.org) and Make Education A Priority (schoolpriority.com) do an outstanding job of highlighting the accomplishments of the Texas public education system. 

But it’s one thing to have the resources available to us; it is yet another to commit to using these resources to tell the public education story, a story yearning to be heard by students, parents, community members, legislators and other stakeholders.  It’s time we told our story; it’s time that we channeled our energies toward the positives of Texas public education rather than staying on the defensive. 

Our public education system, despite challenges relating to student growth, accountability, funding and other issues, does an outstanding job of equipping our students to travel the path toward success.  Let’s make certain we are all a part of that journey!

And Now the Successes Begin

After a Spring and early Summer where Bobby J Rigues (Aledo trustee and architect of the Make Education a Priority grassroots movement) and I had presented at several sessions attended by school board trustees from around the state, it’s now time to acknowledge and begin to celebrate some of the many successes we have heard.  And there are many!  Congratulations to districts across the state for embracing the spirit and intent of HB 5, efforts that will position local school boards very well when the 84^th Legislature convenes in January.  Some districts did not move forward as the legislation (and our presentations!) might have hoped; most, however, took steps that will bear fruit for their students.

There are several ways to look at success in implementing HB 5, beginning with the approach to offering endorsements, specifically to the number of endorsements that a particular district chooses to offer.  In our early discussions with superintendents and administrators, we frequently heard, and this was especially true at smaller districts, that they might be able to offer only the Multidisciplinary endorsement in year one.  But as they stepped back and looked at the opportunity and examined their district’s curriculum, many found that they could offer at least one or two more and, in many cases, offer all five endorsements.  What an accomplishment!

For example, in my conversation with a superintendent in a central Texas 2A district, he was somewhat optimistic that he would be able to offer three endorsements.  As implementation unfolded and his district pursued the opportunities found in HB 5, they found ways to create partnerships that would expand their ability to offer an endorsement. 

Partnerships were certainly at the heart of HB 5, as shared with us by Rep. Jimmie Don Aycock, Chairman of the House Education Committee.  In fact, the district referenced above established partnerships at multiple levels, including the business community in their area, neighboring school districts, and local colleges.

Those attending our sessions heard us say that a district should be able to offer three endorsements without doing anything other than realigning curriculum, that according to TEA.  It would certainly appear that districts found that to be the case … and more!

While we are talking about successes, it is once again important to acknowledge the role that counselors have played in working with incoming 9^th graders as they sought to select an endorsement.  For the most part, we have heard that the process of doing so has gone fairly smoothly; that is absolutely a credit to the efforts of the counselors.  And most districts did this without adding counselors to their staff if we normalize staffing based on enrollment.  That is truly a credit to the commitment of the counselors, our new education "superheroes", to ensuring the success of this aspect of HB 5.

So let’s take time (but not too much!) to celebrate the successes being achieved through the implementation of HB 5.  Students and those that we serve as trustees of our local districts are all winners in this effort.  

HB 5 and the New Education "Superheroes"

The passage of House Bill 5 in the 83rd Legislative Session created new opportunities for students who many considered to be underserved, addressed concerns raised by parents and educators alike relating to curriculum design and assessment, and established requirements for community and student engagement.  Having previously documented some of the most significant changes, I won't belabor the point or discussion about the many benefits of this critical legislation. 

So with all of the good emanating from passage of this bill, what are some of the pitfalls?  Over the next couple of blogs, I'll provide perspectives gained through conversations with a number of administrators and fellow trustees across the State of Texas.  The first will focus on what we might call the new Education Superheroes, the counselors in our middle and high schools.

The advent of HB5 and introduction of the concept of an endorsement opened up new career pursuit opportunities for a large number of students in the state. Chairman Jimmie Don Aycock, Chairman of the House Education Committee, told me that he believed that as many as 40% of the 5.1 M public education students will benefit from having more career options, specifically those in the Career and Technical Education (CATE) arena.  The shift from a one-size-fits-all approach under the former 4X4 program, to one focused on individual choice tied to endorsement selection, is certainly a positive step for these students.

But this implementation of an endorsement-based approach does not come without challenges.  The most notable of these is how endorsement choices and counseling have significantly impacted the role of the counselor.  Many concluded that the main impact would be on the high school counselor as they work with incoming ninth graders.  The reality, however, is that the impact is felt equally, and perhaps even more so, at the middle school level.

