Michigan State Board of Education Meeting for September 11, 2018 – Morning Session


>>GOOD MORNING. THE TIME IS NOW 9:35 AM AND A QUORUM OF THE BOARD IS PRESENT. THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 11, 2018 IS CALLED TO ORDER. THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA AND ORDER OF PRIORITY. ARE THERE ANY ITEMS BOARD MEMBERS WOULD LIKE TO ADD OR DELETE FROM THE AGENDA?>>MOVE FOR APPROVAL AS PRESENTED.>>OKAY, WE HAVE A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.>>AYE.>>THOSE OPPOSED, NAY. MOTION CARRIES– THANK YOU. TODAY WE REMEMBER, IN A VERY SPECIAL WAY, THOSE WHOSE LIVES WERE DRAMATICALLY IMPACTED ON SEPTEMBER 11, 2001, 17 YEARS AGO, AND ALL OF THOSE WHO RUSHED TO OFFER ASSISTANCE AS OUR COUNTRY CAME TOGETHER THROUGH TREMENDOUS ACTS OF HEROISM. I WOULD LIKE US EACH TO PAUSE IN A MOMENT OF SILENCE TO RECOGNIZE THOSE WHO LOST THEIR LIVES ON THIS DATE. THANK YOU. WE HAVE A VERY FULL AGENDA. THIS MORNING WE HAVE FOUR PRESENTATIONS AND 2 1/2 HOURS TO COMPLETE THEM. SO I’M GOING TO BE THE TIME KEEPER THIS MORNING. PLEASE BE ASSURED THAT IF YOU DON’T GET ALL OF YOUR QUESTIONS ANSWERED DURING THE PRESENTATION, AND YOU NEED MORE INFORMATION, THE STAFF WILL BE HAPPY TO MEET WITH YOU AT A LATER TIME. AT THIS TIME, MARILYN, WILL YOU PLEASE INTRODUCE THE MEMBERS OF THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION?>>I WILL. I’M MARILYN SCHNEIDER. I’M THE STATE BOARD EXECUTIVE. AND TO MY IMMEDIATE LEFT IS SHEILA ALLES. SHE’S THE INTERIM STATE SUPERINTENDENT, AND ALSO, CHAIRPERSON OF THE BOARD. TO HER LEFT IS ONE OF OUR CO-PRESIDENTS, DR. ZEILE. HE RESIDES IN DEARBORN. THE OTHER CO-PRESIDENT, CASANDRA ULBRICH, RESIDES IN ROCHESTER HILLS. MICHELLE FECTEAU, THE BOARD’S SECRETARY, RESIDES IN DETROIT. NIKKI SNYDER RESIDES IN DEXTER. SHE’S A BOARD MEMBER. AND THIS YEAR’S MICHIGAN TEACHER OF THE YEAR IS LAURA CHANG. SHE IS A K-5 READING AND MATH INTERVENTIONIST IN VICKSBURG COMMUNITY SCHOOLS. ACROSS THE TABLE IS TYLER SAWHER. HE IS THE GOVERNOR’S REPRESENTATIVE– STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS FOR EDUCATION AND CAREER CONNECTIONS.>>THERE YOU GO. [ LAUGHTER ]>>I THINK THAT WAS A LITTLE OFF– YOU’RE BEING VERY GRACIOUS, TYLER. EILEEN WEISER, STATE BOARD MEMBER FROM ANN ARBOR. LUPE RAMOS-MONTIGNY, STATE BOARD MEMBER FROM GRAND RAPIDS. PAM PUGH, STATE BOARD MEMBER FROM SAGINAW. THE BOARD’S TREASURER, TOM McMILLIN, FROM OAKLAND TOWNSHIP. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. VENESSA, WILL YOU PLEASE BEGIN WITH THE NEW EMPLOYEE INTRODUCTIONS?>>YES. GOOD MORNING, EVERYBODY. WE ARE VERY PLEASED TO HAVE BEN BOERKOEL HERE IN OUR OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL SUPPORTS. BEN, WILL YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT YOURSELF?>>SO I’M MANAGING THE STATEWIDE SYSTEM OF SUPPORTS, SUPPORTING THE MI EXCEL SCHOOLS, THE LOWEST PERFORMING SCHOOLS IN THE STATE. PRIOR TO COMING WITH MDE, I WORKED AS THE DIRECTOR OF CONTINUOUS IMPROVEMENT FOR KENT INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT IN GRAND RAPIDS.>>THANK YOU. AND SCOTT?>>GOOD MORNING, ALL. I HAVE THE PLEASURE OF INTRODUCING THREE NEW EMPLOYEES. I’VE HAD A CHANCE TO MEET WITH ALL THREE OF THEM. WE’D LIKE TO WELCOME THEM TO THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. FIRST WE HAVE CHELSEA THELEN. CHELSEA IS IN THE OFFICE OF GREAT START, CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND CARE. SO WELCOME, CHELSEA.>>THANK YOU.>>WE ALSO HAVE INDIRA MAZURE, FROM THE OFFICE OF GREAT START, AGAIN, CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND CARE. AND FINALLY, WE HAVE SARAH OBERLIN. AND SARAH JOINS US AND IS WORKING IN THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL ED, LOW INCIDENCE OUTREACH. SO WELCOME.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. DID WE MISS ANY NEW EMPLOYEES WHO ARE IN THE ROOM? OKAY, THANK YOU, AND WELCOME TO EVERYONE. NOW, WE ASK THAT OUR AUDIENCE PLEASE INTRODUCE THEMSELVES, STARTING WITH MARTIN.>>GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS MARTIN ACKLEY. I’M THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF PUBLIC AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS HERE AT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.>>GOOD MORNING. I AM CAROLINE LIETHEN. I AM THE LEGISLATIVE LIAISON FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION.>>GOOD MORNING, STACY BOGARD, MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS.>>GOOD MORNING, CHELSEY MARTINEZ, COMMUNICATIONS DIRECTOR AT MASSP, THE SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS ASSOCIATION.>>GOOD MORNING, I’M WENDY ZDEB, THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OF THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF SECONDARY SCHOOL PRINCIPALS.>>DAVID MICHELSON, MICHIGAN EDUCATION ASSOCIATION.>>GOOD MORNING, DONNA OSER WITH MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL BOARDS.>>HI, ALESIA FLYE, ASSISTANT SUPERINTENDENT FROM MACOMB INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT.>>GOOD MORNING. PAUL SALAH, WAYNE RESA.>>TERANCE LUNGER, SUPERINTENDENT OF CALHOUN INTERMEDIATE SCHOOL DISTRICT.>>AND THE GENTLEMAN BEHIND?>>[ INDISTINCT ].>>IN THE BACK OF THE ROOM?>>[ INDISTINCT ].>>[ INDISTINCT ], MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ED, FROM THE SPECIAL ED, LOW INCIDENCE OUTREACH [ INDISTINCT ].>>[ INDISTINCT ], ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR THE OFFICE OF SPECIAL EDUCATION HERE AT MDE.>>SCOTT BLAKENEY, DIRECTOR OF STRATEGIC PLANNING AND COMMUNICATION FOR MDE.>>FRAN LOOSE. I’M THE FACILITATOR FOR MICHIGAN SPECIAL EDUCATION ADVISORY COMMITTEE.>>GINA PEPIN. I AM THE REGION I, UPPER PENINSULA, TEACHER OF THE YEAR.>>ALISANDE SHREWSBURY. MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IN THE SUPERINTENDENT’S OFFICE.>>SCOTT KOENIGSKNECHT, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT FOR P-20 TRANSITIONS AND STUDENT SUPPORTS.>>GOOD MORNING. KYLE GUERRANT, DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT FOR FINANCE AND OPERATIONS, AND INTERIM STATE SCHOOL REFORM OFFICER.>>VENESSA KEESLER. DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT FOR THE DIVISION OF EDUCATOR, STUDENT, AND SCHOOL SUPPORTS.>>LEAH BREEN, THE DIRECTOR OF THE OFFICE OF EDUCATOR EXCELLENCE.>>GOOD MORNING. MARK HOWE, CHIEF OF STAFF TO THE CHIEF DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT.>>GOOD MORNING. WENDY LARVICK, OFFICE OF THE STATE SUPERINTENDENT.>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND ONCE AGAIN, GOOD MORNING, EVERYONE. IF YOU PLAN TO OFFER PUBLIC COMMENT AT TODAY’S MEETING, PLEASE COMPLETE A FORM AND GET IT TO MARILYN. FORMS ARE AVAILABLE ON THE TABLE JUST OUTSIDE THE BOARDROOM. AND THEY MUST BE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO THE BEGINNING OF THE PORTION OF THE MEETING DEVOTED TO PUBLIC COMMENT. PUBLIC COMMENT WILL BEGIN IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE LUNCH BREAK, WHICH IS SCHEDULED FOR APPROXIMATELY 1:00 PM TODAY. PLEASE BE HERE AT THAT TIME TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT. MOVING ON TO THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE, WE HAVE FOUR DISCUSSION ITEMS PRIOR TO LUNCH. THE FIRST ONE IS THE PRESENTATION OF THE 2017-2018 MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION ANNUAL REVIEW. AND FOR THIS ONE, I’M GOING TO TAKE OFF MY INTERIM STATE SUPERINTENDENT’S HAT– OR ACTUALLY, MOVE IT TO THE BACK, AND PUT ON MY CHIEF DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT’S HAT AND MOVE DOWN TO THIS END OF THE TABLE. COMING AROUND ARE THE 2017-2018 ANNUAL REVIEW DOCUMENTS FOR YOU. WE ARE VERY PLEASED THIS MORNING. WE HAVE A TEAM THIS MORNING TO PRESENT THE 2017-2018 ANNUAL REVIEW FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION. EVERY PUBLIC SCHOOL AND SCHOOL DISTRICT IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN CREATES A SIMILAR DOCUMENT, AND IT’S CALLED THEIR ANNUAL EDUCATION REPORT, OR AER. THEY ALSO PRESENT THEIR ANNUAL EDUCATION REPORT TO THEIR CONSTITUENTS, MUCH AS WE ARE DOING TODAY. SO WE ARE PRESENTING TO YOU, THE BOARD, AS WELL AS TO OUR AUDIENCE, TO OUR LIVE PEOPLE WHO ARE WATCHING US LIVE STREAM OUR ANNUAL REVIEW. IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO SHARE WITH YOU THE WORK THAT WAS DONE THIS PAST YEAR RELATED TO THE TOP 10 IN 10. WE WILL ALSO SHARE WITH YOU THE METRICS THAT WE ARE USING THAT PROVIDE DATA THAT REFLECT THE PROGRESS THAT WE ARE MAKING TO BECOME A TOP 10 EDUCATION STATE. THE MDE STAFF THIS PAST YEAR WAS ENGAGED IN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK. AND WE’RE NOT ABLE TO CAPTURE ALL OF THE WORK IN THE ANNUAL REVIEW. WE WILL BE SHARING SOME OF THE WORK WITH YOU. WE’RE GOING TO SHARE SOME OF OUR EFFORTS, SOME OF OUR INITIATIVES, AND SOME OF THE PRODUCTS THAT WERE CREATED THIS PAST YEAR. THIS MORNING I’M VERY PLEASED TO HAVE WITH ME THE THREE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENTS, SCOTT KOENIGSKNECHT, KYLE GUERRANT, VENESSA KEESLER, AND MARK HOWE. WE ARE ALL PLAYING A ROLE THIS MORNING IN PRESENTING THE ANNUAL REVIEW TO YOU. NOW, AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE’S A LOT OF INFORMATION IN THIS DOCUMENT. FOR THE SAKE OF TIME, WE ARE GOING TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE ELEMENTS CONTAINED IN IT. THEN IN THE CONCLUSION OF THE PRESENTATION, WE WOULD BE VERY HAPPY TO RESPOND TO YOUR COMMENTS OR YOUR QUESTIONS. THIS YEAR’S ANNUAL REVIEW IS THE THIRD ONE FROM MDE. AND IT HAS THREE COMPONENTS TO IT. THE FIRST PART IS THE NARRATIVE COMPONENT. AND THE NARRATIVE COMPONENT IS GOING TO DESCRIBE THE EFFORTS AND THE WORK THAT HAS OCCURRED AT MDE WITH OUR EXTERNAL PARTNERS. THE SECOND PART OF IT IS THE DATA PART. AND THAT PROVIDES THE METRICS FOR MEASURING OUR PROGRESS. AND THEN THE THIRD PART IS GOING TO BE THE ADDITIONAL PERTINENT INFORMATION, ANCILLARY INFORMATION. ADDITIONALLY, THE ELECTRONIC VERSION OF THE REPORT HAS HYPERLINKS INCLUDED. SO AS YOU ARE LOOKING THROUGH THE DOCUMENT, YOU’LL SEE BLUE ITALICIZED TYPE. IF YOU ACCESS THE DOCUMENT ONLINE, YOU’LL BE ABLE TO CLICK ON THOSE HYPERLINKS, AND IT WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND DETAILS TO SUPPORT THE WORK THAT’S NOTED IN THE REPORT. FOR THOSE WHO ARE INTERESTED, THE ELECTRONIC VERSION CAN BE DOWNLOADED TODAY. IF YOU GO TO TODAY’S MEETING AGENDA, YOU WILL SEE A LINK TO THE REPORT. SO IF YOU ARE LIVE STREAMING, YOU CAN CLICK ON THE LINK. IT’S ALSO AVAILABLE ON THE MDE WEBSITE WWW.MICHIGAN.GOV /MDEANNUALREVIEW. SO NOW LET’S GET INTO THE DOCUMENT ITSELF. AND I’M GOING TO ASK THAT YOU TURN TO THE BACK COVER OF YOUR DOCUMENT. ON THE BACK COVER, YOU WILL SEE ALL OF THE COMPONENTS– WELL, MOST OF THE COMPONENTS OF MICHIGAN’S TOP 10 IN 10 STRATEGIC PLAN. YOU WILL SEE AT THE UPPER LEFT-HAND CORNER MICHIGAN’S VISION STATEMENT, MICHIGAN’S MISSION STATEMENT, FOLLOWED BY THE FOUR GUIDING PRINCIPLES. YOU WILL SEE LISTED THE SEVEN GOALS THAT MAKE UP THE TOP 10 IN 10. WHAT YOU DON’T SEE INCLUDED ARE THE 44 STRATEGIES. THOSE ARE THE STRATEGIES THAT INTERFACE WITH AND SUPPORT THE ACHIEVEMENT OF THE SEVEN GOALS. SO NOW, INTO THE DOCUMENT. IF YOU LOOK AT PAGES 1 AND 2, YOU WILL SEE AN EXECUTIVE SUMMARY OF THE REPORT. AND THEN, IF YOU TURN TO PAGE 3, IN THE UPPER RIGHT-HAND CORNER, YOU WILL SEE A VERY FAMILIAR GRAPHIC. AND WE HAVE THAT GRAPHIC ON THE SCREEN. THIS GRAPHIC REPRESENTS ALL OF THE COMPONENTS OF THE TOP 10 IN 10 STRATEGIC PLAN IN FOUR– OF WHAT WE CALL OUR FOUR FOCUS AREAS. THE BLUE AREA IS LEARNER-CENTERED SUPPORTS. THE GOLDEN AREA, EFFECTIVE EDUCATION WORKFORCE. THE RED AREA, STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS. AND WHERE THESE THREE CIRCLES INTERSECT IS SYSTEMIC INFRASTRUCTURE. TODAY OUR ANNUAL REVIEW AND OUR PRESENTATION ARE GOING TO FOCUS ON THESE FOUR FOCUS AREAS. SO WHEN WE DESIGNED THE ANNUAL REVIEW, WE DESIGNED IT, WE FORMATTED IT AROUND THESE FOUR FOCUS AREAS. SO OUR PRESENTATION TODAY WILL ALSO THEN FOCUS ON THESE FOUR FOCUS AREAS. I’M GOING TO ASK NOW THAT THE THREE DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENTS TAKE YOU THROUGH EACH OF THE FOUR FOCUS AREAS AND SHARE WITH YOU SOME OF THE ELEMENTS THAT ARE IN EACH OF THOSE FOUR FOCUS AREAS. AND WE’RE GOING TO BEGIN WITH VENESSA.>>PAGES 3 THROUGH 38 OF YOUR BOOKLET PROVIDE EXAMPLES OF SOME OF THE INITIATIVES AND EFFORTS OF THE TOP 10 IN 10. I’M GOING TO BEGIN TALKING ABOUT LEARNER-CENTERED SUPPORTS ON PAGE 3. WE WANT TO HIGHLIGHT THREE OF THOSE TODAY. WITH THE PASSAGE OF THE READ BY GRADE 3 LAW, SUPPORTING LITERACY EFFORTS IS A KEY PRIORITY FOR MICHIGAN. ON PAGE FOUR, YOU’LL SEE LOTS OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE WORK OF MDE’S EARLY LITERACY TEAM IN DEVELOPING MICHIGAN’S ACTION PLAN FOR LITERACY EXCELLENCE, WHICH CAME FROM THE WORK OF THE EARLY LITERACY TASK FORCE. AND THAT IS VERY EXPANSIVE WORK. SO HOPEFULLY YOU WILL TAKE A GOOD LOOK AT THAT PART OF THE REPORT AND UNDERSTAND THE WORK THAT’S GONE INTO THAT. THE LIBRARY OF MICHIGAN ALSO SUPPORTS LITERACY AND LEARNING IN THE STATE THROUGH A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS, INCLUDING THE READY TO READ PROGRAM THAT HELPS INSTILL A LOVE OF READING IN YOUNG CHILDREN ACROSS THE STATE. AND NEW THIS YEAR WAS THE INTRODUCTION OF MICHIGAN’S SEAL OF BI-LITERACY, WHICH IN ITS FIRST YEAR WAS AWARDED TO MORE THAN 350 STUDENTS WHO WERE FLUENT IN ENGLISH AND OVER 20 DIFFERENT LANGUAGES.