![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Oregon Goals 2000 State Plan - January 1995
Criterion II:
The plan holds reasonable promise of helping all students
to achieve at the high levels called for in the Act
- Goals 2000: Educate America Act Section 306 (n) (2) (B-C)
The State improvement plan realistically and thoughtfully describes comprehensive strategies for enabling all children to reach challenging academic standards. Each plan should reflect a clear analysis of the State's needs related to improved teaching and learning; a compelling vision of what schools must do in order for all children to attain the State's challenging standards to be prepared for further learning, work and productive citizenship; and a coherent, step-by-step set of strategies for realizing that vision. An effective plan will have pieces so interrelated that the actions in their entirety will be more than the sum of its parts.
Question to Consider:What is the State's vision of schools and the educational system necessary to help all children reach challenging standards of achievement and how does that vision reflect the State's evaluation of its current education system? |
Oregon began development of its school improvement plan in 1984 with the Oregon Action Plan for Excellence, then state's response to A Nation at Risk. In 1985, the Essential Learning Skills and Common Curriculum Goals were developed, articulating basic skill expectations for local schools and laying the foundation for the state assessment system. In 1987, the Oregon State Legislature enacted the School Improvement and Professional Development Act to develop model schools throughout the state that would be engaged in effective practices. In 1989, the Oregon State Legislature enacted the 21st Century Schools Program permitting waivers of statutes, rules and contracts that inhibit progress toward school improvement.
Building on this history, the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century, enacted in 1991, provides a compelling vision for systemic school improvement: The "best educated citizens in the nation by the year 2000 and a work force equal to any in the world by the year 2010." This vision invites the entire community from policy makers to school practitioners, from businesses to families to join in redesigning Oregon schools: preschool, kindergarten through high school, higher education and school-to work transition. Every Oregon student, from early childhood on, will have the opportunity to learn in a comprehensive, integrated system that consistently focuses on high standards.
Each child's journey toward high content and performance standards begins well before her/his formal K-12 school experience. The first National Goal declares that by the year 2000, all children will start school ready to learn. To ensure that more of our children enter kindergarten "ready to learn," the Oregon State Legislature reaffirmed its commitment to developing comprehensive prekindergarten programs for 3 and 4 year old children from low income families. These programs, with a key element of parent involvement, provide educational, health and social services to young children. Oregon has adopted federal Head Start guidelines for these programs which are currently funded biennially with 17 million dollars from the State General Fund. An additional focus has been in the area of Early Intervention programs for children 0 through 5 years old with disabilities. A variety of services are provided for young children and their families.
The development of challenging academic content and student performance standards that are the centerpiece of Goals 2000 also drive the school improvement agenda in Oregon. The Certificates of Initial and Advanced Mastery (CIM and CAM) form the foundation of the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century, providing a continuous connection of learning for each student from preschool through postsecondary entry into the workforce.
Questions to Consider:Does the plan provide a process for developing or adopting Statewide content standards and performance standards for all students? Will the standards developed through this process be challenging academically? Will these standards encourage the development of coordinated systems of standards and measures under section 115 of the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Applied Technology Education Act? Will the standards be challenging for all students--including economically disadvantaged students; students with limited English proficiency, disabilities, or other special needs; and gifted and talented students? |
The Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM) is based on a rigorous educational program which prepares students for continuing education in one or more endorsement areas leading to the Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM). Students begin working on the CIM in kindergarten, with most students completing requirements at or about age 16 or grade 10. Districts will award the first CIMs to students in their districts in June 1997. Some students will earn a CIM prior to age 16 while others may take longer. Accommodations will be made to student learning needs without compromising the integrity of the standards.