The middle school counselor has a clear responsibility to start a communication process with students and parents as early as seventh grade.  What seems to be a fairly simple process of articulating endorsements offered by a district is much more than that.  Students need to understand their options and the need to begin thinking about where their interests lie.  And the role of the middle school counselor doesn't stop there.  They also have a responsibility to work with their peers at the high school level to coordinate these communications.

So when it's all said and done, and after the dust of selecting endorsements has settled, make sure that you give a hug and a thank you to the counselors that so capably serve the needs and interests of public education students across the State.  They truly are Superheroes to all of us!

The Real Value in HB 5

Well, while certainly not the only real value in HB 5, much is being written today about the positive impact of encouraging students to pursue career and technology education (CATE) options now afforded them.  As noted in prior blogs, one of the main considerations behind the initial discussions that ultimately led to drafting and passing this important piece of legislation was the feeling among many educators that the requirements pre-HB 5 limited opportunities for students, or at least that they failed to align opportunity with student interest.

I happened to be reading my “local” newspaper (Ft. Worth Star-Telegram) earlier today and read a cover story (More high school grads certified and ready to work) that discussed the opportunities for high school students to pursue career and technical education opportunities.  The good news is that articles such as this one are no longer isolated examples of how public education has changed in terms of importance and public awareness.  And that is tremendous exposure for all involved in public education in the State of Texas.

It’s certainly possible to access the on-line version of this article (yes, the Star Telegram today is still free to access) by going to www.star-telegram.com, but this exposure is important enough that I wanted to highlight some of the key points made in this article.  One of the comments is that the number of industry licenses in Birdville ISD earned through their technology center increased from 344 in 2009 to 1,890 in the current school year.  And that number will continue to grow as technology evolves. 

In the Hurst-Euless-Bedford district, voters supported a 2011 bond program that included funding for a new Technical Education Academy to replace the former Technical Education Center.  Courses offered will include animation, architecture, automotive technology, engineering and culinary arts.  In Mansfield ISD, students now have an opportunity to choose from 15 different tracks, including EMT certification and food safety and sanitation management.  And the Keller district is weighing a potential opportunity to transform a prior intermediate school into a career and technical education center.

Truly, these represent great opportunities for students!

And these successes are not limited to large school districts such as Birdville, Mansfield and Keller ISD’s.  In a recent conversation that I had with a 2-A district superintendent in central Texas, he highlighted career and technology options now available through partnering with other districts.  Specifically, a neighboring district offered the opportunity for students to graduate and immediately be in a position to work in manufacturing jobs.  So what’s critical here is that the CATE options can be delivered either directly by the district or through partnerships with other districts or local businesses.  All great options, all focused on student achievement and opportunity!

So going back to an earlier blog and paraphrasing somewhat, “How are you doing?”  House Bill 5 was absolutely passed to address many shortcomings of the prior 4X4 system that provided limited flexibility for as many as 30-40% of the students in Texas whose interests do not align with that curriculum.  It’s now up to individual districts and boards of trustees to make decisions that positively impact the students in their districts.  It’s not just an opportunity; it’s a requirement that we, as trustees, have in working with students, parents, businesses, and the communities at large.  As I’ve said before, the students in your district deserve nothing less!

“Are We There Yet?” – A Story of One Journey

Are we there yet?  At some point in our lives, every one of us has either posed the question to someone else, or had this question posed to us.  So how did we typically answer the question if one of our children asked us?  Well, we might have said, “We’re almost there” (hoping to buy time), or “If you ask me that again, …” (not certain what we hope to achieve with that one), or my personal favorite from a co-worker of mine.  When his child asked if they were almost to Grandma’s house, his response was, “Yes, we are, but Grandma has a really long driveway.”

Since we have been writing about the ramifications of House Bill 5, it’s fair to ask, “are we there yet?”  In some cases, trustees tell us that they are pleased with the progress being made; others are uncertain about where “there” even is.  It’s been our hope, therefore, that posting this blog helps define “there”.  As trustees, most of us have now had the opportunity to discuss, debate and perhaps even curse the requirements imposed by HB 5 relating to Curriculum and Community and Student Engagement.