>>SO ON PAGE NINE, YOU’LL SEE MORE ABOUT OUR CONTINUED WORK THIS YEAR TO ESTABLISH A MULTI-TIERED SYSTEM OF SUPPORT, WHICH INTENTIONALLY CONNECTS THE STATE’S EDUCATION, HEALTH, AND HUMAN SERVICE SYSTEMS IN SUPPORT OF SUCCESSFUL LEARNERS, SCHOOLS, CENTERS, AND COMMUNITY OUTCOMES. THE MTSS FRAMEWORK PROVIDES SCHOOLS AND DISTRICTS WITH AN EFFICIENT WAY TO ORGANIZE LOCAL RESOURCES TO SUPPORT EDUCATORS IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF EFFECTIVE PRACTICES WITH FIDELITY, SO THAT ALL LEARNERS CAN SUCCEED. THE FRAMEWORK ALSO FOCUSES ON CORE INSTRUCTION, AND THEN PROVIDES FOR TIERED INTERVENTIONS BASED UPON THE INDIVIDUAL NEEDS OF STUDENTS. THIS IS THE WORK THAT IS CURRENTLY OCCURRING IN OUR TWO TRANSFORMATION ZONES, INCLUDING LENAWEE ISD, WHERE WE WILL BE NEXT MONTH.>>THIS YEAR, MDE FOCUSED ITS EFFORTS ON SUPPORTING THE WHOLE CHILD, WHICH PLACES AN EMPHASIS ON ALL NEEDS THAT SUPPORT LEARNING, NOT JUST ACADEMICS. ON PAGES 15 AND 16 OF THE REPORT, YOU WILL FIND INFORMATION ON THE MANY CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS THAT ASSURE STUDENTS COME TO SCHOOL WELL FED AND READY TO LEARN. IN 2017, THE SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM SERVED MORE THAN 3 1/2 MILLION MEALS AT MICHIGAN’S MEET UP AND EAT UP SITES THROUGHOUT OUR STATE. YOU WILL NOTICE A RENEWED EMPHASIS ON THE WHOLE CHILD IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE NEEDS ASSESSMENT THAT OUR TEAM IS CURRENTLY WORKING ON.>>MOVING ONTO THE NEXT FOCUS AREA, EFFECTIVE EDUCATION WORKFORCE. THAT BEGINS ON PAGE 22. MICHIGAN RECOGNIZES THAT THE PRIMARY SUPPORT FOR STUDENT LEARNING IS THE EDUCATOR, AND THAT WE CANNOT BUILD A QUALITY EDUCATION SYSTEM WITHOUT HAVING AN EFFECTIVE EDUCATION WORKFORCE THAT IS WELL-PREPARED AND WELL-SUPPORTED. ONE OF THE EFFORTS WE’VE UNDERTAKEN THIS YEAR IS THE WORK TO REVISE THE CERTIFICATION STRUCTURE, WITH AN EMPHASIS ON PREPARING TEACHERS TO TEACH LITERACY IN THE EARLY GRADES. AND WE SHARED THAT WORK WITH THE BOARD LAST MONTH, I BELIEVE, POSSIBLY THE MONTH BEFORE THAT. MDE HAS ALSO WORKED WITH SEVERAL OF THE STATE’S EDUCATOR PREPARATION INSTITUTIONS TO ESTABLISH RESIDENCY-BASED PILOT PROGRAMS TO PREPARE INCOMING TEACHERS. AND FINALLY, WE’VE RESTRUCTURED THE MICHIGAN TEACHER LEADERSHIP ADVISORY COUNCIL THIS YEAR. ITS MEMBERSHIP NOW INCLUDES THE REGIONAL TEACHERS OF THE YEAR, ONE OF WHOM IS WITH US TODAY. AND THEY WILL SUPPORT EDUCATORS IN THEIR REGION AND PROVIDE ADVICE TO MDE THROUGHOUT THE YEAR.>>ON PAGE 24 OF THE REPORT, WE STAY WITH THE EFFECTIVE EDUCATION WORKFORCE AREA. AND WE HIGHLIGHT SEVERAL OF OUR RECENT PROGRAMS TO SUPPORT EDUCATORS OF OUR YOUNGEST LEARNERS. IN 2017, MICHIGAN WAS ONE OF FOUR STATES TO RECEIVE A GRANT FROM THE NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF THE STATE BOARDS OF EDUCATION TO STUDY AND IMPROVE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION WORKFORCE CONDITIONS. MDE IS USING THESE FUNDS TO DEVELOP A FRAMEWORK TO STRENGTHEN THE STATE’S EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION WORKFORCE. THIS YEAR, MDE WAS ONE OF TEN STATES TO RECEIVE FUNDING THROUGH A NATIONAL GOVERNORS ASSOCIATION OF CHIEF STATE SCHOOL OFFICERS TO DEVELOP A POLICY AGENDA TO STRENGTHEN THE STATE’S EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION WORKFORCE. WE ALSO JOINED A MULTI-STATE CONSORTIUM TO CREATE WHAT’S CALLED MIREGISTRY.COM, WHICH SERVES AS AN ONLINE ALL-IN-ONE RESOURCE CENTER FOR THOSE TEACHING OUR YOUNGEST LEARNERS.>>MOVING ON TO THE NEXT FOCUS AREA, WHICH IS STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS. BEGINNING ON PAGE 25, THESE PARTNERSHIPS WITH ISDs AND LOCAL SCHOOL DISTRICTS, OTHER STATE AGENCY PARTNERS, AND MANY EXTERNAL ORGANIZATIONS ARE CRITICAL TO SUCCESSFUL IMPLEMENTATION OF THE TOP 10 IN 10. AGAIN THIS YEAR, MDE’S WORK WITH THE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS WAS ONE OF OUR KEY STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIPS. WITH THE GOVERNOR’S EXECUTIVE ORDER RETURNING THE SCHOOL REFORM OFFICE TO MDE, WE CREATED THE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICT OFFICE TO OVERSEE OUR WORK WITH THESE DISTRICTS. ON PAGES 27 THROUGH 30, WE’VE INCLUDED BRIEF OVERVIEWS OF EACH OF THE NINE ORIGINAL PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS. ON PAGE 31 AND 32, YOU’LL SEE UPDATES ON THE WORK THAT MDE HAS DONE WITH OUR PARTNERS IN SUPPORT OF THE STUDENTS AND FAMILIES IN FLINT.>>ON PAGE 33, YOU CAN READ MORE ABOUT HOW MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF ED’S OFFICE OF CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND CARE PARTNERED WITH TWO OTHER STATE AGENCIES, THOSE BEING THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND THE LICENSE AND REGULATORY AFFAIRS OFFICE, ALSO KNOW AS LARA, TO ASSURE THAT STATE EMPLOYEES WHO WORK WITH LICENSED CHILD CARE PROVIDERS, THE PROVIDERS THEMSELVES AND OTHERS IMPACTED WERE AWARE OF THE RECENT CHANGES TO THE FEDERAL CHILD CARE DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT.>>ANOTHER PARTNERSHIP THAT WE’RE ESPECIALLY PROUD OF IS DESCRIBED ON PAGES 33 AND 34, OUR WORK WITH THE 12 FEDERALLY-RECOGNIZED SOVEREIGN TRIBES IN MICHIGAN THROUGH THE INDIGENOUS EDUCATION INITIATIVE. LAST YEAR, AS WE DEVELOPED THE ESSA PLAN, WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO DO CONSULTATION WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF THE TRIBES. AND WE WERE ABLE TO DEVELOP GUIDANCE FOR TRIBAL CONSULTATION GOING FORWARD. MDE STAFF FROM MULTIPLE OFFICES PARTICIPATE IN REGULAR MEETINGS WITH TRIBAL REPRESENTATIVES TO PROMOTE LEARNING AND DISCUSSION OF RELEVANT ISSUES. ALSO ON PAGE 34, WE SHARE AN UPDATE ON OUR WORK WITH HIGHER EDUCATION PARTNERS AT MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY AND THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN TO ESTABLISH THE MICHIGAN EDUCATION RESEARCH INSTITUTE, WHICH WILL HELP ADVANCE MICHIGAN’S EDUCATION RESEARCH AGENDA, LOOKING AT TOPICS RELATED TO THE IMPLEMENTATION OF OUR TOP 10 IN 10 PLAN. AND THE BOARD HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR FROM ONE OF THOSE RESEARCH PARTNERS AT OUR RETREAT THIS JUNE.>>NOW WE’LL MOVE ONTO THE FOURTH FOCUS AREA, SYSTEMIC INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH BEGINS ON PAGE 35 AND CONTINUES ON THROUGH PAGE 38. ALL SYSTEMS NEED AN INFRASTRUCTURE IN ORDER TO RUN. THIS YEAR, THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION CONTINUED TO FOCUS ON OUR INTERNAL SYSTEMS TO ENSURE THAT WE WERE BEST POSITIONED TO SUPPORT THE TOP 10 IN 10 WORK. MICHIGAN’S MULTI-YEAR IMPROVEMENT PLAN, ALSO KNOWN AS THE STATE SYSTEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN, IS DESCRIBED SPECIFICALLY ON PAGE 35. THIS PLAN PROVIDES THE FRAMEWORK THROUGH WHICH OUR NEW INITIATIVES ARE IMPLEMENTED.>>ON PAGES 37 AND 38, WE PROVIDE UPDATES ON ANOTHER KEY COMPONENT OF OUR SYSTEMIC INFRASTRUCTURE, TECHNOLOGY. THE MICHIGAN ROADMAP IS MICHIGAN’S EDUCATIONAL TECHNOLOGY PLAN, IN ITS FIRST YEAR OF IMPLEMENTATION THIS YEAR. THE ROADMAP BUILDS ON THE PREVIOUS TRIG GRANTS, WORKING WITH NUMEROUS PARTNERS TO BUILD THE STATE’S DATA AND TECHNOLOGY INFRASTRUCTURE TO SUPPORT EDUCATION. THE GO OPEN INITIATIVE PROVIDES OPENLY LICENSED, HIGH QUALITY DIGITAL RESOURCES TO MICHIGAN EDUCATORS. THE MICHIGAN DATA HUB PROJECT PROVIDES A PLATFORM FOR DISTRICTS TO USE STATE AND LOCAL DATA TO DRIVE EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENT. MORE THAN 20 ISDs ARE NOW PARTICIPATING, SERVING MORE THAN 900,000 STUDENTS. AND THIS YEAR, MDE IS SUPPORTING DISTRICTS’ USE OF THE FEDERAL E-RATE PROGRAM, WITH THE HIRING OF AN E-RATE SPECIALIST, WHO HELPS DISTRICTS, ISDs, AND LIBRARIES WITH PROGRAMS FUNDED THROUGH E-RATE.>>AS PART OF THE STATE’S SYSTEMIC IMPROVEMENT PLAN, WE HAVE ADOPTED THE WAY OF WORK MODEL TO STRUCTURE OUR WORK. THIS GRAPHIC MODEL, WHICH SHOULD LOOK FAMILIAR TO YOU BY NOW, SERVES AS THE BACKBONE OF OUR CROSS-OFFICE COLLABORATIONS. ONE EXAMPLE OF HOW WE’RE USING THIS MODEL IS SHOWN ON PAGE 38, THROUGH THE CREATION OF COMMON DEFINITIONS, TO ASSURE THAT THERE IS A COMMON UNDERSTANDING ACROSS MDE AND OUR LOCAL AND ISD PARTNERS. WE’VE CREATED A PAGE ON THE MDE WEBSITE WHERE THIS INFORMATION IS HOUSED FOR EASY SHARING WITH INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL PARTNERS. THE ACTIVITY WILL HELP ASSURE CONSISTENCY OF KEY MESSAGING. THAT CONCLUDES THE NARRATIVE PORTION OF THE TOP 10 IN 10 IMPLEMENTATION ACTIVITIES. I’LL NOW TURN IT OVER TO MARK HOWE TO REVIEW THE METRICS PORTION.>>THANK YOU, KYLE. THE METRICS SECTION BEGINS ON PAGE 39. LAST YEAR WE IDENTIFIED METRICS TO MEASURE OUR PROGRESS AND ORGANIZE THEM INTO SIX Es, WHICH ARE LISTED ON THIS SLIDE. WE NOTED THAT AS THE WORK CONTINUES TO REFINE OUR IMPLEMENTATION EFFORTS, IT IS PROBABLE THAT OUR METRICS WILL ALSO EVOLVE OVER TIME. THERE ARE TWO TYPES OF DATA USED FOR THIS PURPOSE. AND THEY ARE DESCRIBED ON THE BOTTOM OF PAGE 39. NATIONAL DATA, WHICH PROVIDES STATE-TO-STATE COMPARISONS, AND STATE AND LOCAL DATA, WHICH IS SPECIFIC TO MICHIGAN. LAST YEAR WE IDENTIFIED DATA TO SET A BASELINE FOR OUR METRICS. THIS YEAR WE ARE SHOWING CURRENT RESULTS, AS WELL AS THE BASELINE VALUES. WE WILL CONTINUE TO ADD RESULTS IN COMING YEARS FOR COMPARISON PURPOSES, WHICH WILL HELP US MONITOR OUR PROGRESS OVER TIME. AN OVERALL NOTE IS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT IS TO PRESENT THE INFORMATION, INCLUDING HISTORICAL DATA, WITHOUT ATTRIBUTING POSSIBLE FACTORS THAT MAY HAVE CAUSED CHANGES FROM YEAR TO YEAR. FOR THIS PRESENTATION, I’LL BE HIGHLIGHTING A FEW OF THE METRICS FROM EACH OF THE Es. PAGES 40 AND 41 INCLUDE THE FIRST E, EARLY LEARNING METRICS, WHICH ARE COLOR CODED IN PURPLE. HERE YOU’LL SEE THE GREAT START TO QUALITY PROVIDER STAR RATINGS SHOWN ON PAGE 40. WE’VE MOVED THIS TABLE FROM THE NARRATIVE SECTION OF THE REPORT TO THE METRICS SECTION THIS YEAR. YOU’LL SEE THAT A NUMBER OF FIVE-STAR PROGRAMS OF ALL TYPES HAS INCREASED, AND THAT THERE ARE MORE PROVIDERS OF ALL TYPES PARTICIPATING IN THE RATING SYSTEM THIS YEAR, COMPARED TO LAST YEAR. A QUICK NOTE ABOUT M-STEP RESULTS THAT YOU SEE REPORTED IN THIS SECTION, AND ON THE NEXT SECTION AS WELL. AT THE TIME THIS REPORT WAS COMPLETED, THE 2017-2018 M-STEP RESULTS WERE NOT AVAILABLE. AND I KNOW THAT THAT’S A PRESENTATION LATER ON AT THE BOARD MEETING TODAY. BUT WHAT YOU SEE IN THIS REPORT ARE THE 2016-2017 RESULTS COMPARED TO THE BASELINE YEAR OF 2015-2016. PAGES 41 AND 42 INCLUDE METRICS AROUND THE SECOND E, EXIT READY, WHICH IS COLOR CODED IN RED. IN THIS SECTION, TODAY WE’RE HIGHLIGHTING GRADUATION RATES, WHICH INCREASED TO 80.2% IN 2016-2017, UP FROM 79.7% IN 2015-2016. ANOTHER HIGHLIGHT IS THAT WE SAW AN INCREASE IN THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS COMPLETING ALL COURSES AND REQUIREMENTS IN THEIR CTE PROGRAM OF STUDY, FROM OVER 37,000 IN 2015-2016 TO NEARLY 45,000 IN 2016-2017. AT THE BOTTOM OF PAGE 42 WAS THE THIRD E, ENGAGEMENT. AND THAT’S COLOR CODED IN YELLOW. WE KNOW THAT A STUDENT’S SUCCESS DEPENDS ON BEING FULLY PRESENT AND ENGAGED IN THE LEARNING ENVIRONMENT. AND TODAY WE LOOK AT CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM, WHICH IS DEFINED AS MISSING 10% OR MORE OF THE SCHEDULED SCHOOL DAYS ACROSS ALL GRADES. YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE ARE INCREASES IN CHRONIC ABSENCE RATES ACROSS MOST GRADES, AND PARTICULARLY IN THE LOWER GRADES, K-4. ON THE TOP OF PAGE 43 IS OUR FOURTH E, EFFECTIVE EDUCATORS. THAT’S COLOR CODED IN BLUE. HERE WE’RE SHOWING DATA BASED ON THE RESULTS OF TEACHER EVALUATIONS. THE OVERALL RATE OF TEACHERS RATED AS EFFECTIVE REMAINED AT 98% THIS YEAR. AND IN FUTURE YEARS, WE PLAN TO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION, BUT IN A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT FORM, NOTING THE DISTINCTIONS BETWEEN TEACHERS RATED AS HIGHLY EFFECTIVE AND EFFECTIVE, VERSUS MINIMALLY EFFECTIVE OR INEFFECTIVE. I’LL NOTE THAT THE DATA SHOWS THE TREND FROM THE PREVIOUS YEAR TO THIS YEAR SHOWS THAT THERE WAS A CHANGE FROM OR REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF TEACHERS RATED FROM HIGHLY EFFECTIVE. THAT REDUCED. BUT THE TEACHERS RATED AS EFFECTIVE INCREASED. SO IT WAS A CORRESPONDING SHIFT FROM HIGHLY EFFECTIVE TO EFFECTIVE. PAGES 43 AND 44 EXPLORE METRICS AROUND EQUITY, THE FIFTH E, WHICH IS COLOR CODED IN LIGHT GREEN. EQUITY METRICS ARE EMBEDDED IN ALL OF THE PREVIOUS METRICS THAT WE’VE HIGHLIGHTED. WE LOOK AT SUBGROUP OUTCOMES AND OVERALL METRICS. AND FOR EXAMPLE, WE REVIEW SUBGROUP OUTCOMES AND PROFICIENCY AND GROWTH ON STATE ASSESSMENTS. THE DETAILED SUBGROUP OUTCOMES ARE PROVIDED IN THE APPENDIX. THAT’S A SEPARATE DOCUMENT THAT IS INCLUDED WITH THIS ANNUAL REVIEW. AND HERE WE LOOK AT SCORES ON THE M-STEP, THE MME, WHICH INCLUDES THE S.A.T. AND FUNCTIONAL INDEPENDENCE SCORES FOR MI ACCESS. RESULTS ARE BROKEN DOWN BY GRADE AND SUBJECT AREA, AND THEN STUDENT SUBGROUPS BASED ON GENDER, RACE, ETHNICITY, ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED, ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS, HOMELESS, MIGRANTS, AND STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES. OUR FINAL E IS EFFICACY, WHICH IS LISTED ON PAGE 44 AND COLOR CODED IN DARK GREEN. EFFICACY METRICS ALLOW US TO ASSESS THE EXTENT TO WHICH SYSTEMS AND PROGRAMS ARE BEING IMPLEMENTED AS INTENDED. HERE WE SHOW THE RESULTS OF STATE AND REGIONAL CAPACITY ASSESSMENTS. THE STATE ASSESSMENT IS AN INTERNAL SURVEY OF OUR SYSTEMS COORDINATION TEAM, AND IS CONDUCTED PERIODICALLY TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO SUPPORT IMPLEMENTATION OF SYSTEMIC IMPROVEMENT WORK AT THE STATE LEVEL. THE REGIONAL ASSESSMENTS MEASURE CAPACITY TO IMPLEMENT THE MTSS WORK IN THE TRANSFORMATION ZONES AT THE REGIONAL LEVEL. THAT CONCLUDES THE METRICS SECTION OF THE REPORT. AND I’LL TURN IT BACK TO SHEILA.