| Foundation Skills | Think | critically, creatively and reflectively in making decisions and solving problems. |
| Self-Direct Learning | direct his or her own learning, including planning and carrying out complex projects. | |
| Communicate | communicate through reading, writing, speaking, and listening, and through an integrated use of visual forms such as symbols and graphic images. | |
| Use Technology | use current technology, including computers, to process information and produce high-quality products. | |
| Quantify | recognize, process, and communicate quantitative relationships. | |
| Collaborate | participate as a member of a team, including providing leadership for achieving goals and working well with others from diverse backgrounds. | |
| Core Applications for Living | Deliberate on Public Issues | deliberate on public issues which arise in our representative democracy and in the world by applying perspectives from the social sciences |
| Understand Diversity | understand human diversity and communicate in a second language, applying appropriate cultural norms. | |
| Interpret Human Experience | interpret human experience through literature and the fine and performing arts. | |
| Apply Science and Math | apply science and math concepts and processes, showing an understanding of how they affect our world. | |
| Understand Positive Health Habits | understand positive health habits and behaviors that establish and maintain healthy interpersonal relationships. |
The Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM) standards are divided into Foundation Skills and Advanced Applications that will require the same high standards of performance of all students. The CAM program will provide the content and context to prepare students for their individual goals beyond high school.
Students, with the involvement of parents and school staff, will develop individualized plans that will build upon students' aptitudes, interests and goals. These plans will provide a road map to prepare students to continue their education and to enter the work force.
The CAM program differs from the CIM program in its fundamental purpose. Students will continue to emphasize the CIM Foundation Skills as they prepare for the CAM but will demonstrate the skills in a context requiring a more sophisticated use of knowledge and performance. While nearing completion of the CIM, students will begin preparation towards this focused program of study lasting approximately two years.
The CAM program builds upon the learning of the CIM program and focuses on student demonstrations at high levels of performance in nine outcome areas that together comprise the Foundation Skills (think, self-direct learning, communicate, use technology, quantify and collaborate) and the Advanced Applications (use knowledge, improve processes and enhance systems).
As a context for learning and for performance demonstrations, the student selects one or more of the following CAM endorsement areas: Arts and Communications, Business and Management, Health Services, Human Resources, Industrial and Engineering Systems and Natural Resource Systems.
As National Standards are further developed in content and performance areas, these may be aligned with the Certificates of Initial and Advanced Mastery Standards (CIM and CAM) thereby enriching both school level programs and instructional practice.
In January 1995, each school district submitted a comprehensive school improvement plan including:
a survey of professional development needs indicating the specific training areas for teachers as they design and implement programs and assessments leading to the Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM);
a plan for designing alternative learning environments so that all students might reach CIM standards and begin to plan toward the Certificate of Advanced Mastery (CAM); and
a plan for designing and implementing programs including curriculum, instructional strategies and performance assessments leading to the awarding of the CIM by June 1997.
This district school improvement plan meets the intent of the local improvement plan indicated in the Goals 2000: Educate America Act. School site councils are the representative panels that work together to align building plans with district plans which are in turn aligned with state level CIM and CAM standards.
| Foundation Skills | Think critically, creatively and reflectively in making decisions and solving problems. | |
| Direct his or her own learning, including planning and carrying out complex projects. | ||
| Communicate through reading, writing, speaking, and listening, and through an integrated use of visual forms such as symbols and graphic images. | ||
| Use current technology, including computers, to process information and produce high-quality products. | ||
| Recognize, process, and communicate quantitative relationships. | ||
| Participate as a member of a team, including providing leadership for achieving goals and working well with others from diverse backgrounds. | ||
| Advanced Applications | Access, evaluate, and apply information, resources, and technology common to selected endorsement area(s) | |
| Analyze and deliberate on the systems and structures common to selected endorsement area(s) | ||
| Examine diverse positions and deliberate on social, political, economic, and environmental issues related to their systems | ||
| Evaluate the factors that build interpersonal relationships and balance the personal, family, and workplace roles. | ||
Questions to Consider:
(Section 306 (c) (1) (B)) |
Oregon's program to assess the learning goals adopted for the state by the State Board of Education began development in 1985 and has been in place statewide since 1991. These assessments have focused on program evaluation and on providing information to monitor how well students are doing in relation to Oregon's learning goals. However, the goals for students have been changing with the introduction of the Certificates of Initial and Advanced Mastery (CIM and CAM), which require the state to adjust its large scale assessment program to support both the CIM and CAM and program evaluation.
