![[Table of Contents]](/icons/up.gif){kind=icon}
Oregon State Goals 2000 Plan - January 1995
Questions posed by USDOE Review Panel: Brian Benzel, Rubin Carriedo, Chris Cross, Susan Fuhrman, Paulette Copeland
Review of the Oregon Goals 2000 State Plan
12/24/94
A five-member peer review panel met on December 21st and 22nd to discuss the Oregon Goals 2000 State Plan. Attached are questions and items that they would like to leam more about during the upcoming site review. These questions are being provided to you in order that you may prepare for the review. The panel would like to stress that these are items for discussion; the panel does not expect a written document(s) in response to them.
In the interest of time these questions are being sent to you directly. The panel has seen and revised a draft of the questions, but has not reviewed the final edition. We believe the items that follow capture the panel's areas of interest.
CRITERIA I: THE PLAN HOLDS REASONABLE PROMISE OF HELPING ALL STUDENTS ACHIEVE HIGH LEVELS
To deepen their knowledge of the Oregon Education Act for the 21st Century the panel would appreciate an opportunity for a general discussion of it with members of the Oregon Department of Education and, if possible, members or staff of the legislature.
Local plans
Each school district will be required to submit a local improvement plan to the State. We would like to have you discuss the criteria and process that will be used to review these plans.
Standards
The Curriculum Content Framework contained in appendix G says that the framework will be reviewed when final documents on national voluntary standards become available. The panel believes this is one mechanism to ensure that the Oregon content is challenging. Could you tell us how you are progressing with this review and/or what other benchmarks you may use to determine that content standards are challenging?
If local plans also contain content standards, how will Oregon determine that these standards are challenging?
We are not clear on the process Oregon will use to develop Statewide performance standards. We would appreciate additional information in this area.
Assessments
The panel realizes that the area of assessment is a particularly difficult one for all States. To give us a better idea on how Oregon plans to proceed with assessment, we would appreciate clarification on the following:
Can you map out and describe the plan for the State and local assessment system?
What is the status of the development of this plan?
What is your plan to accommodate limited-English-proficient and other special needs students in your assessment system?
Involvement of teachers
Goals 2000 calls for both familiarizing teachers with the State plan and including in the plan staff development aligned with content standards. Please provide information on the following matters:
What are your strategies to ensure that teachers are involved in, knowledgeable about, and committed to the plan?
How will the State and local staff development activities support the plan? For example, the Oregon Report Card (Appendix Q) states that 45 percent of the State's teachers will be trained. What are your plans for the remainder?
Opportunity to learn standards and strategies
Your plan, on page 10, lists several activities (multiple learning environments, alternative education programs, alternative learning centers, Serve Oregon, etc.) at the State and local level related to opportunity to learn. The panel was pleased to see them stated so specifically. Are these activities tied together to provide all children an opportunity to learn to the State standards?
At the local level, the plan calls for both alternative learning programs and sites. The panel understands and supports that the purpose of both these alternatives is to raise the achievement of children attending them to the same standards set for other children. The panel is aware that, in the past, similar approaches have often resulted in tracking of students and in over inclusion of minority children. The district survey information in Appendix J addresses flexibility in grouping and equal opportunities regard to alternative learning environments. How will this work in regard to alternative learning environments? How will this work in regard to alternative sites and centers?
Making improvements systemwide
The plan highlights how the State will use technology to build capacity throughout the state. Beyond using technology, what is the State's strategy for helping local education agencies (LEA's) and schools to develop and implement local improvement plans.
Dropout strategies
Alternative learning environments are integral to how the State plans to address the needs of dropouts. Clarification about this effort should be addressed through the response to the question posed about opportunity to learn strategies.
Governance, Accountability and Management
The plan indicates that over half of the school districts have received funding for restructuring. Do you have any evidence that new governance structures, particularly the school site councils, are having an impact on teaching and learning?
Does the State's accountability model include interventions or rewards for LEAs? If not, is this under consideration?
How is the Oregon Department of Education changing to support changes at the local level?
Benchmark and timelines
The panel noted the comprehensive list of statewide benchmarks included in the "Oregon Benchmarks" publication (Tab D). In particular those for student performance outcomes are exemplary.
Program improvement and regular review
The panel found the five-step plan to be a constructive approach to reviewing progress. Clarification is needed on the details of the timeline and where you are now in the 5-step process. How is the five-step plan connected to the standards setting process?
Coherent and coordinated strategies
GOALS 2000 facilitates the coordination of planning, implementation, and the use of Federal resources. How is the State planning to integrate the GOALS 2000 plan with the Carl Perkins Act, Improve America Schools Act, and the School-to-Work Act? What is the best way for the State to show how all this fits together and that resources will be coordinated.
As various school districts implement their programs, what strategies do you see for sharing the results of reform efforts among schools and districts and with educators?
The panel found the Proficiency-based Admission Standards adopted by the Board of Higher Education and included in Tab R to be a noteworthy component of integration.
CRITERIA II: THE PLAN REFLECTS WIDESPREAD COMMITMENT TO ITS IMPLEMENTATION
You indicate in the plan review section (page 35) that GOALS 2000 first-year funds have been used to review the implementation of the Oregon Education Act. The panel would be interested in knowing what the State has found out in this survey. As those findings and other indicators pertain to widespread commitment, what is being done in the State to sustain and expand public support over time? By teachers, business, parents, etc.?
The passage of education reform legislation reflects broad-based support. What is being done to assure that legislative appropriations will be sufficient to support the reform agenda?
CRITERIA III: THE PLAN ALLOWS SCHOOLS, LOCAL EDUCATION AGENCIES AND COMMUNlTIES THE FLEXIBILlTY TO IMPLEMENT LOCAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS
The 21st Century School Program provides for flexibility through waivers and your plan includes a list of items that can be modified under this program. Within the areas listed, what cannot be waived? For example, can graduation requirements be waived as they relate to CIM and CAM and how does this affect the integrity of the State's standards setting?
What has the State learned from local waiver requests about barriers to reform? Are there plans to change any laws or regulations?
What opportunities are offered by the State for local communities to initiate reform? What is being done to build local capacity to initiate and sustain reform?
OBSERVATIONS
For the benefit of other States and districts that can learn from your experience the panel made the following observations
Consider giving more prominence to student performance outcomes in the plan itself rather than piacing it in the appendix (Tab 3, "Oregon Benchmarks," page A-3). The panel saw this as an essential component of your plan and a model that could be of use to other States
The panel found the Proficiency-based Admission Standards adopted by the Board of Higher Education and included in Tab R to be a noteworthy example of integration. You may want to consider including more information about these standards in the plan itself.
Widespread public engagement is implied as a result of the progress the State has made, but there is not much explicit information about community support. Consider including more information about what you did to build public support that enabled you to get to this point.
[Letter of Recommendation from Peer Review Panel]