>>THANK YOU, MARK. AND I WILL NOW REVIEW THE THIRD PART OF THE ANNUAL REVIEW, WHICH IS THE PERTINENT ANCILLARY INFORMATION. BEGINNING ON PAGE 45, YOU WILL SEE FACTS AND FIGURES ABOUT MICHIGAN’S EDUCATION SYSTEM, INCLUDING THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS, SCHOOLS, AND DISTRICTS IN THE STATE, INFORMATION ABOUT EDUCATION FUNDING, AS WELL AS CLASS SIZE RATIOS. MOVING ON TO PAGE 46, NOW, THERE’S A FAMILIAR FACE. THIS IS OUR MICHIGAN TEACHER OF THE YEAR, LUKE WILCOX. HE WAS THE TEACHER OF THE YEAR IN 2017-2018. DETAILS ABOUT THE MICHIGAN TEACHER OF THE YEAR PROGRAM ARE ALSO LISTED, AS WELL AS A LINK TO THE MICHIGAN TEACHER OF THE YEAR WEBSITE. MOVING ON TO THE NEXT PAGE, YOU WILL SEE– THE NEXT COUPLE OF PAGES IN THE REPORT, YOU WILL FIND SOME REFERENCE INFORMATION. YOU– OOPS. DID I SKIP A PAGE? SORRY. THERE YOU GO. YOU WILL SEE INFORMATION ABOUT YOURSELF, THE MICHIGAN STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. THAT IS LISTED ON PAGE 49, AS WELL AS THE ACTIONS TAKEN BY THE STATE BOARD DURING THE 2017-2018 YEAR. THERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL MAJOR EDUCATION LEGISLATION THAT WE HAVE INCLUDED. LEADERSHIP AT MDE ARE ALSO INCLUDED, AS WELL AS A DATA APPENDIX. THE ELECTRONIC COPY HAS CONTENT INFORMATION, SO WHEN YOU CLICK ON THE PERSON’S NAME, THAT WILL TAKE YOU TO INFORMATION ABOUT– CONTACT INFORMATION ABOUT MDE LEADERSHIP. THEN, MOVING ON TO THE LAST COUPLE OF PAGES IN THE REPORT, IT’S ONLY FITTING THAT WE RECOGNIZE THE PEOPLE THAT– AT MDE, THE STAFF AT MDE THAT WE LOST DURING THE 2017-2018 YEAR, BEGINNING WITH SUSAN BROMAN, OUR FORMER DEPUTY SUPERINTENDENT AT MDE. CECE WINKLER, THE PRINCIPAL OF MICHIGAN SCHOOL FOR THE DEAF. AND CELE– SORRY, KELLY CROSS. KELLY WORKED IN THE OFFICE OF EDUCATIONAL IMPROVEMENT AND INNOVATION, AS WELL AS THE OFFICE OF CAREER AND TECHNICAL EDUCATION. AND OF COURSE, BRIAN WHISTON, WHOSE LEADERSHIP AND VISION SENT US ON A PATH TO BECOMING A TOP 10 IN 10 EDUCATION STATE. THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS AND THEY, THEMSELVES, ARE DEEPLY MISSED IN THE DEPARTMENT. AND THEN THERE ARE SOME THANK YOUS FOR THIS REPORT. THIS REPORT TRULY WAS A COLLABORATIVE EFFORT. IT TOOK MANY PEOPLE IN THE DEPARTMENT WORKING TOGETHER TO PUT THIS REPORT TOGETHER. AND I’D LIKE TO ACKNOWLEDGE AND THANK SOME OF THEM, SOME OF THE MANY PEOPLE BY CALLING THEM OUT TODAY, BEGINNING WITH ALISANDE SHREWSBURY, FOR HER OUTSTANDING CONTRIBUTIONS TO HELPING US COORDINATE AND ORGANIZE THE CONTENT, AND HELP PREPARE FOR TODAY’S PRESENTATION. SHANNON VLASSIS, FOR FORMATTING THE LAYOUT OF THE DOCUMENT, AND ALL OF THE GRAPHIC DESIGN THAT’S INCLUDED IN THE DOCUMENT. MARK HOWE, WHO SPEARHEADED THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE METRICS SECTION. I WANT TO THANK ALL THE STAFF WHO WERE INVOLVED IN PROOFREADING THIS DOCUMENT AND REVIEWING IT FOR CONTENT ACCURACY. AND THEN THE MANY, MANY STAFF MEMBERS AT MDE WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THIS WORK. AS YOU’LL SEE IN THIS REPORT, IT’S VERY COMPREHENSIVE. AND WE WERE ONLY ABLE TO TOUCH ON SOME OF THE ELEMENTS THAT ARE INCLUDED IN IT. AND THEN I’D LIKE TO RECOGNIZE OUR STATE BOARD OF ED MEMBERS FOR YOUR SUPPORT, YOUR ENCOURAGEMENT, AND YOUR GUIDANCE OVER THE PAST YEAR. AS I MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PRESENTATION, THERE’S A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF WORK THAT GOES ON AT THE DEPARTMENT OF ED, NOT ALL OF WHICH WE WERE ABLE TO CAPTURE IN THIS REPORT. BUT WE’RE VERY PROUD OF THE WORK THAT WE WERE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH DURING THE 2017-2018 YEAR. WE BELIEVE THAT IT WILL BE INSTRUMENTAL IN HELPING US MOVE FORWARD TO BECOMING A TOP 10 EDUCATION STATE. THE DOCUMENT THAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU, WE PLAN TO SHARE THIS DOCUMENT WITH MEMBERS OF THE MICHIGAN LEGISLATURE, WITH THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE, WITH OUR OTHER EDUCATION PARTNERS, AND WITH A TRANSITION TEAM FOR THE INCOMING ADMINISTRATION. WE’RE ALSO GOING TO BE INCLUDING A COPY OF THIS DOCUMENT IN A NEW PACKET THAT WE PUT TOGETHER THAT WE ARE TAKING WITH US WHEN WE GO TO VISIT SCHOOLS. WE WILL BE LEAVING A PACKET OF INFORMATION WITH THE SUPERINTENDENT OF ALL OF THE SCHOOL DISTRICTS THAT WE VISIT, AND WE WILL BE INCLUDING THIS DOCUMENT INSIDE OF IT. WE THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO HIGHLIGHT SOME OF THE PIECES OF INFORMATION AND SOME OF THE CONTENT IN THIS DOCUMENT WITH YOU. WE KNOW THAT THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF INFORMATION TO COVER TODAY. WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL TAKE THE TIME FOLLOWING TODAY’S PRESENTATION TO SPEND MORE TIME BECOMING MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE CONTENT OF IT. WE’RE HAPPY TO RESPOND TO QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS THAT YOU HAVE. AND WE’D ALSO BE HAPPY, AT ANY TIME, TO GO INTO A DEEPER DIVE ON ANY OF THE CONTENT OF THIS DOCUMENT, IF YOU WOULD SO CHOOSE, AT A LATER TIME. SO NOW WE TURN IT OVER TO YOU.>>AND SINCE SHEILA IS SITTING UP THERE, SHE HAS ASKED ME IF I WOULD DO THE ROUND ROBIN. SO, EILEEN? [ CLEARS THROAT ]>>EXCUSE ME. I WENT THROUGH A LOT OF FOG TODAY, AND IT APPARENTLY GOT INTO MY VOICE. I’D LIKE TO COMMEND THE STAFF ON THIS REPORT. IT GIVES ME A REALLY GOOD FEELING ABOUT MICHIGAN EDUCATION TO READ IT. AND IT’S AN ACCURATE REFLECTION OF TOP 10 IN 10, THE GOALS OF TOP 10 IN 10. BUT I HAVE SOME SPECIFIC CONCERNS, AS I ALWAYS DO, BECAUSE THAT’S MY JOB, AS A STATE BOARD OF ED MEMBER. THE FIRST ONE IS THAT THE RECENT– WE WERE RECENTLY DECLARED BY THE FEDS IN JULY AS THE ONLY STATE IN THE COUNTRY TO NEED [ INDISTINCT ] INTERVENTION. THEY COMPARED US– 29% OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES DROP OUT OF SCHOOL, 25% IN HIGH SCHOOL ALONE. SO SOME OF THAT IS IN THE EARLIER GRADES. [ COUGHS ] EXCUSE ME. WE KNOW THAT WE’RE THE ONLY STATE THAT’S IN THIS LEVEL OF INTERVENTION NOW. THE OTHER ENTITIES WERE WASHINGTON D.C., PALAU, AND THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS. TOP 10 IN 10 DOESN’T ADDRESS SPECIAL ED, SPECIFICALLY. AND SO WE’RE IN A FUNNY SITUATION. BECAUSE THIS REPORT DOESN’T SHOW THAT INFORMATION. THAT WAS RECENT ENOUGH THAT I THINK THAT PROBABLY– YOU’RE SHAKING YOUR HEAD, MARK– THE CONCERN THAT I HAVE IS THAT THE REPORT CAME OUT, I THINK, IN JULY. ALTHOUGH I KNOW THAT THE 25% STATISTIC FOR HIGH SCHOOL WAS KNOWN IN DECEMBER. AND FROM THE OUTSIDE, IF YOU’RE ONE OF THOSE ACTIVISTS, OR PEOPLE WHO READ “THE DETROIT NEWS” OR LISTENED TO NPR ON THIS, IT LOOKS AS IF WE DON’T CARE, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE. SO I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE DO AN ADDENDUM TO THE REPORT POINTING OUT THAT TOP 10 IN 10 DOESN’T INCLUDE SPECIAL EDUCATION AS A SPECIFIC BREAKOUT FOR REPORTING. IT DOES TALK ABOUT GRADUATION RATES AND CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM. BUT THIS IS BIG ENOUGH. I DON’T KNOW– OH, SCOTT, DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY CHILDREN ARE IN SPECIAL EDUCATION WHO ARE IMPACTED BY IT? DO WE HAVE STATISTICS THAT SHOW HOW MANY, WHAT THE NUMBER OF KIDS IS?>>WE HAVE ABOUT 200 STUDENTS WITH IEPs IN THE STATE OF MICHIGAN.>>200 AND–>>ABOUT 200,000 GIVE OR TAKE, WITH IEPs.>>OKAY, SO THAT’S ONLY 60,000 DURING THEIR TIME PER YEAR, ON THE ROLLING AVERAGE. CAN THAT REALLY BE RIGHT? IS MY ESTIMATE ACTUALLY ACCURATE? NO, IT CAN’T BE. IT WOULD BE 1/12 OF THAT PER YEAR, RIGHT?>>CORRECT. YEAH, IF THERE’S 200,000 STUDENTS THAT COME AND GO, DEPENDING UPON THE IEP, DEPENDING UPON WHAT QUALIFIES THEM– IF A STUDENT’S QUALIFIED WITH A SPEECH IMPAIRMENT, THEY MAY NOT CARRY THAT SPEECH IMPAIRMENT LABEL THROUGH THEIR ENTIRE EDUCATIONAL CAREER. SO IT’S KIND OF TOUGH TO DRAW THAT NUMBER, BUT I [ INDISTINCT ].>>AND I WONDERED ABOUT WHAT DATA WE HAVE, BECAUSE, THIS WAS– WAS THIS NEWS TO THE DEPARTMENT, THAT THE NUMBER WAS THAT HIGH? DO WE EVEN HAVE TRACKING TO SHOW WHERE– I’M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS AN OVERSIGHT, AS MUCH AS SOMETHING WE DON’T– WE HAVEN’T COLLECTED DATA FOR, FOR EXAMPLE. DO WE KNOW HOW THE CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM TRANSLATES INTO SPECIAL ED DROPOUTS FIRST? WE DO KNOW THAT.>>I WAS NODDING. SO IT’S A TWOFOLD. AND SCOTT’S BEEN DOING A LOT OF WORK WITH HIS TEAM. AND MAYBE THIS IS A FUTURE TOPIC WE COULD COME BACK AND TALK ABOUT. I WAS NODDING BECAUSE OUR CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM THAT WE HAVE ON THE INDEX AND ON THE DASHBOARD BREAKS OUT BY ALL OF THE DEMOGRAPHIC CATEGORIES, INCLUDING STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES. COULD WE DO MORE WITH USING THAT DATA TO IMPLEMENT SOLUTIONS TO THE ISSUE YOU’VE CALLED OUT? YES, I THINK WE’VE GOT SOME GREAT PLANS ABOUT THAT. BUT I WAS JUST NODDING, THAT THAT DATA IS AVAILABLE. BUT STEP TWO IS DOING MORE WITH IT.>>RIGHT, AND SO WHAT I’M CONCERNED ABOUT IS THAT THIS MADE NATIONAL NEWS. AND IT LOOKS, FROM THIS, BECAUSE IT’S NOT A TOP 10 IN 10 PRIORITY OR DISCUSSION TOPIC WITHIN THE CATEGORIES THAT WE HAD, THAT WE’RE IGNORING IT, WHICH IS NOT THE CASE. AND I KNOW SCOTT’S DEVELOPING A PLAN, I KNOW THAT THE DEPARTMENT IS ALL OVER THIS. BUT WE DON’T WANT TO GIVE THE APPEARANCE FROM THE OUTSIDE THAT THIS REALLY GOOD-LOOKING, WELL-PRESENTED MAGAZINE MISSES THAT. AND IT MAKES SENSE. AND I MEAN, IT DOESN’T MAKE SENSE TO ANY OF US HERE. I HAVE A SPECIAL ED STUDENT. OTHERS HAVE HAD SPECIAL ED STUDENTS ON THE BOARD, AND IT’S A PASSION THAT ALL OF US SHARE. SO I WOULD JUST POINT THAT OUT. THE SECOND THING IS THAT ON PAGE 18, ONE OF THE REPORTS THAT– WE’LL BE TALKING MORE ABOUT ASSESSMENT IN A LITTLE BIT. BUT ONE OF THE STATISTICS THAT I’M SEEING PUT FORWARD RIGHT NOW, AS A REALLY COOL THING, IS THAT 99% OF MICHIGAN STUDENTS ARE BEING ASSESSED ON COMPUTER ADAPTIVE ASSESSMENTS. THAT STATISTIC DOESN’T HOLD TRUE FOR PSAT 10, OR SAT, WHICH ARE PAPER AND PENCIL. AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT IF WE SWITCH FROM M-STEP TO PSAT 8, THAT THAT, AGAIN, IS A PAPER-AND-PENCIL TEST. SO THAT STATISTIC WOULD ONLY HOLD TRUE FOR THE EARLIER GRADES, WHERE WE HAVE A VOLUNTARY ASSESSMENT FOR K-2, I BELIEVE.>>K-2, AND THEN WE HAVE M-STEP FOR 3-7.>>RIGHT. SO THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, WE JUST DROP OFF THE MAP, BECAUSE WE’RE GOING BACK TO PAPER AND PENCIL FOR EVERYTHING AFTER 8TH GRADE. AND IT’S A JARRING STATISTIC. I MEAN, IT’S ONE I WOULDN’T USE, OR I WOULD QUALIFY IT. BECAUSE IT MAKES IT SOUND AS IF, GUESS WHAT? YOU KNOW, EVERYTHING WE’RE DOING IS COMPUTER ADAPTIVE, WHICH IT’S NOT. BUT THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. I THINK THESE ARE ISSUES AND PROBLEMS THAT AREN’T IN TOP 10 IN 10. AND THAT’S THE BINDER, YOU KNOW, THE RESTRICTION THAT YOU’RE UNDER.>>SO I WOULD SAY THAT STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES ARE INCLUDED IN GOAL NUMBER 4 IN THE TOP 10 IN 10, WHERE WE’RE LOOKING AT REDUCING THE IMPACT OF HIGH-RISK FACTORS, INCLUDING POVERTY AND PROVIDING EQUITABLE RESOURCES TO MEET THE NEEDS OF ALL STUDENTS, TO ENSURE THAT THEY HAVE ACCESS TO QUALITY EDUCATIONAL OPPORTUNITIES WITHOUT CALLING OUT A SPECIFIC SUBGROUP OF STUDENTS.>>RIGHT. THAT’S NOT WHAT I’M SAYING. I’M SAYING THAT TO IGNORE THE PUBLICITY AND– I MEAN, TO APPEAR TO IGNORE THE PUBLICITY AND NOT TALK ABOUT THAT ASPECT OF THE WORK THAT WE’RE DOING, WHEN THIS DOCUMENT IS FRANK ON A LOT OF ISSUES LIKE CHRONIC ABSENTEEISM, BUT NOT– IT DOESN’T ADDRESS THAT– MEANS THAT I WOULD PUT, IF I WERE IN OUR POSITION, I WOULD BE PUTTING A CAVEAT LETTER IN THIS AND SAY, “SINCE “THIS DOCUMENT WAS DEVELOPED, “IT BECAME VERY CLEAR THAT “OUR FOUR YEARS OF BEING RANKED “AS NEEDING ASSISTANCE–” AND I DON’T KNOW WHAT IMPACT THAT HAD ON SCHOOLS AND CHILDREN, “–HAS CHANGED “TO NEEDING INTERVENTION. “AND THE DEPARTMENT IS “ADDRESSING THAT, BUT IT’S NOT “CONTAINED IN THE REPORT.” IT WOULD JUST BE AN ACKNOWLEDGEMENT THAT THERE’RE CONDITIONS THAT AREN’T INCLUDED.>>THANK YOU FOR THAT. WE APPRECIATE THAT.>>SO JUST PIGGYBACKING ON WHAT EILEEN WAS SAYING, AND THIS IS SOMETHING THAT I CONTINUE TO TALK ABOUT, AND THAT’S WITH THE AFRICAN AMERICAN STUDENTS AS WELL, BECAUSE I’M LOOKING ON PAGE THREE AND FOUR. LET ME BACK UP. LET ME FIRST SAY THAT AS A PERSON WHO PUTS REPORTS TOGETHER AND HAVE PUT REPORTS TOGETHER, THIS IS A MARVELOUS DOCUMENT. IT’S REALLY EXCITING TO SEE. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO DEFINITELY GOING THROUGH IT. AND IT READS WITH GREAT CLARITY. SO THANK YOU ALL FOR THIS. AND I LOOK FORWARD TO ALSO HEARING HOW WE’RE GOING TO BE DISSEMINATING THIS. BUT JUST, I JUST HAVE TO PUT OUT THERE THAT WHEN WE LOOK AT OUR HARDEST-TO-REACH POPULATIONS, THAT WE DO MAKE NOTE OF THAT. ONE OF THE OTHER PIECES– I DON’T KNOW IF THERE’S AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO SHARE WITH US, OR IF THERE’S A WAY FOR YOU TO SHARE WITH OTHERS– WHERE IS THERE OVERLAP IN THESE? AND I’M SORRY– I’M LOOKING AT THE ANNUAL DOCUMENT ON PAGE THREE AND FOUR.>>THE APPENDIX?>>THE APPENDIX, YEAH. AND SO THIS WILL BE GIVEN TO US ANNUALLY, CORRECT?>>YES.>>AND THIS WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WE KEEP FOR–>>YES, THIS WILL PROVIDE SOME HISTORICAL INFORMATION.>>OKAY, THE WHOLE THING. YES, THE APPENDIX. SO THE APPENDIX, LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS, I WAS JUST GOING THROUGH BECAUSE I CAN, BECAUSE IT’S SO CLEAR HERE, AND JUST LOOKING AT THOSE– THE POPULATIONS, AND JUST MAYBE BEING ABLE TO ONE DAY KNOW HOW DOES RACE/ETHNICITY OVERLAP WITH SOME OF THESE– SOME OF THE OTHER SUBGROUPS? I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO SEE HOW THERE’S OVERLAP BETWEEN AMERICAN INDIANS, AFRICAN AMERICANS, AND ECONOMICALLY DISADVANTAGED, SO ON AND SO FORTH, AND STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES. THAT WOULD BE GOOD INFORMATION TO KNOW.>>WE CAN PROVIDE THAT FOR YOU.>>SO WE CAN HONE IN AND TARGET THOSE GROUPS. BUT THANK YOU.