While the CIM will require the same high standards of performance of all students, many tasks will be structured so students can demonstrate their achievement through a variety of formats. There are common statewide tasks and assessments that will occur at the benchmark levels at grades 3, 5, and 8 and the CIM level (around age 16 or grade 10). Individual assessment will be ongoing to provide students continuous feedback regarding their progress toward meeting the CIM outcomes at the benchmark levels and at the CIM level.
For the CIM, the state will focus primarily on providing a quality control function. Three separate activities will be included in this process:
use of common tasks for the CIM portfolio;
certification of individual scores; and
assuring comparability and reliability of scoring of portfolios.
The Oregon Department of Education, in collaboration with the Student Performance Assessment Network (SPAN), and as a participant in the New Standards Project, is developing performance assessment models including tasks, portfolio guidelines and judging procedures to assist schools with the implementation of the CIM program. This development work builds on existing state wide assessment of all students at grades 3, 5, 8 and 11.
Portland State University, special educators and schools participating in the Student Performance Assessment Network (SPAN) are collaborating to ensure that tasks and assessment will be modified to met the needs of special populations without jeopardizing the integrity of the standards. We anticipate that the small number of students unable to achieve the CIM standards will leave school with a portfolio that recognizes and highlights their achievements toward the CIM.
The attainment of the CAM will be based on student performance measured against state level performance standards. Procedures are being developed to assure that all schools make comparable decisions based on the same standards of student performance and program development criteria. These standards will include specific proficiency levels in the advanced applications and foundation skills. Responsibility for awarding the CIM and CAM rests with the local districts which are required to have comprehensive school improvement plans approved by the Oregon Department of Education.
| Goals 2000 | State Level | Local Level |
|---|---|---|
| "Each State...shall establish and include in its improvement plan strategies for meeting the National Education Goals by improving teaching and learning and students' mastery of basic and advanced skills in core content areas...including a process for developing or adopting State content standards and State student performance standards for all students...and a process for developing and implementing valid, nondiscriminatory and reliable State assessments." Section 306, Subsection (c) |
1991, the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century, established a comprehensive plan for restructuring schools pre-K through 14, including school-to-work link; promoted models and demonstration sites pre-K through 14; expanded waiver process; established school site councils with broad participation; mandated development of content and performance standards for Certificates of Initial and Advanced Mastery (CIM and CAM), accompanying assessments and annual Report Card on progress; required alternative learning environments; extended the school year; promoted parent participation and benchmarked Oregon Education System to world-class standards 1992, the State Board accepts the recommendations of the CIM and CAM Task Forces 1994, the State Board approves the standards that must be met by all students to receive the CIM 1994-95, CIM and CAM steering committees continue the development of systems aligning content standards, performance standards and assessments with State and national content and performance standards |
1992, six school districts forming the Student Performance Assessment Network (SPAN), begin developing systems for assessing student performance and progress toward achieving the CIM In a pilot program, 105 sophomores at Cottage Grove High School receive the first CIM, based on locally developed criteria January 1995, all school districts submitted comprehensive school improvement plans to enable all students to reach CIM standards |
Question to Consider:Does the plan incorporate a mechanism for aligning State or local curricula, instructional materials, and State assessments with the State content and student performance standards? |
In 1991, the State Board of Education completely revised the process for the review and adoption of instructional materials. Each summer, hundreds of public school teachers from all levels review a wide variety of instructional materials aligning these materials with State adopted Curriculum Frameworks and developing state and national content and performance standards. Recommendations are made to local districts on quality materials that support all students reaching high standards. Local district boards of education adopt instructional materials that are selected by and suited to local needs.