But I’d like to share with you the journey of how one district achieved far more than what they thought they would be able to do.  I recently had the opportunity to talk with the superintendent of a 2-A district in Central Texas.  When I first spoke with him three months ago, my intent was to gain insights into how a district of his size would address the Curriculum mandates relating to offering endorsements to students in his district.  Candidly, he had doubts during our initial discussion about whether they would be able to offer any endorsement other than the state-mandated Multidisciplinary endorsement.  Oh, how times have changed!

In my recent conversation with him, I could hear the excitement and enthusiasm in his voice as he told me that, as a result of "collaborative partnerships" (his words) with businesses and neighboring districts, it now looked like his district would be able to offer all five of the endorsements defined under HB 5.  And what is even more impressive is the manner in how the district approached the reporting of metrics and criteria.  In fact, while HB 5 defined the eight areas to be evaluated, his district felt it important to add a ninth, Safety and Security.  Talk about understanding and responding to the needs of students and community members in his district!

He explained to me how the district was going to be able to move from the originally anticipated single endorsement to likely being able to offer all five.  Quite simply, it was through establishing relationships with neighboring districts that were willing to share programs and resources so that his students could find content relevant to their specific interests.  Working with his board, he also spent time benchmarking against other districts in the county, not to evaluate his district’s performance against theirs, but to draw on the “best of the best”, again to the benefit of his students.

So, if this 2-A district can do it, why can’t we all?  HB 5 contained little in the way of implementation details and requirements, other than the requirement to report campus level ratings by August 8.  Rather than wait for TEA to tell them what to do and how to derive these ratings, this district took it upon themselves to think first about their students and how to make their high school curriculum more relevant.  Not satisfied with the minimum graduation program requirements defined under HB 5, they adopted a local standard requiring 24 credits for graduation.

I am certain that the journey undertaken by districts across the state has resulted in similar success stories, and my hat is off to those who have viewed HB 5 as the opportunity that it is.  And while we may not yet be to Grandma’s house, this story is about our journey, not the destination.  We are certainly a long way up the driveway!

House Bill 5, Toyota, and the Mayor of Dallas

So what do the three of these have in common?  Community engagement lies at the core of this trifecta, some positive, some not so much.  Most are aware that the Mayor of Dallas has proposed that Dallas ISD become a home rule district, an action that would remove the board of trustees and change the manner in which DISD is governed.  Thankfully, this has met with strong opposition from a wide array of groups but that is not the premise of this blog.

Unfortunately, the Mayor has continued his public criticism of DISD by suggesting that part of Toyota’s decision to relocate their US headquarters from Torrance, CA to Plano, TX was based on concerns about the quality of education provided by DISD.  Toyota certainly weighed a number of factors when making a decision to relocate their headquarters and to bring 4000 jobs to the Metroplex; quality of education no doubt was one of them.  But for the Mayor to single out DISD is patently unfair to the staff and students of DISD.  Like any district, DISD has issues but it is unfair to blame Toyota’s decision on DISD.  Perhaps the Mayor would be better served by engaging the district in discussions about how to address what he perceives to be weaknesses in DISD.

And that’s where the reference to HB 5 comes in.  Under the Community and Student Engagement part of HB 5, communities and districts are required to work closely with each other to set metrics for performance in a number of areas, and to then define corrective action plans where those metrics are not being attained.  To suggest that “fostering economic development” is one of those attributes is not within the scope of HB 5.  However, as a whole, focusing on the eight attributes defined in HB 5 will help tell the story of performance in a district and how it is working to improve, putting all parties in a better position to leverage those successes to the benefit of the entire community.  Dallas ISD is no different than the rest of our districts in that regard and, given cooperation between public officials and the district, stands a far better chance of addressing shortcomings than continually being subjected to criticism by the Mayor.

This, to me, seems to be a golden opportunity for the City administration and the District administration to sit down and discuss their respective needs.  To succeed, the district needs the support of the Mayor and the citizens of Dallas in defining not just what the State requires relative to public education, but what the Mayor and City want to see from the District.  There are no winners when it comes to the Mayor’s continued criticism of DISD; it’s time for all parties to embrace the spirit of House Bill 5 and to come together to address the challenges and opportunities in educating DISD students.  These students deserve the opportunity to succeed; a more cooperative effort will help them do so.