>>EILEEN, I DON’T KNOW IF YOU SAW. I KNOW YOU WERE– I’M JUST POINTING OUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT YOU GUYS PUBLISHED. MAYBE NOT GRADUATION DROP OUT, BUT GROWTH FROM 4TH TO 11TH, FOR STUDENTS WITH DISABILITIES IN ENGLISH–>>WHAT PAGE IS THAT?>>IN THE SUPPLEMENT, ON PAGE 11 AND 12. BUT THERE’S A VERY SIGNIFICANT DECREASE– WELL, THERE’S REALLY A SIGNIFICANT– SO THIS IS 25.8. IF YOU LOOK AT ELA ON PAGE 11, SO 25.8 OF THE 200,000 STUDENTS ARE ON A PATH TO REACHING PROFICIENCY. I KNOW WE DON’T KNOW THE DETAILS OF THOSE STUDENTS’ DISABILITIES. BUT THEN IT GOES DOWN TO 15.8 IN 11. AND THEN IN MATH, 22.9 IN 7. AM I READING THAT CORRECTLY?>>YEP. SORRY, I WAS JUST– YEP.>>WHERE IS THAT?>>RIGHT HERE, THIS REPORT.>>11 AND 12.>>RIGHT?>>ON THE SUPPLEMENT, YEAH.>>THANK YOU, [ INDISTINCT ].>>AND I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT EILEEN IS SAYING, IS THAT PEOPLE NEED TO HEAR IT CALLED OUT. I MEAN, IF YOU’RE GOING TO– IF YOU SEE GAPS IN DISPARITY THAT ARE THIS HUGE, THEN PEOPLE WANT TO HEAR IT CALLED OUT, THAT YOU’RE ADDRESSING THOSE ISSUES. SO THAT’S WHY THE DATA IS GREAT. BUT THEN, HEARING IT STATED THAT THAT IS A PRIORITY IN THE BIGGER DOCUMENT, IT GOES A LONG WAY, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU DO HAVE NATIONAL REPORTS THAT ARE SHOWING THAT AFRICAN AMERICANS IN THE STATE, OR CHILDREN WITH DISABILITY IN THE STATE ARE PERFORMING LOWER THAN ANYWHERE ELSE IN THE COUNTRY. WE NEED TO CALL THAT OUT AS A PRIORITY, AND NOT BE AFRAID OF THAT, NOT BE AFRAID OF CALLING OUT SUBGROUPS.>>I JUST WANTED TO SUPPORT WHAT EILEEN WAS SAYING, AS WELL, THAT I ALSO SHARE THOSE CONCERNS. AND ALTHOUGH THERE’S LANGUAGE THAT SPEAKS ABOUT EQUITY, I DO THINK MORE EXPLICIT RECOGNITION OF BOTH THE ISSUES OF CHILDREN WITH DISABILITIES AND ALSO, THE AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITY ON THESE RESULTS, AND WHAT WE’RE GOING– WHAT’S THE PLAN TO DO THAT, TO ADDRESS IT? I’M ALSO CONCERNED FOR THESE COMMUNITIES, ESPECIALLY AFRICAN AMERICAN COMMUNITIES. AND I DON’T KNOW THE DATA, BUT JUST AN ANECDOTAL LOOK AT THE PARTNERSHIP DISTRICTS, IT SEEMS LIKE MOST OF THOSE, MANY OF THEM, ARE URBAN, HIGH-POVERTY-CONCENTRATED DISTRICTS. AND I AM VERY CONCERNED ABOUT, WITH THE RETENTION BILL, THE IMPACT THAT THE LEGISLATION WILL HAVE ON THESE COMMUNITIES, CREATING MORE– FURTHER DISRUPTION. AND WITHOUT A PLAN, A CLEARLY STATED PLAN– AND I KNOW, LIKE– I DO KNOW THAT THAT’S BEING WORKED ON. BUT AS A PARENT, AND AS SOMEONE WHO JUST OVERSEEING– AND THAT LIVES IN DETROIT, I AM GRAVELY CONCERNED ABOUT MY COMMUNITY AND COMMUNITIES LIKE IT. SO I JUST WANTED TO SECOND THAT. BUT I ALSO THINK THIS IS– I’M GOING TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME COMBING THROUGH THIS. AND I APPRECIATE THE DATA AND ALL THE WORK AS WELL.>>THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.>>REAL QUICK, I GUESS IN FUTURE ANNUAL REVIEWS, I DON’T KNOW THAT I’LL GET THIS, BUT I PERSONALLY WOULD RATHER SEE, OR LIKE, A REAL FOCUS ON PARENTAL SATISFACTION AND LOCAL TEACHER SATISFACTION. AND I KNOW NUMBERS, AS A CPA– YOU CAN MOVE NUMBERS ALL AROUND, AND TELL DIFFERENT STORIES. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT REALLY UNDERSTANDING OUR ULTIMATE CUSTOMERS, THE PARENTS, MAYBE EVEN THE STUDENTS, AND LOCAL TEACHERS WHO OFTENTIMES GET PUT UPON BY A SYSTEM THAT ISN’T NECESSARILY THINKING ABOUT THEIR BEST INTERESTS. NOT NECESSARILY MDE, BUT I’M THINKING MORE OF THE LAWMAKERS, THAT IT WOULD BE GOOD, IN AN ANNUAL REVIEW, TO REALLY HEAR FROM THEM AS WELL.>>I DON’T SEE ANY OTHER REQUESTS, SO I’LL– LUPE, GO AHEAD.>>I– YOU KNOW, WHEN I WAS GETTING READY THIS MORNING, I THOUGHT ABOUT BRIAN. I THOUGHT ABOUT SUSAN. BECAUSE THOSE WERE THE TWO THAT I WAS MOSTLY ENGAGED WITH. AND THEN I COME TO THE MEETING, AND WE’RE CELEBRATING 9/11. AND SO I’M EMOTIONAL TODAY. BUT I’M MORE EMOTIONAL BECAUSE WHEN WE STARTED THE CONCEPT– AND I KEPT TELLING BRIAN, “IT’S AMAZING, FROM WHERE “WE STARTED TO WHERE WE ARE “TODAY, EVERY YEAR, “TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY.” AND SO THIS DOCUMENT, TO ME, IS OVERWHELMING AS TO THE PROGRESS THAT WE MADE FROM THE CONCEPT, NOW. IT IS OVERWHELMING. NOW, MY COLLEAGUES HAVE OUTSTANDING POINTS, THAT WE COULD MAKE THE DOCUMENT EVEN BETTER FOR THE NEXT TIME. BECAUSE ALL THESE ISSUES ARE IMPORTANT TO THE PEOPLE, TO THE TEACHERS, TO THE EDUCATORS. BUT I AM OVERWHELMED TO SEE BRIAN’S PICTURE IN THERE, AND SUSAN’S PICTURE IN THERE. AND THIS IS A LOT OF WORK. A LOT OF WORK WENT INTO THESE DOCUMENTS. AND I WISH BRIAN WAS SITTING THERE, AND I COULD SAY IT TO HIM AGAIN– AND I AM SAYING IT TO HIM– WHERE WE STARTED FROM, WITH THE CONCEPT, AND I WAS ALL OVER THE PLACE. NO, WHATEVER, WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, WE WERE ALL IN DOUBTS, AS SOMETHING LIKE THIS WAS GOING TO HAPPEN. AND LOOK AT IT. HERE’S THE ROAD THAT HAS TAKEN US THERE. AND I THINK WITH US ALL WORKING TOGETHER, GIVING INPUT, AND CONTINUING TO REFINE WHAT WE HAVE IS GOING TO EVEN MAKE US BETTER, AND GIVE US TO THE RIGHT DIRECTION. WE DON’T LIKE READING AND HEARING THAT WE’RE THE LAST, THAT WE’RE– BECAUSE AS I SAY, EDUCATORS GET DEMORALIZED WHEN THERE’S NOTHING POSITIVE BEING SAID THAT THEY’RE DOING, BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING A LOT OF GOOD THINGS. A LOT OF GOOD THINGS ARE HAPPENING IN SCHOOLS. IT’S NOT ALL BAD, OR WE WOULDN’T BE PRODUCING THE DOCTORS AND ALL THE DIFFERENT PROFESSIONALS THAT WE DO. SO I WANT TO CONCENTRATE ON THE POSITIVE THINGS THAT ARE CONTINUING TO OCCUR, BUT ALSO KEEPING IN MIND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE TO MAKE OUR MISSION EVEN STRONGER AND MORE PRODUCTIVE. SO I THANK YOU, THE DEPARTMENT. THIS IS AWESOME. PLAIN AWESOME.>>THANK YOU. THANK YOU, BOARD MEMBERS.>>JUST ONE QUICK THING. SO I WANT TO ECHO EVERYONE’S THANKS. I THINK THIS IS EXTREMELY HELPFUL. IS THIS GOING TO BE ONLINE?>>YES. IT’S ONLINE RIGHT NOW.>>GREAT. AND MARILYN, CAN YOU EMAIL US THE LINK SO IF WE WANTED TO SHARE THAT, WE COULD?>>MM-HMM.>>AND THEN ONE QUICK QUESTION. SOMETHING JUST POPPED OUT TO ME. PAGE 41, UNDER CAREER AND COLLEGE READINESS, IT TALKS ABOUT THE S.A.T. SCORES, AND THE FACT THAT IT’S VERY DIFFICULT TO COMPARE STATE-BY-STATE ANALYSIS FOR A NUMBER OF REASONS, WHICH I COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND. BUT THE LAST ONE I’M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT. IT SAYS, “AND IN DIFFERENCES “IN CUT SCORES USED “TO DETERMINE PROFICIENCY.” I GUESS I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THE S.A.T. SET THE CUT SCORE. BUT DOES THIS IMPLY THAT EVERY STATE HAS SET THEIR OWN CUT SCORE WITH THE S.A.T.?>>NO. SO THAT’S A REALLY, REALLY GOOD CATCH, CASANDRA. S.A.T. DOES SET THEIR BENCHMARK. AND WE USE S.A.T.’S COLLEGE AND CAREER READY BENCHMARK. THE U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION THINKS YOU NEED A PROFICIENCY CUT, WHICH– ACTUALLY, TWO– PROFICIENT– ADVANCED PROFICIENT, AND THE MIDDLE– BEFORE I– IN MY LIFE, I’M GOING TO REMEMBER THE NAME OF THE PARTIAL– IT USED TO BE– IT WAS PARTIALLY PROFICIENT WHEN I WAS A TEACHER. AND THAT IS WHAT HAS STUCK IN MY BRAIN FOREVER. AND I DON’T THINK THAT’S WHAT IT IS. BUT ANYWAY, THEY WANT MORE CUTS THAN WE HAVE. SO MICHIGAN, UP TIL NOW, HAS HELD STEADY WITH “WE’RE NOT GOING TO HAVE “MULTIPLE CUTS. “WE’RE GOING TO STICK WITH “WHAT THE MESSAGING IS FROM.” SO THERE’S A PARENTAL UNDERSTANDING AND AN EASE OF USE. BUT THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION IS PUSHING STATES WHO ARE USING IT AS THEIR STATE TEST TO SET THOSE OTHER CUTS. SO SOME STATES, LIKE CONNECTICUT, HAVE MOVED FURTHER AHEAD THAN US. AND THEY’D HAVE A PROFICIENT ON THE S.A.T. CUT, OR THEY’RE WORKING TOWARD IT. SO THAT’S TRYING TO CALL THAT OUT.>>OKAY, ALL RIGHT.>>AND AS STATES VARY, AND IF THEY USE IT AS THEIR STATE TEST, IF THEY USE IT AS AN OPTIONAL, IF THEY USE IT AS WHATEVER, AND HOW, THEN, THEY INTERACT WITH THE COLLEGE BOARD AROUND THAT– THERE’S JUST VARIATION. IT’S A NEW– IT’S NEW FOR STATES TO DO.>>GOT IT.>>THANK YOU– GOOD CATCH.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYONE. AND I’M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE FRONT OF THE TABLE. THANKS, TEAM. OUR NEXT PRESENTATION THIS MORNING IS AN OVERVIEW OF CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND CARE FUNDING. THE CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPMENT FUND IS A $5.3 BILLION BLOCK GRANT PROGRAM THAT PROVIDES FUNDING TO STATES, TERRITORIES, AND TRIBES TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO CHILD CARE SERVICES FOR LOW-INCOME FAMILIES, AND IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF CHILD CARE. WHILE STATES HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY UNDER THE BLOCK GRANT, THEY MUST ALSO MEET CERTAIN FUNDING REQUIREMENTS TO UTILIZE THE FUNDS. TODAY’S PRESENTATION IS AN INFORMATION ITEM ONLY, AND IT WILL NOT REQUIRE ANY BOARD ACTION. THE PRESENTERS ARE SCOTT KOENIGSKNECHT AND LISA BREWER-WALRAVEN, THE DIRECTOR OF CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND CARE. AND TODAY’S PRESENTATION DOES INCLUDE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION, WHICH YOU RECEIVED A COPY OF. SCOTT AND LISA, WELCOME.>>THANK YOU, SHEILA. AS SHEILA SAID, OBVIOUSLY, MY NAME IS SCOTT KOENIGSKNECHT. I’M JOINED BY LISA BREWER-WALRAVEN, WHO OVERSEES THE CHILD DEVELOPMENT AND CARE PROGRAM HERE AT THE DEPARTMENT. AND WE WANTED TO TAKE SOME TIME THIS MORNING TO KIND OF GIVE YOU A HIGH-LEVEL OVERVIEW OF THE PROGRAM ITSELF, IN TERMS OF ITS PURPOSE, WHO WE PARTNER WITH– WE PARTNER WITH MULTIPLE AGENCIES– THE POPULATION THAT ARE SERVED, WHO PARTICIPATES AND THE PARTICIPATION RATES, AND THEN FINALLY, AND MAYBE MOST IMPORTANTLY, HOW THE FUNDING WORKS WITH REGARD TO THIS PARTICULAR PROGRAM. SO WITH THAT, I’M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO LISA, AND WE WILL WALK THROUGH THE POWERPOINT.>>OKAY, GREAT. SO SHEILA MENTIONED THAT WE DO RECEIVE THIS FUNDING THROUGH A BLOCK GRANT, AND THAT STATES DO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY. THIS PROGRAM WAS PUT IN PLACE IN THE 1990s, BUT WAS REAUTHORIZED AFTER 19 YEARS IN 2014. SO THAT REAUTHORIZATION WAS AN IMPORTANT STEP, IN TERMS OF BETTER BALANCING THE PROGRAM, ENSURING THAT WE WERE FOCUSED NOT ONLY ON CHILDREN, AND ENSURING CHILDREN HAD HIGH-QUALITY OPPORTUNITIES TO PREPARE THEM FOR SCHOOL, BUT ALSO, ENSURING THAT WE WERE HELPING MOVE PARENTS TOWARD SELF-SUFFICIENCY. SO SCOTT IS PUTTING UP SOME PURPOSES OF THIS FUNDING. THERE ARE SEVEN BROAD, OVERARCHING PURPOSES THAT STATES CAN USE THIS MONEY FOR. AND THIS HIGHLIGHTS, AGAIN, THAT WE HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY, THAT WE WANT TO ENSURE THAT THERE’S PARENTAL CHOICE, THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE PARENTS CAN MAKE INFORMED CHOICES, THAT THEY HAVE HIGH-QUALITY CHOICES, THAT WE HAVE HEALTH AND SAFETY STANDARDS IN ALL PROGRAMS, THAT WE’RE ENSURING THAT WE’RE PROVIDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR KINDERGARTEN AND LIFE READINESS SKILLS, AND AGAIN, THAT PARENTS HAVE CHOICES TO HIGH-QUALITY SETTINGS. SO EVERYTHING THAT WE’RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT FALLS UNDER THOSE PRIMARY PURPOSES, AND WHAT WE’RE DOING TO SUPPORT THOSE. SO THESE THREE CATEGORIES THAT YOU SEE HERE ARE THE OVERARCHING PRIMARY CATEGORIES THAT ALL OF THOSE PURPOSES FALL UNDER. SO SUBSIDY IS ABOUT OFFERING FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE TO LOW-INCOME FAMILIES WHO HAVE CHILDREN BIRTH THROUGH 12, TO HELP THEM HAVE ACCESS TO HIGH-QUALITY PROGRAMS THAT MEET THEIR NEEDS. SO WE’LL TALK ABOUT THOSE CHOICES IN A FEW SLIDES. IT ALSO ENSURES THAT STATES HAVE HEALTH AND SAFETY PROVISIONS. THAT CAN HAPPEN THROUGH CHILD CARE LICENSING. THAT CAN HAPPEN THROUGH TRAINING THAT’S OFFERED TO PROVIDERS, A VARIETY OF WAYS, EVEN MONITORING, TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY’RE MEETING THOSE REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN QUALITY IMPROVEMENT ACTIVITIES, WHAT ARE WE DOING TO SUPPORT PROVIDERS, ENSURING THAT THEY ARE OFFERING HIGH-QUALITY PROGRAMS, AND THEY HAVE SUPPORTS THAT ARE NECESSARY FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES? SCOTT ALREADY MENTIONED WE HAVE SEVERAL PARTNERS. WHILE MDE’S THE LEAD AGENCY FOR THIS PROGRAM, WE RELY ON MANY OTHERS TO HELP US IMPLEMENT. WE’RE PARTNERS WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES. THEY HELP WITH THE ELIGIBILITY DETERMINATIONS FOR THE FAMILIES WHO ARE APPLYING FOR THIS PROGRAM. CHILD CARE LICENSING, WHICH IS LOCATED IN LARA, HELP ENSURE THAT WE HAVE HEALTH AND SAFETY STANDARDS FOR THE PROVIDERS, AND THAT THOSE ARE BEING MET. THE MICHIGAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE EDUCATION OF YOUNG CHILDREN AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD INVESTMENT CORPORATION– YOU CAN SEE WE’RE STARTING TO USE LOTS OF ACRONYMS– SUPPORT US WITH WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT, PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT, QUALITY, OUR QUALITY RATING IMPROVEMENT SYSTEM, OFFERING SUPPORTS TO PARENTS. AND THEY’RE ALSO ENTERING IN TO HELP US WITH SOME MONITORING OF OUR LICENSE-EXEMPT PROVIDERS. WE ALSO HAVE PARTNERS THAT WE’RE WORKING WITH TO UTILIZE NEW FUNDING MODELS FOR THESE FUNDS. WE’RE DOING THAT IN FLINT, AND WE’RE DOING THAT THROUGH THE EARLY HEAD START CHILD CARE PARTNERSHIPS. TO GIVE YOU A GLIMPSE OF SOME DATA, IN TERMS OF CHILDREN WHO HAVE BEEN SERVED WITH THIS FUNDING, WE’RE SHOWING YOU FROM FISCAL YEAR 2013 TO CURRENT. THIS IS THE AVERAGE NUMBER OF CHILDREN, BIRTH THROUGH 12, EACH YEAR, THAT WE HAVE SERVED WITH THIS FUNDING. THE NEXT SLIDE SHOWS YOU FAMILIES SERVED. OR SOMETIMES THEY REFER TO, “HOW MANY CASES DID WE HAVE?” AGAIN, THIS IS AN AVERAGE FOR EACH OF THE YEARS THAT IS SHOWN. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT BOTH FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES, WE WERE HIGH, AND THEN WE TOOK A DIP, AND NOW WE’RE BACK ON AN UPSWING, IN TERMS OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES WHO ARE PARTICIPATING.>>WOULD YOU LIKE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS? DR. ZEILE?>>IS THERE A PARTICULAR EXPLANATION WHY YOU HAVE A DROP BY A THIRD OVER THOSE TWO YEARS, FROM 2013 TO 2015?>>SO THOSE WERE TIMES WHEN WE HAD POLICY CHANGES. THOSE WERE TIMES WHEN WE HAD A HIGHER UNEMPLOYMENT RATE. AND SO WE WERE SEEING THAT IMPACTING. TO QUALIFY FOR THE PROGRAM, FAMILIES EITHER HAVE TO BE WORKING, OR ENGAGED IN TRAINING AND EDUCATION. SO THERE WERE SOME OTHER FACTORS THAT WERE ALSO CONTRIBUTING.>>AND ROUGHLY, WHAT WAS THE CENSUS OF ELIGIBLE CHILDREN? DID IT TEND TO GO DOWN BY A SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE?>>SO IN TERMS OF CHILDREN AND CHILDREN WHO WOULD QUALIFY, OUR QUALIFIER IS AT 130% OF THE FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL, CURRENTLY.>>RIGHT.>>OVER TIME, THAT’S BEEN AS LOW AS 119% OF THE FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL. SO THERE HAVE ALWAYS BEEN MORE CHILDREN THAN WE’RE SERVING WHO FALL WITHIN THAT RANGE FOR INCOME ELIGIBILITY. BUT THEY MAY NOT HAVE HAD PARENTS WHO WERE WORKING, OR GOING TO TRAINING AND EDUCATION.>>RIGHT, RIGHT.>>OR APPLYING FOR THE PROGRAM.>>MY ACTUAL QUESTION IS THAT THE NUMBER OF CHILDREN IN MICHIGAN– I’M JUST TRYING TO GET A FEEL FOR THESE FIGURES, RELATIVE TO THE OVERALL POPULATION. IF THE POPULATION DROPPED 5% IN THESE FIVES YEARS, THEN THAT HELPS ME PUT THESE INTO BETTER CONTEXT.>>I DON’T HAVE THAT DATA WITH ME RIGHT NOW. BUT WE WORK WITH THE MICHIGAN LEAGUE FOR PUBLIC POLICY AND THE KIDS COUNT DATA. SO WE CAN CERTAINLY FOLLOW UP AND GET YOU SOME OF THAT INFORMATION.>>OKAY, THANK YOU.>>DR. Z, WE’LL GET THAT INFORMATION AND PROVIDE THAT IN THE BOARD BRIEF TO ALL BOARD MEMBERS.>>OKAY, THANK YOU.>>THIS SLIDE SHOWS YOU PROVIDER PARTICIPATION BY TYPE. I MENTIONED THAT PARENTS HAVE A CHOICE OF THE TYPE OF PROVIDER THAT THEY WOULD LIKE THEIR CHILD TO BE WITH. WE HAVE CENTERS, GROUP HOMES, AND FAMILY HOMES. THOSE TWO TYPES OF PROGRAMS ARE LICENSED BY LARA, AND THEN WE, OF COURSE, HAVE OUR LICENSE-EXEMPT PROVIDERS. SOME PEOPLE REFER TO THEM AS FAMILY, FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS. THAT’S ANOTHER TERM. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT IT COMPARES 2017 TO 2018, CURRENT TO DATE, AND HOW THOSE PROVIDER TYPES ARE VARYING FROM YEAR TO YEAR. IN FISCAL YEAR 2018, WE CURRENTLY HAVE 16% MORE SUBSIDY CHILDREN IN THE CARE OF LICENSED PROVIDERS. THE GROWTH THAT WE’RE SEEING THERE. EARLIER, WHEN YOU WERE GOING THROUGH THE ANNUAL REPORT, YOU HEARD A LITTLE BIT ABOUT STAR RATINGS. THIS CHART GIVES YOU A VIEW AT SUBSIDY CHILDREN, AND WHERE THOSE SUBSIDY CHILDREN ARE IN REGARDS TO STAR RATED PROGRAMS. AND AGAIN, COMPARING WHAT WE KNOW FROM FISCAL YEAR 2017 TO THIRD QUARTER OF FISCAL YEAR 2018, YOU CAN SEE THAT SUBSIDY CHILDREN ARE STARTING TO BE ENGAGED IN HIGHER QUALITY PROGRAMS. WE HAVE FEWER CHILDREN WHO ARE IN EMPTY STAR PROGRAMS, AND MORE CHILDREN WHO ARE IN PROGRAMS WHO ARE PARTICIPATING IN GREAT START TO QUALITY, WHICH MEANS THAT THEY’RE GETTING SUPPORT TO HELP THEM CONTINUE TO INCREASE THEIR QUALITY, OR IMPROVE THEIR QUALITY. SO A LITTLE BIT OF DEMOGRAPHICS. NOW SHIFTING INTO THE FUNDING PIECE, WHICH TAKES MORE TIME TO WRAP YOUR HEAD AROUND– CAN BE A LITTLE BIT COMPLEX. WE HAVE DIFFERENT FUNDING REQUIREMENTS, DIFFERENT TYPES OF FUNDING, AND APPROPRIATIONS THAT ARE MADE TO THE DEPARTMENT, SO WE’RE GOING TO KIND OF WALK YOU THROUGH HOW ALL OF THOSE ARE INTERCONNECTED. SO THIS CHART GIVES YOU A LITTLE BIT OF A HISTORICAL LOOK AT HOW THE FEDERAL FUNDING REQUIREMENTS WORK. THE STATE RECEIVES A FEDERAL BLOCK GRANT AWARD THAT’S BASED ON A FORMULA THAT’S USED ACROSS ALL OF THE STATES. WE’RE REQUIRED TO HAVE SOME GENERAL FUND IN ORDER TO DRAW DOWN THAT FULL FEDERAL AMOUNT– AND I SHOULD BE CLEAR THAT THIS CHART SHOWS STRICTLY OUR FEDERAL NUMBERS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO ACCESS THE FUNDS. OUR APPROPRIATION NUMBERS WOULD LOOK DIFFERENT, BUT IT’S COMPLICATED WHEN YOU MIX THE TWO TOGETHER, SO THIS JUST FOCUSES ON THE FEDERAL NUMBERS. AND THEN IT SHOWS, AGAIN, A– WHAT OUR APPROPRIATION IS COMPARED TO THAT FEDERAL– JUST SO YOU CAN SEE THAT WE DON’T ALWAYS GET APPROPRIATED OUR FULL FEDERAL AWARD FOR THIS PROGRAM. AND AGAIN, THAT TAKES A COMBINATION OF STATE DOLLARS, FEDERAL DOLLARS, MATCH FROM OUR GSRP PROGRAM, IN ORDER TO ACCESS THOSE FULL FEDERAL FUNDS. THE NEXT SLIDE EVEN BRINGS IN THE NEXT COMPLEXITY, WHICH IS WE HAVE OBLIGATION AND LIQUIDATION PERIODS FOR THE FEDERAL FUNDING. SO THAT MEANS YOU HAVE A PERIOD OF TIME TO SPEND THAT FUNDING. AND WE ALWAYS WORK TO SPEND THE OLDEST FUNDING FIRST. SO WHEN YOU SAW THE CHART THAT SHOWED 2016, 2017, AND 2018, WE’RE ALWAYS WORKING TO SPEND ALL OF THAT 2016 MONEY FIRST, THEN WE MOVE ON TO 2017, THEN 2018, BECAUSE WE HAVE MULTIPLE YEARS TO SPEND THAT FEDERAL FUNDING. THAT’S SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE TRACKED AND LOOKED AT AS WELL. IN ADDITION TO THINKING ABOUT THOSE FUNDING POTS, THE OBLIGATION AND LIQUIDATION PERIODS, THERE ARE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SPENDING, AND THEY REALLY FALL INTO THREE CATEGORIES. ONE OF THEM IS ON ADMINISTRATION. SO THE DEPARTMENT HAS A LIMIT IN TERMS OF THE AMOUNT OF ADMINISTRATION WE CAN SPEND. THAT CAP IS AT 5%, AND THAT’S REALLY FOCUSED ON OVERSIGHT OF THE PROGRAM AND IMPLEMENTING ALL OF THE PROVISIONS. THE SECOND CATEGORY IS CALLED DIRECT SERVICES, AND THAT’S REALLY THE REQUIREMENT OF SPENDING THAT GOES TO FAMILIES. SO WE HAVE TO SPEND 70% OF OUR FUNDING TO THE SUBSIDY, OR TO FAMILIES. AND THEN WE HAVE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS FOR QUALITY EXPENDITURES AND MAKING SURE THAT WE HAVE HIGH QUALITY OFFERINGS FOR FAMILIES. FOR THAT QUALITY SPENDING, THEY GIVE US A LIST OF TEN ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES, AND WE HAVE TO CHOOSE FROM THOSE TEN ALLOWABLE ACTIVITIES. THE NEXT CHART SHOWS YOU HOW THOSE QUALITY EXPENDITURES REALLY BREAK DOWN. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT OVER TIME, THEY’RE EXPECTING STATES TO SPEND MORE ON QUALITY ACTIVITIES, AND WE’RE ALWAYS REQUIRED TO SPEND 3% ON IMPROVING INFANT AND TODDLER QUALITY. SO I THINK IF SCOTT CONTINUES HITTING THE FORWARD BUTTON, IT’S GOING TO SHOW YOU BY FISCAL YEAR WHAT THAT QUALITY SPENDING AMOUNT IS. SO IN FISCAL YEAR 2018, OUR CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, WE HAVE TO SPEND $20.3 MILLION OF OUR FUNDING ON IMPROVING THE QUALITY OF PROGRAMS. AND THAT INCLUDES QUALITY FOR INFANTS AND TODDLERS.>>SO THAT’S WITHIN THE STAR RATED FACILITIES? IS THAT WHAT YOU MEAN WHEN YOU SAY THAT?>>IT’S REALLY ACROSS ALL PROVIDER TYPES.>>OKAY.>>THROUGH OUR TEACH SCHOLARSHIPS THAT WE OFFER THEM TO EARN DEGREES– THAT COUNTS AS OUR QUALITY ACTIVITIES. CHILD CARE LICENSING ACTIVITIES COUNT AS QUALITY, BECAUSE THEY ARE COACHING PROVIDERS IN TERMS OF MEETING THE RULES AND REQUIREMENTS. AND THEN GREAT START TO QUALITY IS THE OTHER BIG PIECE. SO WE’VE TALKED A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE FEDERAL COMPLEXITIES. NOW LET’S TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS AT THE STATE LEVEL. SO WE ALWAYS HAVE THE EXECUTIVE BUDGET THAT’S PRESENTED BY THE GOVERNOR, AND THEN THAT BUDGET GOES THROUGH THE COMMITTEE PROCESS BEFORE WE RECEIVE OUR FINAL APPROPRIATION. FOR THIS PROGRAM, WE UTILIZE SOMETHING THAT’S CALLED CASE LOAD CONSENSUS. SO THE STATE BUDGET OFFICE, THE HOUSE AND SENATE FISCAL ENTITIES, AND THE DEPARTMENT GET TOGETHER TO LOOK AT WHAT OUR CASE LOAD TRENDS HAVE BEEN. SO, AGAIN, ACROSS THOSE FISCAL YEARS, HOW MANY CASES HAVE WE HAD, AND WHAT HAVE BEEN THE COSTS OF THOSE CASES? AND THEN WE GO BACK AND THINK ABOUT WHAT ARE ALL OF THOSE SPENDING REQUIREMENTS WE HAVE TO MEET– QUALITY, INFANT/TODDLER, SUBSIDY. AND ULTIMATELY, THAT HELPS THERE BE A DETERMINATION ABOUT HOW MUCH FUNDING IS NEEDED IN THE FISCAL YEAR TO COVER THOSE REQUIREMENTS? SO THIS, AGAIN, COMPARES– SHOWS YOU 2018 AND 2019. YOU CAN SEE THAT FOR FISCAL YEAR 2019, WE’RE PROJECTING MORE INCREASE RELATED TO CASES, AND THAT THE COST PER CASE IS GOING UP. AND THAT REALLY IS DIRECTLY TIED TO A LOT OF THE INITIATIVES THAT WE’VE BEEN PUTTING IN PLACE, AND WE’LL TALK ABOUT IN JUST A MINUTE. AGAIN, THIS PROCESS MIGHT MEAN THAT OUR FULL AWARD FOR A FISCAL YEAR ISN’T APPROPRIATED, AND THAT MONEY, YOU KNOW, GETS USED OVER MULTIPLE YEARS. SO WHEN WE THINK ABOUT HOW THE SUBSIDY WORKS, WE HAVE TO LOOK AT A ELIGIBLE FAMILY, WHAT THEIR ELIGIBILITY IS BASED ON INCOME, AND AGAIN, WHETHER THEY’RE WORKING OR PARTICIPATING IN TRAINING. WE HAVE TO THINK ABOUT WHAT EACH FAMILY IS ELIGIBLE FOR– SO THEY GET AUTHORIZED FOR A CERTAIN NUMBER OF HOURS, AND THE PROVIDER GETS THE INFORMATION ABOUT HOW MANY HOURS THEY’RE AUTHORIZED FOR. THE PARENT CHOOSES THE PROVIDER THEY WOULD LIKE, WHETHER IT’S A LICENSED PROGRAM, OR A LICENSE-EXCEPT PROVIDER WHO MIGHT COME TO THEIR HOME, OR A RELATIVE, AND THE CHILD GOES TO THE RELATIVE’S HOME. AND THEN THAT PROVIDER IS ABLE TO BILL FOR THE CARE THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED. SO THAT’S KIND OF THE SEQUENCE OF THINGS THAT HAPPEN IN TERMS OF US BEING ABLE TO GET THAT MONEY TO FAMILIES AND PROVIDERS. ONE BIG QUESTION THAT ALWAYS COMES UP RELATED TO THE PROGRAM IS HOW DO WE DETERMINE THE RATES FOR THE REIMBURSEMENTS THAT FAMILIES RECEIVE TO HELP THEM WITH THEIR CHILD CARE COST? THE STRATEGY THAT STATES USE IS CALLED A MARKET RATE SURVEY. IT’S ONE OF OUR FEDERAL REQUIREMENTS TO CONDUCT THIS EVERY THREE YEARS. AND IN MICHIGAN, WHEN WE THINK ABOUT THAT MARKET RATE, WE THINK ABOUT IT RELATED TO WHAT TYPE THE PROVIDER IS, WHAT IS THE AGE OF THE CHILD, AND WHAT IS THE STAR RATING OF THE PROVIDER OR THE PROGRAM. AND THE REAL HELPFUL PIECE OF THE MARKET RATE SURVEY IS THAT IT’S REALLY HELPING US LOOK ACROSS THE STATE OF MICHIGAN TO DETERMINE WHAT IS THE MARKET RATE FOR CHILD CARE. SO WE’RE NOT JUST LOOKING AT WHAT IS THE MARKET RATE FOR CHILD CARE SUBSIDY CHILDREN, BUT WHAT DOES IT COST ACROSS THE STATE FOR CHILD CARE, AND WHAT IS NEEDED TO MAKE SURE THAT CHILDREN WHO RECEIVE THE SUBSIDY HAVE ACCESS TO 75% OF THE CARE? THE OFFICE OF CHILD CARE AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL FOR THIS PROGRAM CALLS THAT THE 75TH PERCENTILE. SO IT’S RECOMMENDED THAT STATES SET THEIR RATES AT THAT 75TH PERCENTILE TO ENSURE PARENTS HAVE CHOICE. OUR LAST MARKET RATE SURVEY WAS AT THE END OF 2017 AND INTO THE SPRING OF 2018. WE HAD 25% OF PROVIDERS ACROSS THE STATE PARTICIPATE IN THAT. SO OUR PERCENTAGE RATE WAS UP, WHICH WAS GREAT NEWS. AND OF THOSE 25% WHO PARTICIPATED, 60% SHARED THAT THEY CARE FOR CHILDREN WHO RECEIVE THE SUBSIDY. AND THIS SLIDE SHOWS YOU OUR CURRENT PROVIDER RATES. THESE RATES ARE SET BY THE LEGISLATURE. AND THE RATES THAT YOU SEE HERE– AGAIN, A COMPLICATED CHART BECAUSE IT’S BY STAR RATING, BY PROVIDER TYPE AND BY THE AGE OF THE CHILD. AND THESE RATES WERE SET BASED ON THE 2015 MARKET RATE SURVEY– NOT THE MOST CURRENT SURVEY, BUT THE SURVEY THAT WAS DONE PRIOR. IT’S ALSO IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE AMOUNTS THAT YOU SEE THERE ARE AN HOURLY RATE. CURRENTLY, MICHIGAN IS ONE OF THREE STATES WHO PAYS AN HOURLY RATE TO OUR PROVIDERS. OTHER STATES ARE USING DAILY RATES, OR WEEKLY RATES, OR HALF-DAY RATES. PROVIDERS CAN ASK THAT PARENTS PAY THEM THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE SUBSIDY REIMBURSEMENT AND THE AMOUNT THAT THEY CHARGE ALL OTHER FAMILIES. YES?>>OKAY, SO THESE RATES– WHAT DO THEY INDICATE? WHAT A PROVIDER IS PAID PER HOUR?>>SO IF A PROVIDER CARED FOR–>>–DOLLARS PER HOUR?>>PER CHILD.>>PER CHILD.>>PER CHILD, FOR A CHILD WHO IS RECEIVING THE SUBSIDY.>>OKAY, SO IF THE PROVIDER HAS FOUR CHILDREN, THEN SHE IS PAID $20 FOR A– 16–>>YEAH, 16 IF YOU’RE LOOKING AT THE VERY FIRST COLUMN UP THERE.>>YEAH, AND THAT’S WHERE IT GETS COMPLEX, AS LISA SAID. THERE’S FOUR– THREE OR FOUR WAYS THAT THE RATES ARE SET. ONE IS BY STAR RATING. SO IF YOU’RE A ONE-STAR, TWO-STAR, THREE-STAR, FOUR-STAR, FIVE-STAR, THAT HAS AN IMPACT. WHETHER YOU’RE A PRIVATE CENTER, GROUP AND FAMILY HOME, OR FAMILY AND FRIENDS IS ANOTHER FACTOR. AND THEN THE AGE OF THE CHILD. AND SO IF I’M A CHILD THAT IS OVER 2 1/2, I’M IN A CHILD CARE CENTER THAT IS THREE STARS– IF YOU LINE ALL OF THAT UP, THE REIMBURSEMENT IS $3.50. AND SO THERE ARE MULTIPLE FACTORS THAT GO INTO THE REIMBURSEMENT RATE FOR EACH CHILD, DEPENDING UPON THEIR AGE, THE STAR RATING, AND THE TYPE OF FACILITY THAT THEY’RE CARED FOR IN.>>I GUESS TO THAT POINT, AND MAYBE YOU’RE GOING TO GET TO THIS– SO LET ME JUST MAKE SURE– SO THERE’S LIKE– SO LET’S SAY IN FISCAL YEAR 2018, THERE’S– I’M LOOKING AT THE SLIDE ON PAGE 3, THE BOTTOM SLIDE. THERE’S 33,947 CHILDREN THAT ARE IN DAY CARES. AND SO THESE PROVIDER RATES ARE FOR THE– FOR 24,740 CASES? OR HOW MANY OF THOSE CHILDREN ARE– FALL INTO THIS, GET THIS SUBSIDY– I MEAN, THE PROVIDER GETS THIS AMOUNT FOR THAT CHILD?>>SO THERE– THERE ARE CASES. SO THAT’S WHERE WE COUNT AT THE FAMILY LEVEL–>>OH, OKAY.>>HOW MANY FAMILIES HAVE RECEIVED A SUBSIDY, AND THEN THAT CHILD NUMBER ARE THE ACTUAL CHILDREN WHO ARE BEING PAID FOR THROUGH THE SUBSIDY.>>OKAY, SO WE’RE ONLY TALKING– THIS WHOLE PRESENTATION IS ONLY ABOUT THESE– THE SUBSIDY CHILDREN. OKAY, AND THEN HOW MANY CHILDREN PER PERSONNEL? I MEAN, IF WE USE THE EXAMPLE THAT LUPE GAVE, THAT THERE’S FOUR CHILDREN, HOW MANY PROVIDERS WOULD– OR HOW MANY STAFF WOULD YOU HAVE TO HAVE PER CHILD? DO WE KNOW THAT NUMBER?>>SO THAT WILL VARY BY SETTING TYPE.