Question to Consider:Does the plan provide a process for familiarizing teachers with the State content and student performance standards and developing the capacity of teachers to provide high quality instruction within the State content areas? |
Recognizing that quality education can only come about through a quality prepared workforce of educational professionals, the Joint Boards of Education (the State Boards of Education and Higher Education) have embarked on an ambitious collaborative venture with the Teachers Standards and Practice Commission (TSPC). The intent of this collaborative effort is to transform teacher preservice training, continuing professional development, and licensure to align with the design and implementation of the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century. A broad based participative process has been used to involve educational professionals from all levels in a conversation around key issue areas. Preliminary progress indicates that the Joint Boards project promises to eventually transform Oregon's system of preparing and licensing teachers to align more closely with a performance based system.
Question to Consider:Does the State plan establish standards or strategies for providing all students the opportunity to learn to challenging academic standards, based on those factors as the State deems appropriate to ensure that all students receive a fair opportunity to achieve the knowledge and skills described in State content and student performance standards? NOTE: The Goals 2000 Act provides flexibility for States and localities to exercise their own discretion regarding how and whether to implement opportunity-to-learn standards or strategies |
The Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century speaks directly to the importance of ensuring that every child has the opportunity for a quality education. The capacity of every school district in Oregon to support and meet high standards is currently assessed every six years and beginning in 1996, will be assessed every three years. State statute directly addresses opportunity to learn standards, "The board shall establish the standards, including standards of accessibility to educational opportunities" (ORS 329.085).
Despite our best efforts some students are not able to meet high standards in traditional ways. In Oregon, opportunity to learn standards received legislative support beginning in 1979 when the Oregon Department of Education gave local districts the authority to create multiple learning environments. These environments include both private and public school programs. Such programs are held accountable according to the level of academic achievement the participating student demonstrates on an appropriate exam or test or through earning credit. The 1987 Legislative session defined alternative education programs as designed to "assist students to achieve the goals of the curriculum in a manner consistent with their learning styles and needs."
With the passage of the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century, a task force on Alternative Learning Environments was established. This task force recommended the revision of existing administrative rules and statutes to require that districts demonstrate the progress of their students toward the CIM and CAM standards as measured through performance on statewide assessments at grades 3, 5, 8 and 10. Furthermore, alternative learning environments were defined as "additional services and programs for students who are not making satisfactory progress toward the CIM as measured by achievement of CIM benchmarks or for students who have requested additional learning options to help them achieve the CIM benchmarks."
The learning centers mandated in Section 24 of the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century, are defined as "a system of coordinated and integrated learning environments and services for students... all students, ranging from those needing remedial services to talented and gifted who are not successfully reaching the identified outcomes, are entitled to the support offered in learning centers and other environments."
This vision of coordinated and integrated alternative learning environments became a reality in January 1994 when three regional alternative learning sites were established to serve 10,000 students from Benton, Coos, Curry, Jackson, Josephine, Lincoln and Linn Counties. These students include those who are reentering the educational system; seeking a high school diploma; achieving a CIM or CAM; enrolling in professional technical education; participating in work or community-based learning experiences; or making the transition from school to school or school to work. These current regional sites and future additional sites are creating partnerships from across the system by coordinating services among local school districts, community colleges, private alternative education programs and the regional workforce quality councils.
In January 1995, each school district submitted as part of its plan for the implementation of the Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM) a plan for alternative learning environments for those students who are not making satisfactory progress toward achieving the CIM standards. Our commitment to all students reaching high standards clearly stems from two decades of development of a system to support all students in a manner consistent with their learning styles and needs.
The 1991 Legislature created a new school funding formula to provide financial equity among school districts. Under the formula, each school district receives funding per student, based on the number of students in the district, plus an additional amount for students in more costly programs such as special education or English as a Second Language.