>>OKAY.>>SO IN A CHILD CARE CENTER, BECAUSE THEY’RE LICENSED, FOR EACH AGE GROUP OF CHILDREN, THEY HAVE A CHILD TO ADULT RATIO THAT THEY MUST FOLLOW. SO FOR EXAMPLE, FOR INFANTS, IT’S ONE TO FOUR. IF YOU ARE A FAMILY HOME PROVIDER, YOU CAN CARE FOR UP TO SIX CHILDREN AT ONE TIME. IF YOU ARE A GROUP HOME PROVIDER, YOU CAN CARE FOR UP TO 12 CHILDREN AT ONE TIME, WITH A SECOND ADULT. IF YOU ARE A LICENSE-EXEMPT PROVIDER, YOU CAN ALSO CARE FOR UP TO SIX CHILDREN AT ONE TIME. MOST ARE CARING FOR AROUND FOUR.>>LUPE?>>THERE’S A FAMILY HOME ACROSS THE STREET FROM MY HOUSE. AND THE PERSONNEL IS OVERTURNED– OVER, AND OVER, SO NOW I KNOW WHY.>>LISA AND SCOTT, DO YOU WANT TO CONTINUE?>>SO WE WANTED TO GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF EXAMPLES, I THINK TO REINFORCE THE COMPLEXITY OF THE PROVIDER RATES IN COMPARISON TO THAT RECOMMENDED 75TH PERCENTILE. BECAUSE WE OFTEN GET THE QUESTION, “ARE YOUR RATES “AT THE 75TH PERCENTILE?” AND IT REALLY DEPENDS. SO IN THIS EXAMPLE, YOU’RE LOOKING AT A THREE-STAR RATED PROGRAM, CHILD CARE CENTER, AND WE’RE SHOWING YOU THE THREE DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS. AND WE’RE SHOWING YOU IN BLUE WHAT OUR CURRENT RATE IS FOR A THREE-STAR PROGRAM, AND THE GREEN LINE IS WHAT THE 75TH PERCENTILE RATE WOULD BE. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR EXAMPLE, FOR A THREE-STAR CENTER-BASED PROGRAM, WE ARE NOT PAYING AT THE 75TH PERCENTILE. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE NEXT EXAMPLE, THIS EXAMPLE IS A PROVIDER WHO IS PAID AT WHAT WE CALL OUR BASE RATE, BECAUSE THEY ARE NOT STAR RATED. SO THEY HAVE AN EMPTY STAR, AND WE’RE SHOWING YOU, AGAIN, BY AGE AND BY PROVIDER TYPE. SO THE FAMILY HOMES ARE TO THE LEFT, AND THEN CENTERS ARE TO THE RIGHT. IF YOU LOOK AT THAT BASE RATE AND COMPARE IT TO THE CURRENT MARKET RATE, YOU CAN SEE THAT FOR SOME TYPES, AGES, WE ARE ABOVE THE 75TH PERCENTILE, BUT FOR SOME TYPES AND AGE COMBINATIONS, WE ARE BELOW THE 75TH PERCENTILE. SO, AGAIN, KIND OF REINFORCING, IN SOME CASES, YES, WE’RE AT THE 75TH PERCENTILE, AND OTHER CASES, NO, WE ARE NOT.>>I’M SORRY, CAN YOU REPEAT AGAIN– THE 75TH PERCENTILE IS BASED ON WHAT? HOW DID YOU TELL–>>SO THAT’S THE FEDERAL GUIDANCE THAT WE RECEIVED THROUGH THE BLOCK GRANT, THEIR RECOMMENDATION THAT STATES ACHIEVE THAT 75TH PERCENTILE SO FAMILIES HAVE ACCESS TO 75% OF THE CARE CHOICES THAT ARE AVAILABLE TO THEM. SO EVEN THOUGH MICHIGAN HAS LOW RATES, EVEN THOUGH WE’RE PAYING AT AN HOURLY RATE, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING OVERTIME TO CONTINUE TO INCREASE THOSE RATES– PAYMENTS THAT OUR PROVIDERS ARE ELIGIBLE FOR. SO THIS GRAPH SHOWS YOU RATE INCREASES THAT HAPPENED IN 2014, 2015, AND THEN AGAIN IN 2017. AND AGAIN, THE DIFFERENT COLORS ARE BY THE VARIOUS TYPES OF PROVIDERS– SO DIFFERENTIATING BETWEEN CENTER, HOMES, AND OUR LICENSE-EXEMPT. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT WE’VE BEEN GRADUALLY TRYING TO INCREASE THOSE RATES OVER TIME THROUGH INCREASED APPROPRIATIONS, ALWAYS WITH THE GOAL OF GETTING CLOSER TO THAT 75TH PERCENTILE, ALWAYS WITHIN THE GOAL OF MEETING ALL OF OUR SPENDING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE FEDERAL FUNDS. SO I THINK OUR NEXT SLIDE IS REALLY MEANT TO TALK ABOUT HOW– BIG PICTURE WISE, WITH REAUTHORIZATION, HOW THE DEPARTMENT HAS BEEN WORKING TO INCREASE THE AMOUNT OF SUPPORT THAT GOES TO FAMILIES RECEIVING THIS SUBSIDY, INCREASE THE SUPPORTS TO CHILDREN, AND INCREASE THE SUPPORTS TO PROVIDERS. SO WE HAVEN’T JUST DONE ONE THING. WE’VE TRIED TO BLEND A VARIETY OF STRATEGIES TOGETHER TO MAKE CHANGES THAT HAVE BEEN SIGNIFICANT. AND I JUST WANT TO POINT OUT A COUPLE OF THEM. ONE OF THOSE IS IMPLEMENTING 12-MONTH ELIGIBILITY. SO LUPE TALKED ABOUT TURNOVER IN THE FAMILY HOME THAT’S ACROSS THE STREET FROM HER. 12-MONTH ELIGIBILITY NOW ENSURES THAT WHEN WE SAY A CHILD IS ELIGIBLE TO RECEIVE THE SUBSIDY REPORT– SUPPORT, THAT THEY GET IT FOR 12 MONTHS. PREVIOUSLY, IF THEIR PARENTS STOPPED WORKING OR TOOK A BREAK IN THEIR TRAINING AND EDUCATION, THE SUBSIDY WOULD STOP, AND THAT MEANT THAT THE PARENT HAD NO SUPPORT TO CONTINUE TO SEND THE CHILD TO THAT PROGRAM, TO HAVE THE CONTINUITY OF THAT EXPERIENCE, AND THAT THE PROVIDER NOW COULD POSSIBLY HAVE A VACANCY AND NOT HAVE THAT FUNDING TO SUPPORT THEIR PROGRAM. SO PROVIDING CONTINUITY FOR ALL THREE OF OUR GROUPS. WE’VE ALSO GOTTEN RID OF THE CLIFF EFFECT THAT SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE HEARD ABOUT, AND THAT IS, AGAIN, IF A PARENT WAS WORKING AND GOT AN INCREASE– SAY, A $0.25 AN HOUR INCREASE– PREVIOUS TO WHAT WE CALLED GRADUATED PHASE OUT, THAT RATE INCREASE WOULD’VE STOPPED THEIR SUBSIDY, AND THEY COULD’VE GONE FROM PAYING AROUND $3,000 A YEAR FOR CHILD CARE TO $18,000 A YEAR FOR CHILD CARE. THIS NOW ALLOWS THEM, AS THEY CONTINUE TO GET THOSE RATE INCREASES, TO CONTINUE TO GET SUBSIDY, BUT JUST DECREASING THE AMOUNT THAT THEY’RE GETTING AS THEIR INCOME INCREASES. AND I THINK THE LAST SIGNIFICANT ONE THAT I WOULD PUT OUT THERE IS OUR CONTINUAL EFFORT TO INCREASE THE ENTRANCE ELIGIBILITY AMOUNT FOR FAMILIES. I MENTIONED EARLIER THAT WE’RE AT 130% OF THE FEDERAL POVERTY LEVEL. WE’RE STILL IN THE BOTTOM THREE ACROSS THE NATION FOR THAT ENTRANCE ELIGIBILITY, BUT WE HAVE BEEN WORKING OVER THE LAST SEVERAL YEARS TO INCREASE THAT FROM 119 TO 130. AND WE’LL CONTINUE TO HAVE CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW THAT IS REALLY CRITICAL FOR THOSE FAMILIES WITH LOW INCOMES TO BE ABLE TO RECEIVE THIS SUPPORT. AND WE’RE OPEN FOR ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.>>OKAY. AND SO I’M JUST GOING TO BE THE TIME KEEPER. WE STILL HAVE TWO PRESENTATIONS LEFT BEFORE LUNCH. SO TOM, I BELIEVE YOU HAD A QUESTION OR A COMMENT.>>YEAH, JUST QUICKLY, THE 34,000 CHILDREN SERVED, IS THAT FULL-TIME? LIKE– I MEAN, IT– COULD SOME OF THEM BE JUST A FEW HOURS A DAY, OR–?>>FAMILIES BASED ON THEIR NEED ARE APPROVED BY WHAT WE CALL TIERS. SO THE TIERS ARE 20, 40, 60, 80, OR 90 OVER A TWO-WEEK PERIOD. SO THEY ALL–>>90–>>90 HOURS OVER A TWO-WEEK PERIOD.>>FOR ONE CHILD? OH, TWO-WEEK PERIOD. OKAY, OH, OKAY. AND THEN LAST QUESTION WOULD BE WHEN I LOOK AT THE FEDERAL FUNDING CHART– AND JUST QUICKLY, IN FY 2018 IT SAYS– THE THIRD NUMBER AND FOURTH NUMBER, WOULD I ADD THOSE TOGETHER, THE FEDERAL AND THE STATE FUNDING– AND MAYBE THERE’S SOME ADDITIONAL, BUT– WOULD I ADD THOSE TWO TOGETHER AND DIVIDE BY 34,000 TO COME UP WITH A ROUGH– I GET $7,000 PER CHILD. IS THAT AN ACCURATE WAY TO SAY, BIG PICTURE, WHAT IS BEING SPENT? IT’S $186 MILLION FEDERAL, $52 MILLION STATE, DIVIDED BY 34,000 CHILDREN. IS THAT KIND OF A ROUGH– ABOUT 7 GRAND A CHILD?>>I– YEAH, WE COULD CALCULATE THAT BASED ON DIFFERENT AGES OF CHILDREN IF THAT’S SOMETHING THAT–>>NO, I JUST WAS WANTING A ROUGH– I DON’T KNOW IF WE WERE TALKING 1,000, OR 10,000– I JUST– 7 GRAND IS PROBABLY A ROUGH NUMBER? OKAY, THANK YOU.>>OKAY, PAM?>>AND I DON’T KNOW WHERE WE ARE WITH THE MEDICAID WORK REQUIREMENT, BUT I DON’T KNOW– DO WE PERCEIVE THAT THAT’S GOING TO IMPACT THOSE NUMBERS DRAMATICALLY? AND HOW ARE WE ASSESSING THAT?>>I THINK THAT GOES BACK TO THE FORECAST THAT LISA ALLUDED IN TERMS OF THOSE– THAT NUMBER JUMPING, WHICH IS ON– SLIDES LATER– WHICH IS RIGHT HERE. SO FY 2018, NUMBER OF CASES– ABOUT 19,800 CHILDREN. AGAIN, FY 2019, DUE TO WHAT YOU’RE TALKING ABOUT, DR. PUGH, WE’RE LOOKING AT ABOUT 25,000 STUDENTS WITH THE MEDICAID WORK REQUIREMENTS. OR CHILDREN– EXCUSE ME– NOT STUDENTS.>>AND HOW ARE WE– WE’VE HAD SEVERAL– OR WE’VE HAD A COUPLE DURING OUR PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD, WHERE WE’VE HAD CHILD CARE FACILITIES THAT HAVE COME– AND GETTING AT SOME OF THE POINTS THAT LUPE HAS RAISED. AND I KNOW WORKING IN EARLY CHILDHOOD DEVELOPMENT THAT WE WOULD TRAIN PEOPLE, AND THEN THEY WOULD LOSE THEIR– THEIR STAFFING. AND I HEARD YOU TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU’VE PUT IN PLACE. DO YOU SEE THAT BEING ABLE TO STABILIZE SOME OF THAT? AND WHEN– WHEN WE WERE THESE PUT IN PLACE THAT– THAT YOU SPOKE OF, THE DIFFERENT– INCREASING ACCESS TO HIGH QUALITY CHILD CARE?>>SO THE– THE CHANGES THAT I HIGHLIGHTED, REALLY, WE STARTED IMPLEMENTING IN 2015. IT WAS A YEAR WHERE WE STARTED IMPLEMENTING A VARIETY OF THESE. WHAT WE’RE HEARING IN TERMS OF FEEDBACK FROM PROVIDERS WHEN WE GO OUT GO INTO THE FIELD IS A THANK YOU, THAT THE 12-MONTH CONTINUOUS ELIGIBILITY IS MAKING A DIFFERENCE FOR THEM, CREATING THAT CONTINUITY WITH FAMILIES, NOT HAVING THE SURPRISE ELEMENT OF A CHILD BEING ELIGIBLE TODAY, NOT ELIGIBLE NEXT WEEK. THEY’RE APPRECIATIVE OF THE EFFORTS THAT WE’VE MADE TO INCREASE RATES, TO CONTINUE TO SUPPORT FAMILIES AS THEIR INCOME IS INCREASING, THE SUPPORTS THAT WE’RE PUTTING IN PLACE RELATED TO GREAT START TO QUALITY. SO THEY’RE GIVING US POSITIVE FEEDBACK IN TERMS OF IT HELPING AND STARTING TO MAKE A DIFFERENCE, BUT THEY STILL HAVE FRUSTRATIONS. THERE ARE TIMES WHEN THINGS DON’T GO SMOOTHLY WITH PAPERWORK, AND THERE ARE DELAYS IN TERMS OF CHILDREN BEING DETERMINED ELIGIBLE THAT ALSO CAUSE THEM ISSUES.>>JUST ONE MORE QUESTION. AND I DON’T KNOW IF I’M NOT UNDERSTANDING THIS, BUT– SO THE 75TH PERCENTILE, HOW ARE WE COMPARING, LIKE, OTHER CHILD CARE FACILITIES IN AREAS WHERE SUBSIDY IS NOT AN ISSUE? ARE WE LOOKING AT THAT? ARE WE COMPARING THOSE FACILITIES? OR ARE WE ASSUMING THAT ALL OF OUR CHILD CARE FACILITIES ARE IN THIS– ARE– FIT INTO THESE CATEGORIES?>>SO OUR FULL MARKET RATE SURVEY REPORT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE, AND WE CAN CERTAINLY SHARE THAT LINK WITH YOU. IT GIVES YOU COMPARISONS ACROSS THE STATE FOR THE COST OF CARE IN GENERAL, NOT JUST FOR THE SUBSIDY CHILDREN.>>OKAY, OKAY. I MEAN, BECAUSE I WOULD ASSUME THAT THAT’S GOING TO HAVE A HUGE IMPACT ON WHAT IT IS THAT WE’RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. BECAUSE IF I’M A WORKER, AND IF I HAVE TO DEPEND ON THIS $4 TO $2, VERSUS JUST GO SOMEPLACE ELSE– AND THEN I’M– WE KNOW THAT THE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE BEING IMPACTED BY THIS ARE THE SAME COMMUNITIES WHERE– YOU KNOW, BY THE TIME THEY MAKE IT TO 3RD GRADE, WE HAVE READING ISSUES. SO IT– WE PROBABLY SHOULD LOOK AT IT FROM THAT FULL VANTAGE POINT. AND THAT’S WHY I WAS ASKING ABOUT THE 75TH PERCENTILE– ARE WE LOOKING AT IN COMMUNITIES, OR ACROSS THE WHOLE COUNTRY, OR WITHIN MICHIGAN? BUT THANKS FOR THE REPORT.>>OKAY, MICHELLE?>>YEAH, SO ON PAGE 6, WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT THE FEDERAL FUNDING, AND I SEE THAT THERE WAS– SO YOU SAY THAT SOMETIMES– IT SAYS FEDERAL FUNDING RETURNED DUE TO LACK OF APPROPRIATION. SO IT DOESN’T SAY THAT IT’S– ROLLS OVER. IT SAYS IT’S RETURNED. SO I’M WONDERING IF THAT’S ACCURATE? AND WHY SUCH– SUCH A LARGE BALANCE WHEN THERE’S SUCH A HIGH DEMAND AND WHEN THE PAY IS– SEEMS TO BE INSUFFICIENT.>>YOU CAN START, I’LL FINISH.>>OKAY. SO IN FISCAL YEAR 2016 AND 2017, WE DID IN FACT RETURN FEDERAL FUNDS, AND THAT’S BECAUSE WE WEREN’T ABLE TO OBLIGATE THOSE FEDERAL FUNDS WITHIN THAT TWO TO THREE-YEAR WINDOW– THE, YOU KNOW– THAT OBLIGATION CHART. GOING FORWARD IN FISCAL YEAR 2018, WE ARE PLANNING TO SPEND THE FUNDING THAT IS AVAILABLE TO US WITHIN THOSE OBLIGATION AND LIQUIDATION PERIODS.>>IS THERE A REASON– SO IT WAS JUST BECAUSE OF THE CATEGORIES THAT THEY GAVE YOU, OR– YOU COULDN’T GIVE THEM TO FAMILY SUBSIDIES?>>SO PART OF THAT, TOO, WAS WHAT WASN’T APPROPRIATED OUT OF THE STATE GENERAL FUND. AND SO IF YOU LOOK IN THE FIRST COLUMN, WE WERE AWARDED $164 MILLION. WHAT WAS NEEDED TO ACCESS ALL OF THAT 164 WAS A $50 MILLION ALLOCATION FROM THE STATE. WE DIDN’T GET THAT ALLOCATION. THE STATE APPROPRIATION WAS TWO– TWO– OR TWO ROWS BELOW AT $37 MILLION, HENCE RETURNING THE $13 MILLION. SO FULL APPROPRIATION FROM THE STATE, THEN, WOULD’VE MEANT THAT WE WOULDN’T HAVE HAD TO RETURN THAT. SO THAT’S–>>OKAY, THANKS FOR CLARIFYING THAT, YEAH. YEAH, THAT’S PRETTY– I MEAN, FOR LEGISLATORS WHO SAY HOW IMPORTANT IT IS TO WORK AND HOW MEANINGFUL IT IS TO WORK, NOT TO SUPPORT PEOPLE WHO ARE TRYING TO WORK MAKES NO SENSE TO ME, BUT– I ALSO WANTED TO KNOW, HAS THERE BEEN AN INCREASE IN THE STAR RATING? IN THE FIVE– IN THE– IN PEOPLE MOVING UP? BECAUSE ONE OF THE CONCERNS I’VE HEARD IS THAT WITH THE TEACH GRANT, YOU KNOW, THESE PEOPLE ARE IMPOVERISHED– I MEAN, THEY’RE MINIMUM WAGE WORKERS, AND VERY FEW HAVE HEALTH BENEFITS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SO THEY ARE ASKED TO COME UP WITH THE MONEY TO GET THE TRAINING, AND THEN GET REIMBURSED FOR THE GRANT, THE TEACH GRANT, LATER. THAT’S MY UNDERSTANDING. IS THAT ACCURATE?>>SO FOR THE TEACH SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM, WHEN YOU’RE ENROLLING FOR CLASSES AT EITHER A COMMUNITY COLLEGE OR A UNIVERSITY, YOUR COURSES CAN BE CHARGED TO THE TEACH PROGRAM AT MICHIGAN AEYC, AND THEN THOSE TUITION CHARGES ARE PAID ON YOUR BEHALF. EACH OF THE SCHOLARSHIP MODELS DO HAVE A PORTION THAT THE PROVIDER CONTRIBUTES TO. IT’S USUALLY AT 10% OR LESS. SO THEY DO HAVE SOME OF THAT THAT THEY ARE PAYING FOR, BUT THE MAJORITY IS PAID FOR THROUGH THE SCHOLARSHIP PROGRAM.>>ARE THEY REIMBURSED? IS– BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THEY WERE– I MEAN, MAYBE I GOT BAD INFORMATION– THAT THEY WERE REIMBURSED FOR THE MONEY AFTER THEY HAD TO PUT MONEY DOWN.>>FOR THE 10%, THEY ARE REIMBURSED.>>ALL RIGHT, SO– AND THAT THAT WAS A– THAT WAS FOR– FOR PEOPLE– OR PRETTY PROHIBITIVE, TO BE ABLE TO EVEN COME UP WITH THAT MONEY, YOU KNOW, IF THEY’RE SUPPORTING THEIR FAMILY ON THAT. AND I– SO THEY SPECIFICALLY ASKED ME TO– BECAUSE THEY WANT– YOU KNOW, THESE SENATORS WANT– SEEM TO– YOU KNOW, THEY WANT THE HIGHER RATINGS FOR ALL THE ADVANTAGES THAT THAT BRINGS, AND– BUT THEY’RE HAVING TROUBLE. AND THEN, AGAIN, AS SOMEONE ELSE HAD MENTIONED, ONCE THEY GET THEM TRAINED, THEN THEY OFTEN WILL LEAVE IF THEY CAN FIND– YEAH– INCOME THAT– BUT IT SEEMS– IT’S NOT THE MDE’S FAULT THAT THERE’S INADEQUATE FUNDING TO PAY THESE WORKERS TO BE STABLE AND TO, YOU KNOW, SUPPORT THEIR FAMILIES AND DO THE WORK THAT THEY WANT TO DO. IT JUST CALLS FOR A BIGGER INVESTMENT, AND THAT’S A PRIORITY. I ALSO HAD A QUESTION. SO THERE’S– WE’RE GETTING A FEDERAL GRANT THAT’S SUPPORTING US, CORRECT? IS THERE– NOW, THIS FEDERAL BLOCK GRANT AWARD, THIS HAPPENS ALL THE TIME AND HAS BEEN AROUND FOR MANY YEARS, OR IS THIS– BECAUSE I KNOW THERE WAS A GRANT THAT WAS AWARDED TO THE DEPARTMENT AT ONE POINT. I’M JUST WONDERING IF YOU FORESEE ANY REDUCTION IN FEDERAL INCOME, AND IF THERE’S A PLAN TO DEAL WITH THAT.>>IT IS A FEDERAL ANNUAL APPROPRIATION. IN FISCAL YEAR 2018, CONGRESS ACTUALLY INCREASED THE AMOUNT OF THE FEDERAL AWARDS TO STATES, AND THEY ARE CURRENTLY DEBATING THE FISCAL YEAR 2019 APPROPRIATIONS AT THE FEDERAL LEVEL.>>HENCE THE CHANGE FROM 2017 TO 2018 THERE FROM 164 TO 226.>>OKAY. SO THE PROBLEM– THE REASON WHY WE RANK SO LOW NATIONALLY, THEN, IS MORE THE STATE COMMITMENT TO THIS? IS THAT WHAT– A FAIR ASSESSMENT?>>SO WHEN I SAY WE’RE THE THIRD LOWEST IN THE NATION, OR MAKE THAT COMPARISON, WHEN WE LOOK ACROSS THE STATES AND WE LOOK AT WHAT THEIR ENTRANCE ELIGIBILITY IS, YOU KNOW, OURS IS ONE OF THE THREE LOWEST ACROSS ALL OF THE STATES. BUT THAT’S A STATE FLEXIBILITY DECISION IN TERMS OF WHERE YOU SET THAT AMOUNT.>>SO– BUT OTHER STATES– DO THEY APPROPRIATE MORE THAN MICHIGAN FOR CHILD CARE IS WHAT I’M– I WOULD ASSUME IF THEY HAVE GREATER– THEY HAVE MORE ENTRANTS, THAT THEY’RE GOING TO SUPPORT THAT. BUT MAYBE THAT’S–>>SOME STATES DO APPROPRIATE MORE GENERAL FUND. MANY STATES HAVE WAITING LISTS. MICHIGAN DOES NOT HAVE A WAITING LIST. SO THE CASE LOAD CONSENSUS SLIDE WHERE WE’RE PROJECTING AND LOOKING AT COST PER CASE IS ALSO TAKING INTO ACCOUNT THAT WE’RE NOT TRYING TO CREATE A WAITING LIST FOR FAMILIES WHO ARE ELIGIBLE FOR THE PROGRAM, WHEREAS OTHER STATES DO HAVE HUNDREDS OR THOUSANDS OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES ON WAITING LISTS FOR THE SUBSIDY SUPPORT.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IF THERE AREN’T ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, I WILL THANK SCOTT AND LISA FOR THEIR PRESENTATION. AND WE WILL GO ON TO OUR NEXT AGENDA ITEM, WHICH IS A PRESENTATION ON TEACHER PREPARATION REQUIREMENTS– CLINICAL EXPERIENCES AND CORE PRACTICES. FOR OVER THREE YEARS, THE MICHIGAN DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, IN COLLABORATION WITH MICHIGAN STAKEHOLDERS, HAS BEEN WORKING TO IMPROVE THE PREPARATION OF THE EDUCATOR WORKFORCE IN MICHIGAN. THIS IS IN DIRECT ALIGNMENT TO MICHIGAN’S STRATEGIC PLAN FOR BECOMING A TOP TEN EDUCATION STATE. ONE OF THE RESULTS OF THIS COLLABORATION IS A SET OF CLINICAL EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS THAT WILL PREPARE TEACHERS TO WORK WITH LEARNERS WHO REPRESENT THE CULTURAL, LINGUISTIC, AND SOCIOECONOMIC DIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN’S STUDENT POPULATION, WITH A LENS AND TOOLS FOR EQUITABLE TEACHING AND LEARNING. PAIRED WITH THESE CLINICAL EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS ARE 19 RESEARCH-BASED CORE PRACTICES THAT TEACHER CANDIDATES ARE TO DEVELOP, PRACTICE, AND DEMONSTRATE APPROPRIATE MASTERY OF WITHIN THEIR CLINICAL EXPERIENCES, REGARDLESS OF THE GRADE BAND OR DISCIPLINE AREA. THIS PRESENTATION IS AN INFORMATION ITEM, AND DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE BOARD. OUR PRESENTERS TODAY ARE VENESSA KEESLER, LEAH BREEN, SEAN KOTTKE, GINA [ INDISTINCT ], AND WE DO HAVE A POWERPOINT PRESENTATION– I BELIEVE BOARD MEMBERS RECEIVED COPIES OF IT. THANK YOU AND WELCOME.>>THANK YOU, SHEILA. AND BEFORE I TURN IT OVER TO THE TEAM, I JUST WANT TO, FIRST OF ALL, THANK THEM. LIKE SHEILA’S INTRODUCTION SAID, THIS HAS BEEN OVER THREE YEARS IN THE MAKING, WITH A DIVERSE GROUP OF STAKEHOLDERS, AND IT’S THE THIRD IN A SERIES OF PRESENTATIONS WE’VE BEEN DOING TO THE BOARD ABOUT A LOT OF WORK THAT THE TEAM’S BEEN DOING AROUND HOW DO WE REVAMP OUR PREPARATION, CERTIFICATION, CLINICAL EXPERIENCES IN A WAY THAT’S SUPPORTIVE OF THE 10 IN 10 AND THE EFFECTIVE EDUCATION WORKFORCE? SO WE’RE EXCITED TO BRING THIS FORWARD. IT REPRESENTS FEEDBACK FROM A LOT OF PEOPLE AND A LOT OF WORK OVER A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND WE’RE LOOKING FORWARD TO SHARING IT. SO, TEAM?>>GREAT, THANK YOU. WE START WITH OUR TOP 10 IN 10 ALIGNMENT GROUP. ALL OF OUR PRESENTATIONS, WE INVOKED GOAL 3, TO DEVELOP, SUPPORT AND SUSTAIN A HIGH QUALITY, PREPARED, AND COLLABORATIVE EDUCATION WORKFORCE. BUT WITH THIS PARTICULAR SET OF THINGS, I WANT TO RAISE UP TWO ELEMENTS IN GOAL 1– CREATING AN ALIGNED AND P-20 SYSTEM FOR OUR STUDENTS, SPECIFICALLY THROUGH FORGING DEEPER PARTNERSHIPS BETWEEN OUR P-12 SCHOOLS, OUR ISDs, AND EDUCATOR PREPARATION INSTITUTIONS SO THAT THERE ARE SEAMLESS GOALS FOR TEACHER QUALITY. WE HAVE THREE DIMENSIONS TO TEACHER PREPARATION, AND THE FIRST IS THE CONTENT KNOWLEDGE FOR TEACHING AND THE PEDAGOGICAL CONTENT KNOWLEDGE. LAST MONTH, WE PRESENTED TO YOU STANDARDS SPECIFIC TO THE PK-3 AND 3-6 GRADE BAND IN THOSE FOUR CORE CONTENT AREAS. AND THERE ARE TWO ADDITIONAL ELEMENTS THAT GO WITH THIS. AND THIS IS A INSET FROM OUR CERT STRUCTURE DIAGRAM. FOUNDATIONAL COURSE WORK, WHICH ARE CORE PRACTICES THAT DEFINE THE BASIC FUNDAMENTALS OF TEACHING, REGARDLESS OF GRADE BAND OR CONTENT AREA BEING TAUGHT, AND THEN CLINICAL EXPERIENCES WITHIN WHICH OUR CANDIDATES DEMONSTRATE THEIR GROWTH AND MASTERY OF THOSE PRACTICES. AND THAT’S WHY WE PAIR THEM TOGETHER FOR OUR PRESENTATION TODAY. SO TALKING ABOUT THE FOUNDATIONAL COURSE WORK, WE DEFINE THIS THROUGH WHAT WE CALL A SET OF CORE PRACTICES. THESE ARE THE 19 HIGH-LEVERAGE PRACTICES IDENTIFIED BY TeachingWorks. IN YOUR PACKET, THERE’S A SET OF– THEY’RE DEFINED. SO YOU’VE GOT THE WHOLE SET OF THEM THERE. THESE ARE THINGS THAT TEACHERS DO ALL THE TIME. THEY’RE USED CONSTANTLY. THEY LEVERAGE STUDENT’S LEARNING AND FLOURISHING. THEY’RE CENTRAL TO THE STUDENT– SUPPORTING STUDENT’S SOCIAL AND EMOTIONAL NEEDS. THEY’RE THINGS THAT CAN PUT YOUNG PEOPLE AT RISK IF NOT DONE WELL, IF DONE POORLY, AND CAN BE TAUGHT TO OUR PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS. THEY’RE LEARNABLE, AND THEY ARE ASSESSABLE, AND THEY ARE CONSISTENT ACROSS CONTENT AREAS AND GRADE BANDS. WHY ARE WE ADOPTING THESE HIGH-LEVERAGE PRACTICES AS CORE PRACTICES– OR AFFIRMING THEM? WELL, PAIRED WITH THE PROFESSIONAL STANDARDS, THE ELEMENT YOU SAW IN THE ELEMENTARY STANDARDS WE PRESENTED LAST MONTH– THESE ADDRESS KEY CONCERNS THAT WERE RAISED BY STAKEHOLDERS IN THE CERT STRUCTURE FEEDBACK THAT WE RECEIVED, CONCERNS SPECIFICALLY ABOUT ASSESSMENT LITERACY, THE NEEDS OF DIVERSE LEARNERS AND CULTURAL COMPETENCE, AND CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT FROM A LEARNING ENGAGEMENT PERSPECTIVE. THERE’S AN EXTRAORDINARILY STRONG RESEARCH BASE BEHIND THE HIGH-LEVERAGE PRACTICES THAT DEMONSTRATES THEIR CORE ELEMENTS OF REFLECTIVE TEACHING REGARDLESS OF GRADE BAND, REGARDLESS OF CONTENT BEING TAUGHT. THAT STRONG RESEARCH BASE ALSO DEMONSTRATES THAT THESE ARE TEACHABLE BEHAVIORS FOR PRE-SERVICE TEACHERS. THEY ARE OBSERVABLE IN TEACHING PRACTICE, AND THEY ARE WRITTEN IN PLAIN, NON-JARGON LANGUAGE. IN CONTRAST WITH OTHER FRAMEWORKS FOR TEACHING, THIS FRAMEWORK WAS DEVELOPED IN MICHIGAN AND HAS GARNERED AN INTERNATIONAL REPUTATION, AND IS WORTHY OF OUR AFFIRMATION. SO WHAT ARE WE DOING WITH THIS? WE’RE CREATING A PARTNERSHIP WITH TeachingWorks TO AFFIRM THESE HLPs AS CORE PRACTICES TO ESTABLISH COMMON OUTCOMES FOR TEACHER PREPARATION. THIS PARTNERSHIP WILL ALSO SUPPORT DEVELOPMENT AND DISSEMINATION OF RESEARCH AND ASSESSMENT TOOLS THAT ARE ONGOING WORK, AND WE’LL BE COLLABORATING WITH TeachingWorks MICHIGAN PROGRAM NETWORK ON INFUSING THE TEACHER PREPARATION CURRICULUM WITH HIGH-LEVERAGE PRACTICES. THE NETWORK CURRENTLY HAS NINE MEMBERS, NOT INCLUDING ITS HOME BASE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, SPREAD ACROSS THE STATE, REPRESENTING THE DIVERSITY OF GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS AND POPULATIONS THAT WE SERVE IN OUR EDUCATIONAL COMMUNITY.>>SO ALONGSIDE THOSE CORE PRACTICES, WE’VE ALSO BEEN CONVENING STAKEHOLDERS TO DETERMINE SOME CLINICAL EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS FOR ALL TEACHERS AS THEY BECOME CERTIFIED. OUR GROUP AS A WHOLE HAS CONTAINED PEOPLE FROM ACROSS THE STATE. WE DEFINITELY INCLUDED MASTERFUL TEACHERS– CURRENT MASTERFUL TEACHERS WHO DO HOST STUDENT TEACHERS. WE HAD P-12 ADMINISTRATORS, OUR ED PREP INSTITUTIONS AND THEIR CLINICAL EXPERIENCE PEOPLE, EDUCATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS– WE ALSO CONTACTED THE NEW EDUCATOR SUPPORT TEAM FOR FEEDBACK FROM THOSE EDUCATORS, AND WE CONNECTED WITH THE LEGISLATURE, THE GOVERNOR’S OFFICE, AND DID CROSS-OFFICE WORK WITH MULTIPLE MDE OFFICES. STAKEHOLDERS REVIEWED CURRENT RESEARCH, THEY EXAMINED OTHER FRAMEWORKS FROM OTHER STATES AND EDUCATOR ORGANIZATIONS AS THEY BEGAN THIS WORK. SO WE MET EIGHT TIMES OVER SIX MONTHS, AND THROUGH THAT REVIEW OF THOSE NATIONAL FRAMEWORKS AND CURRENT PRACTICES AND RESEARCH, THEY CAME UP WITH THE FRAMEWORK THAT YOU’RE GOING TO SEE HERE. WE MADE SURE THAT WE HAD KEY INPUT FROM OUR PK-12 PARTNERS. WE FELT LIKE BECAUSE CLINICAL EXPERIENCE HAPPENS IN THE PK-12 ENVIRONMENT, THEIR INPUT WAS CRITICAL TO THIS PROCESS. WE ALSO FELT IT WAS CRITICAL TO MAKE SURE WE ENGAGED AS MANY TEACHERS AS POSSIBLE TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY COULD GIVE US FEEDBACK NOT ONLY ON THEIR OWN PREPARATION, BUT THEIR EXPERIENCE WITH TEACHER CANDIDATES COMING INTO THEIR CLASSROOMS. SO THEY CREATED A CLINICAL PREPARATION VISION THAT YOU SEE BEFORE US. AND IT ESSENTIALLY CREATES A VISION OF MAKING SURE THAT THESE CANDIDATES HAVE INTENTIONAL SERIES OF DIVERSE AND COHESIVE CLINICAL EXPERIENCES. WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WAS INTEGRATED WITH THE PREPARATION CURRICULUM, BECAUSE THE RESEARCH REALLY INDICATES THAT HAVING A COHESIVE, CONNECTED CURRICULUM WITH CLINICAL EXPERIENCES RESULTS IN MORE EXPERIENCE FOR THOSE TEACHERS, AND QUALITY EXPERIENCE FOR THOSE TEACHER CANDIDATES. ALSO, WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT CLINICAL EXPERIENCES HAPPEN ACROSS THE PROGRAM, ON MULTIPLE POINTS, IN MULTIPLE SETTINGS, SO THAT THESE CANDIDATES CAN ENGAGE WITH THE LEARNERS WHO REPRESENT THE CULTURAL, LINGUISTIC, AND SOCIOECONOMIC DIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN’S POPULATION. WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT WAS SET IN A WAY THAT EACH EPP AND K-12 PARTNER COULD MEET THE NEEDS OF THEIR CONSTITUENTS AND THEIR POPULATION IN EACH OF THE GEOGRAPHIC REGIONS OF THE STATE. SO WHAT THE CLINICAL STAKEHOLDER GROUP CAME UP WITH IS THAT THEY WANTED TO SEE 600 MINIMUM CLINICAL EXPERIENCE HOURS WITH CHILDREN BEFORE CERTIFICATION OCCURRED. THIS HAPPENS IN THREE MAJOR PHASES. THEY DESIGNATED AN EXPLORATORY PHASE, WHICH IS KIND OF A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN EXPLORE POSSIBLE CAREER OPTIONS, AN APPRENTICESHIP PHASE AND AN INTERNSHIP PHASE. AND THEN THEY CREATED A LEVEL OF FLEXIBILITY THAT COULD WORK DEPENDING ON GEOGRAPHIC REGION, AREAS OF NEED, AND NEED FOR OUR PK-12 PARTNERS. THE EXPLORATORY PHASE IS A MAXIMUM OF 30 HOURS THAT CAN BE USED IN ANY GRADE LEVEL AND ANY CONTENT AREA. MOST EPPs HAVE AN EXPLORATORY COURSE THAT ALLOWS CANDIDATES TO DETERMINE WHETHER TEACHING IS FOR THEM, AND WHAT PART OF TEACHING REALLY SPEAKS TO THEIR SOUL, ESSENTIALLY, AND WHICH CHILDREN DO THEY WANT TO WORK WITH? WHAT AREAS DO THEY WANT TO WORK IN? THESE EXPLORATORY HOURS ALLOW THEM TO OBSERVE IN MULTIPLE CLASSROOMS, MULTIPLE BUILDINGS, MULTIPLE LEVELS, MULTIPLE CONTENT AREAS SO THAT THEY CAN GET A FEEL FOR WHAT THEY WANT TO PURSUE. ONCE THEY MAKE THAT DETERMINATION, THEY MOVE INTO THE APPRENTICESHIP STAGE, AND THIS IS COURSE WORK AND FIELD EXPERIENCE THAT ARE CONNECTED SO THAT THEY’RE ABLE TO SEE WHAT’S HAPPENING IN THEIR COURSES DIRECTLY HAPPENING IN CLASSROOMS WITH STUDENTS AND TEACHERS. WE’VE– THE STAKEHOLDER GROUP HAS DETERMINED THAT A MINIMUM OF 70 STUDENT CONTACT HOURS SHOULD BE REQUIRED FOR THIS APPRENTICESHIP PHASE, THAT IT SHOULD BE CO-CONSTRUCTED WITH THE K-12 PARTNERS, AND THE MENTOR TEACHERS THAT THEY CHOOSE SHOULD DEMONSTRATE EXEMPLARY TEACHING PRACTICES SO THAT WE KNOW OUR CANDIDATES ARE LEARNING THESE EXEMPLARY TEACHING PRACTICES. THE APPRENTICESHIP ACTIVITIES– SORRY, REALLY QUICK– THE– WHERE THE EXPLORATORY ACTIVITIES ARE A LOT MORE OBSERVATION, APPRENTICESHIP ACTIVITIES, WE DO EXPECT THAT– THOSE ARE STUDENT CONTACT HOURS– THEY’RE WORKING WITH CHILDREN, THEY’RE ENGAGING WITH THESE STUDENTS, THEY’RE CO-PLANNING WITH TEACHERS, AND OBSERVING MASTERFUL TEACHING IN THESE AREAS. THE INTERNSHIP, THEN, IS WHAT WE CURRENTLY KNOW AS STUDENT TEACHING. AND WHAT WE HAVE STATED IS THE INTERNSHIP SHOULD BE A MINIMUM OF 300 STUDENT CONTACT HOURS WITHIN THAT 12 FULL-TIME WEEKS THAT IS REQUIRED IN RULE. THE MENTORS FOR THE INTERNSHIP MUST BE CREDENTIALED IN THE AREA OF CANDIDATE CERTIFICATION SO THAT WE KNOW THEY ARE GETTING THE BEST EXPERIENCE WITHIN THEIR AREA OF GRADE BAND AND CONTENT. AND IT ALSO MUST INCLUDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR THAT CANDIDATE TO DO SOME SOLO OR CO-TEACHING. WE’RE LEAVING THE VERY SPECIFICS OF HOW MUCH THAT IS TO OUR EPPs AND THE K-12 PARTNERS BECAUSE WE WANT THAT TO REFLECT THE NEEDS OF THE ENVIRONMENTS THAT THESE CANDIDATES GO INTO. WE HAVE ALSO CREATED SOMETHING CALLED FLEX HOURS. FLEX HOURS STRETCH BETWEEN THE APPRENTICESHIP AND THE INTERNSHIP, AND THEY RECOGNIZE SOME OF THE REQUESTS THAT WE GOT