| Goals 2000 | State Level | Local Level |
|---|---|---|
| "...establish standards or strategies for providing all students with an opportunity to learn ...to ensure that all students receive a fair opportunity to achieve the knowledge and skills as described in State content standards and State student performance standards adopted by the State..." Section 306, Subsection (d) |
1979, local districts given authority to create multiple learning environments 1987, Legislative session defines alternative education programs 1991, Section 24, Or. Ed. Act mandates learning centers for students not making progress toward the CIM; Alternative Learning Environments Task Force established 1992, Serve Oregon established through funding from the National Community Services Trust Act |
1993-94, 330 alternative learning programs serve 30,000 or 5.8% of Oregon's students 1994, three regional alternative learning sites established to serve 10,000 students in seven counties January, 1995, every school district submits a Certificate of Initial Mastery (CIM) plan, including a design for Alternative Learning Environments Since 1992, 45 schools established service learning programs K-12 providing alternative learning environments and opportunities for in the non-profit area |
Question to Consider:How effective are the strategies to assist local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools throughout the State in helping all student reach the challenging State standards? |
When considering the challenge of fully implementing the Oregon State Plan in a state with many small, remote schools, technology emerges as the vehicle for making school improvement systemwide. This system merges instructional technology with administrative technology.
Building upon a foundation of collaborative relationships both inside and outside of the educational community, the Oregon Department of Education continues to nurture both top level and grass roots partnerships that will improve student performance at the classroom level; provide quality distance learning opportunities for all schools and communities; develop rigorous curricula in core content areas; demonstrate student performance in both process and content areas; profile student performance individually and aggregate achievement for schools; and address all levels of student and community needs through a connection with state, social service and community agencies.
Note: Oregon received Goals 2000 technology funding on September 30, 1994 to further develop a Technology Plan in response to Section 317 of the Goals 2000: Educate America Act.
The regional Educational Service Districts (ESDs) that provide a foundation for the emerging telecommunications infrastructure also provide a foundation for regional professional development. In August 1994, the Oregon Department of Education implemented a regional strategy to help schools implement the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century. Oregon's 36 counties were divided into nine regions and a team of Department staff was assigned to each region and linked with contacts in the local districts and Educational Service District (ESD).
These teams respond to requests from schools, provide technical assistance and deliver training workshops on the Certificate of Initial Mastery Assessment System, curriculum frameworks, alternative learning environments and special needs students and the certificate of Advanced Mastery.
Beginning in 1987, a collaborative effort was launched by members of the American Indian/Alaskan Native community, the State Board and the State Department of Education to develop strategies for supporting the educational rights and opportunities of American Indian/Alaskan Native children. In 1994, the State Board adopted the Oregon American Indian/Alaskan Native Education State Plan which provides technical assistance to local districts to develop school improvement plans to support American Indian/ Alaskan Native students in meeting the high content and performance standards of the Certificates of Initial and Advanced Mastery.
As part of the Oregon Goals 2000 System Review approved under Oregon's first year Goals 2000 application, constituency groups representing technology and diversity (including Native Americans) will participate in a review process to determine the areas needing improvement to support the further development and implementation of the State Plan at the local district and classroom level.
| Goals 2000 | State Level | Local Level |
|---|---|---|
"...provide students throughout the State with the opportunity to meet standards... (1) provide for availability of curricular materials, learning technologies, including distance learning, and professional development in a manner that ensures equal access by all local educational agencies in the State |
1991, Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century promotes use of technology in the development of the local school improvement plan; quality professional development for all education professionals | 1994, regional strategy instituted to serve practitioners in 36 counties through 9 regions 1994, local districts apply for Oregon Goals 2000 subgrant funds to integrate technology with instructional strategies to help all students meet high standards |
| (2) develop partnerships with Indian tribes and schools funded by the Bureau, where appropriate, to improve consistency and compatibility in curriculum among public elementary schools and such schools funded by the Bureau..." Section 306, Subsection (g) |
1993, Legislation authorizes the reorganization of the 26 Educational Service Districts (ESDs) statewide to coordinate services locally in support of the implementation of the Oregon Educational Act for the 21st Century 21st Century Advisory Committee membership is expanded to include representation of Native American Communities 1994, State Board adopted the Oregon American Indian/Alaskan Native Education State Plan Oregon Goals 2000 Constituency Group on Diversity includes representation of Confederated Oregon Tribes |
1994, technical assistance provided to local districts to develop school improvement plans to support American Indian/ Alaskan Native students in meeting the high content and performance standards in the CIM and CAM |
[Dropout Strategies]