FROM OUR P-12 PARTNERS REGARDING FLEXIBILITY OF WHAT COULD BE COUNTED. MANY OF THEM ENGAGE OUR CANDIDATES IN AFTER-SCHOOL ACTIVITIES, TUTORING ACTIVITIES, EVEN WEEKEND ACTIVITIES. SOME OF THEM DO CAMPS OVER THE SUMMER. AND WE DECIDED THAT IF THOSE WERE MITIGATED AND THEY WERE SUPERVISED TO WHERE THESE CANDIDATES WERE LEARNING, THEY SHOULD BE AVAILABLE TO BE COUNTED AS STUDENT CONTACT. SO WHAT WE HAVE DETERMINED IS THAT THERE’S A MINIMUM OF 200 HOURS THAT COULD BE COUNTED AS FLEX HOURS. AND IT COULD HAPPEN EITHER IN THE APPRENTICESHIP OR THE INTERNSHIP. THESE FLEX HOURS CAN BE, AS I SAID, AFTER SCHOOL, THEY CAN BE TUTORING, THEY CAN ALSO BE WITH THE MATERIALS OF PRACTICE, WHICH THE RESEARCH HAS REALLY INDICATED IS QUALITY WORK WITH MATERIALS THAT COME DIRECTLY FROM STUDENTS– STUDENT DATA SETS, STUDENT WORK SAMPLES, OR QUALITY EXAMPLES OF TEACHING AND LEARNING ON VIDEO. THIS ALSO COUNTS FOR SOME OF THE AVATAR WORK THAT SOME OF OUR INSTITUTIONS HAVE BEEN CREATING TO HELP CANDIDATES LEARN HOW TO DEAL WITH SPECIFIC SITUATIONS. THE FLEX HOURS ALSO CAN BE COUNTED TO ADD ON PIECES FOR INITIAL PREPARATION. THE SPECIAL EDUCATION HOURS COULD NOT BE TOUCHED. WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN THE HOURS THAT MARSE HAS INDICATED. THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL 8-WEEK STUDENT TEACHING PERIOD THAT ANYONE GETTING SPECIAL EDUCATION MUST SERVE IN ADDITION TO THE 12 WEEKS. THOSE 8 WEEKS CAN COME OUT OF THESE FLEX HOURS IF NEEDED. WE’VE BEEN VERY SPECIFIC TO MAKE SURE THAT WE’RE ATTENDING TO THE EPPs’ CONCERN THAT CANDIDATES NEED TO BE ABLE TO GET OUT IN FOUR YEARS. SO WE WANTED TO MAKE THIS SOMETHING WHERE THEY CAN GET THE EXPERIENCE THEY NEED, BUT STILL BE ABLE TO GET OUT IN A REASONABLE AMOUNT OF TIME. [ NO AUDIO ] –FOR A FEW DEFINITIONS FOR YOU. STUDENT CONTACT HOURS– WE SEE THAT AS IN– EXPERIENCES WORKING DIRECTLY WITH STUDENTS IN INSTRUCTIONAL SETTINGS WITHIN THAT CONTENT OR GRADE BAND OF PREPARATION UNDER THE SUPERVISION OF A MENTOR. WE EXPECT THOSE STUDENT CONTACT HOURS CAN BE ANYTHING FROM TUTORING, WORKING IN SMALL GROUPS, LARGE GROUPS, INDIVIDUALLY– BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT IS DIRECT CONTACT WITH STUDENTS. THE MATERIALS OF PRACTICE, AS WE MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO, ENGAGEMENT WITH ITEMS SUCH AS STUDENT WORK, VIDEOS, ASSESSMENT DATA SETS, AND OTHER PIECES– EDUCATIONAL PLANS. THAT ALSO INCLUDES IEP PLANS, SPECIAL ED REEVALUATIONS, SO THAT EVERYBODY HAS EXPERIENCE WITH THOSE PIECES THEY WILL SEE IN THEIR FIELD. MENTORS ARE SELECTED THROUGH A COLLABORATIVE, MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL PROCESS. THIS PROCESS IS FAIRLY WELL DICTATED TO OUR EPPs THROUGH THE ACCREDITATION PROCESS, AND SO THEY DO KNOW THAT THEY NEED TO WORK OUT HOW MENTOR TEACHERS ARE SELECTED, HOW CANDIDATES ARE EVALUATED, AND EVEN HOW THE MENTORS ARE ALSO EVALUATED. CLINICAL INSTRUCTORS WORK WITH THE EPP, AND THEY ARE THE CORRECTION BETWEEN THE EPP AND THE PK-12 PARTNER. AND THEN MENTOR TRAINING– IT IS EXPECTED THAT MENTOR TRAINING IS PROVIDED FOR THE MENTOR TEACHERS, AS WELL AS THE CLINICAL INSTRUCTORS, AND THIS INCLUDES HOW THAT CANDIDATE WILL BE ASSESSED IN THE FIELD. WE ALSO HAVE DIVERSITY EXPECTATIONS. OUR STATEMENT THAT IT’S EXPECTED THAT ALL CLINICAL EXPERIENCE PROGRAMS PROVIDE A SEQUENTIAL SET OF COHESIVE, MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITIES TO REFLECT UPON AND SUPPORT THE NEEDS OF LEARNERS WHO REPRESENT THE CULTURAL, LINGUISTIC, AND SOCIOECONOMIC DIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN’S COMMUNITIES, INCLUDING LEARNERS WHO COME FROM UNDERREPRESENTED OR MARGINALIZED POPULATIONS. WE CREATED THIS STATEMENT VERY SPECIFICALLY. THE LAST THING THE STAKEHOLDER COMMITTEE WANTED IS FOR AN EPP TO GIVE A CANDIDATE A CHECKLIST OF TYPES OF CHILDREN AND TYPES OF ENVIRONMENTS. WE DID NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN. WHAT WE WANTED THEM TO DO WAS MEANINGFULLY ENGAGE IN LOOKING AT WHERE CANDIDATES GO AND LOOKING AT THE DIVERSITY THAT EACH OF THOSE CONTEXTS PROVIDE. DIVERSITY IS DIFFERENT ACROSS THE REGIONS OF MICHIGAN, SO WE WANTED TO GIVE THE FLEXIBILITY THAT YOU COULD RECOGNIZE THE DIVERSITY WITHIN THE COMMUNITIES AROUND THAT– IN THAT PK-12 SYSTEM, OR WHERE THAT EPP EXISTS. THIS ALLOWS FOR OUR EPPs IN THE U.P. TO REALLY LOOK AT WHAT KINDS OF DIVERSITIES OCCUR IN THOSE BUILDINGS AND AREAS. IT COULD BE CULTURAL. IT COULD BE SOCIOECONOMIC. IT COULD ALSO BE ABILITY DIVERSITY. SO WE’RE REALLY ENCOURAGING THEM TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT IS THE DIVERSITY OF THOSE ENVIRONMENTS, AND MAKE SURE THAT CANDIDATES HAVE OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK WITH MANY DIFFERENT TYPES OF STUDENTS, WITHOUT CREATING A CHECKLIST. FINALLY, FOR ADDING ENDORSEMENTS, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF TIERS GOING ON. CANDIDATES IN THEIR INITIAL PREPARATION, CAN ALSO ADD AN ADDITIONAL CONTENT AREA OR GRADE BAND ENDORSEMENT. WHAT THE COMMITTEE DETERMINED IS THAT FOR INITIAL PREPARATION, THEY WOULD WANT TO SEE 30 ADDITIONAL STUDENT CONTACT HOURS FOR ADDITIONAL CONTENT. SO IF THEY’RE PK-3, AND THEN THEY’RE ADDING A MATH SPECIALIZATION TO THEIR PK-3 THAT ALREADY HAS INTENSIVE MATH, THEY WOULD NEED ANOTHER 30 STUDENT CONTACT HOURS IN MATH CLASSROOMS, WORKING WITH MATH IN THAT AGE RANGE. IF THEY WANTED TO START WITH PK-3 AND ADD THE 3-6, WE WOULD REALLY WANT THEM TO GET 50 STUDENT CONTACT HOURS IN THAT ADDITIONAL AGE RANGE, BECAUSE PEDAGOGY IS DIFFERENT AS YOU MOVE THROUGH THE AGE RANGES AND GRADE LEVELS. SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE TIME IN THOSE ENVIRONMENTS AND GET EXPERIENCE IN THOSE AREAS. FOR SPECIAL EDUCATION, AGAIN, THAT DIDN’T GET TOUCHED. INITIAL PREPARATION, SPECIAL ED HAS TO HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 8 WEEKS ON TOP OF THE 12 WEEKS OF STUDENT TEACHING. ONCE TEACHERS ARE ALREADY CERTIFIED, WE USED A SIMILAR FRAMEWORK, BUT OUR PK-12 PARTNERS REALLY WANTED US TO KIND OF DIVIDE THOSE TEACHERS INTO TWO GROUPS– EARLY TEACHERS THAT ARE JUST OUT OF THEIR PREPARATION PROGRAM ARE VERY CLOSE TO TEACHER CANDIDATES, SO THEY WANTED TO MAINTAIN THOSE HOURS THERE. BUT FOR TEACHERS WHO HAVE BEEN IN THE FIELD FOR MORE THAN A COUPLE OF YEARS AND HAVE DEMONSTRATED EXEMPLARY TEACHING, THEY WANTED SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR THOSE HOURS, AND THEY WANTED OPPORTUNITIES TO BE ABLE TO PLACE TEACHERS IN THOSE CLASSROOMS UNDER PERMIT AS THEY WERE TAKING PROGRAMS TO LEARN THAT CONTENT AREA OR GRADE LEVEL, AND COUNT THOSE PERMITTED HOURS, AND NOT– WE GAVE THAT FLEXIBILITY TO OUR PK-12 PARTNERS, BECAUSE THEY WANTED– THEY KNOW THEIR CANDIDATES. THEY KNOW THEIR TEACHERS– OUR PRINCIPALS AND SUPERINTENDENTS AT THE TABLE DID, AND THEY WANTED TO BE ABLE TO USE THEIR OWN EXPERTISE IN THIS PROCESS IN CONNECTION WITH THE EPP. AND AGAIN, THE SPECIAL ED REQUIREMENTS FOR EXPERIENCED TEACHERS, IT’S 180 HOURS THAT THEY MUST HAVE IN THAT AREA OF CERTIFICATION, AND WE WEREN’T ABLE TO CHANGE THAT AT ALL. AND SO THESE ARE OUR CLINICAL EXPERIENCE REQUIREMENTS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.>>SHEILA?>>TOM? QUESTIONS, COMMENTS?>>YEAH, QUICK– YEAH, I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. ON THE NUMBERS, HOW MANY WERE TEACHERS– CURRENT TEACHERS?>>WE HAD TWO CURRENT TEACHERS ON OUR COMMITTEE–>>OUT OF 29?>>–THAT WERE PRESENT– OUT OF 12.>>OH, ON THAT LIST I THOUGHT I READ 29 PEOPLE.>>OH, YEAH. WELL, OUT OF– FULL– EACH MEETING HAD ABOUT 12. I’M SORRY– THERE WERE ABOUT 29 IN THE WHOLE GROUP, AND THEN EACH MEETING, WE HAD, GENERALLY, 12 WHO COULD SHOW UP. AND THEN WE HAD ONE TEACHER WHO WAS AT EVERY SINGLE MEETING IN PERSON, AND THE OTHER TEACHER WAS ABLE TO COME TO SOME MEETINGS, AND THEN ATTEND THE REST OF THEM VIRTUALLY. WE ALSO BROUGHT IT TO A NEW EDUCATOR SUPPORT TEAM FOR FEEDBACK, AND THAT’S A TEACHER SUPPORT GROUP OUT OF HASLETT. AND THEN WE ALSO TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE MICHIGAN TEACHER LEADERSHIP ADVISORY COUNCIL, AND PRESENTED IT TO THEM FOR FEEDBACK AS WELL.>>THANK YOU. I’M A LITTLE CONCERNED THAT ONLY 2 OUT OF 29– WHEN I’M LOOKING AT APPENDIX D, APPRENTICESHIP AND INTERNSHIP TASKS AND REQUIREMENTS, IT’S VERY BROAD, AND SO I COULD FIT A LOT OF THINGS INTO HERE. AND I GUESS THAT’S GOOD IN A WAY, BUT USING DATA TO INFORM INSTRUCTION AND ASSESS– YOU KNOW, MONITORING STUDENT PROGRESS, AND SOME OF THESE THINGS, I WONDER IF– IS IT EPP– THAT’S THE PROVIDERS?>>CORRECT.>>I DIDN’T SEE THAT DEFINITION. SO IF THEY COULD ACTUALLY– WHICH I HOPE THEY COULDN’T, BUT– TAILOR IT SO THAT THESE TEACHERS ARE BEING TAUGHT MORE TO BE FACILITATORS OR ADVISORS, AS A LOT OF THE COMPETENCY BASED EDUCATION IS MOVING TOWARDS– MORE COMPUTERS AND MORE– LESS TEACHING AND MORE CONNECTED WITH ONLINE AND COMPUTERS. OR WILL THEY ACTUALLY BE TEACHING REAL INSTRUCTIONAL SKILLS SO THAT THEY CAN SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN REAL TEACHING AND WHAT SOME ARE MOVING TOWARDS?>>OUR INTENTION IS TO USE THOSE PARTNERSHIPS THAT THE EPPs ARE CREATING WITH THEIR K-12 PARTNERS TO IDENTIFY QUALITY TEACHERS SO THAT THESE CANDIDATES CAN SEE ACTUAL QUALITY TEACHING IN THEIR CONTENT OR GRADE AREA. THE INTENTION IS THAT THEY ARE SEEING THAT TEACHING IN ACTION.>>OKAY, AND SO THEY COULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WEAKNESSES IN OTHER FORMS OF, QUOTE UNQUOTE, “TEACHING.”>>CORRECT, AND THAT’S WHERE THE CORE PRACTICES COME IN AS WELL. BECAUSE WHEN WE’RE LOOKING AT THAT MUTUAL SELECTION OF MENTOR TEACHERS, WE WILL LOOK AT HOW DO THEY EXEMPLIFY THESE CORE PRACTICES THAT OUR TEACHER EDUCATORS ARE LOOKING FOR?>>OKAY, AND THEN FINALLY, WHAT IS AN AVATAR WORK?>>YEAH, I NOTICED THAT, TOO.>>THERE ARE A COUPLE OF PLACES THAT HAVE STARTED CREATING AVATAR SITUATIONS WHERE– PARDON ME– IT’S A VIRTUAL ENVIRONMENT– EXCUSE ME– STUDENT AVATARS AND A TEACHER AVATAR, AND THE CANDIDATES– EXCUSE ME, I’M SO SORRY. THE CANDIDATES ARE ABLE TO INTERACT IN AN ENVIRONMENT WHERE THEY’VE PROGRAMMED STUDENTS TO ACT LIKE ACTUAL STUDENTS. AND SO THEY’RE ABLE TO MAKE TEACHER MOVES AND HAVE STUDENTS REACT, AND THEN REACT TO THEM IN THE PRESENCE OF A TEACHER EDUCATOR, SO THAT THAT TEACHER EDUCATOR CAN GIVE THEM FEEDBACK. THEY EVEN TOLD US AT THE CONVENING– THE TeachingWorks CONVENING THAT ONE OF THE INTERESTING ONES THEY USED WAS A PARENT CONFERENCE. THEY HAD A PARENT AVATAR, AND THEY HAD THE CANDIDATE HAVE TO HAVE A DIFFICULT CONVERSATION–>>BUT IT’S NOT WHAT I FEAR THINGS ARE MOVING TOWARDS– AND ACTUALLY, WE’RE SEEING MOVING TOWARDS– WHERE THERE’S A LOT OF– JUST ONLINE– KIDS ARE ACTUALLY AVATARS– I MEAN, YOU KNOW, THEY BECOME– THEY’RE REFLECTED AS AVATARS, AND YOUR TEACHER IS, TOO, AND THAT’S ALL IT IS.>>NO, NO– WHAT THIS– WHAT THIS IS IS IT’S A VIRTUAL REALITY ENVIRONMENT–>>OF INSTRU– OF KIND OF–>>OF A CLASSROOM, AND THERE IS– THERE’S A LIVE ACTOR BEHIND THE SCENES THAT HAS BEEN COACHED ON HOW TO REACT TO TEACHER MOVES AND EXPRESS CERTAIN NEEDS, AND SO IT’S THAT INTERACTION. AND YOU CAN TITRATE IT UP TO MAKE IT REALLY, REALLY DIFFICULT OR MAKE IT REALLY EASY.>>THANKS.>>SORT OF LIKE WHACK-A-MOLE. [ LAUGHTER ]>>CASANDRA, MICHELLE, AND THEN EILEEN.>>SO I– I REALLY LIKE THE IDEA OF POTENTIAL TEACHERS BEING ABLE TO GO FROM ONE AREA TO ANOTHER TO ANOTHER TO ANOTHER AND REALLY DECIDE, AND GET EXPERIENCE IN EACH AND HONE WHERE THEY WANT TO BE, SO I THINK THAT’S REALLY EXCITING. I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS. ONE, IN ADDITION TO THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, WHAT OTHER EDUCATIONAL PROVIDERS OR PREP INSTITUTIONS WERE INVOLVED IN THIS WORK?>>IN– OH, IN THE CLINICAL EXPERIENCE? LET’S SEE– I HAVE TO PULL MY LITTLE LIST OUT. WE HAD NORTHERN MICHIGAN– LET’S SEE– EASTERN MICHIGAN, HOPE COLLEGE– I’M GOING THROUGH MY LIST– WAYNE STATE, GRAND VALLEY. IS THAT IT– OAKLAND. WE ALSO HAD ADDITIONAL PEOPLE GIVE US FEEDBACK THAT AREN’T NECESSARILY ON THE LIST. AND THEN WE ENGAGED WITH OUR EPPs IN TWO SEPARATE OCCASIONS WHERE THEY WERE ALL GATHERED TOGETHER.>>OKAY, GOOD, OKAY. AND I ASK THE QUESTION ALL THE TIME– I’M GOING TO KEEP ASKING IT– HOW DOES THIS AFFECT THE ALTERNATIVE ROUTES PROVIDERS?>>THIS IS– SPECIFICALLY WE HAVE LOOKED AT IT FOR TRADITIONAL ROUTES, BECAUSE THE ALTERNATIVE ROUTES, THEY’RE IN THE CLASSROOM WITH KIDS FROM DAY 1 AS THEY’RE GETTING THEIR TRAINING. SO THEY EXCEED THE MINIMUM HOURS WITHIN THE FIRST FEW WEEKS TO MONTH OF BEING IN PLACE. SO THE ALTERNATIVE ROUTES WILL BE SUBJECT TO THE CAEP ACCREDITATION REQUIREMENTS, THOUGH. SO THOSE MENTORSHIP PIECES ARE– SHOULD BE IN PLACE. THE CO-CONSTRUCTED, MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL PARTNERSHIPS ALSO SHOULD STILL BE IN PLACE FOR THE ALTERNATIVE ROUTES.>>I’M SORRY– CAEP ACCREDITATION?>>CORRECT. THE– OUR– COUNCIL FOR THE ACCREDITATION OF EDUCATOR PREPARATION.>>SO ALL MICHIGAN INSTITUTIONS ARE REQUIRED TO BE ACCREDITED. WE PARTNER WITH THIS ACCREDITING BODY TO DO THAT, AND OUR TEAM SERVES ON THE TEAMS THAT DO IT. SO WE– IT’S KIND OF A– IT’S A LINK BETWEEN STATE LAW AND THEN A NATIONAL ACCREDITING INSTITUTION.>>SO ALL ALTERNATIVE CERTIFICATION PROGRAMS MUST BE ACCREDITED THROUGH THIS PROGRAM?>>IN MICHIGAN, CURRENTLY. WE HAVEN’T HAD ANY ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PROVIDERS THAT HAVE BEEN IN PLACE LONG ENOUGH TO GO THROUGH THE ACCREDITATION PROCESS. THEY HAVE TO GATHER A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF DATA, SET THEIR PROGRAMS UP, GO THROUGH THE PRELIMINARY APPROVAL, KIND OF LIKE WE DO WITH OUR TRADITIONAL INSTITUTIONS WHERE THEY DON’T GET FULL APPROVAL FOR UP TO EIGHT YEARS OR SO. SO ALL OF THEM ARE STILL IN THAT INITIAL PHASE, BUT WE EXPECT THAT THEY WILL ALL GO THROUGH THE ACCREDITATION PROCESS WHEN IT’S TIME.>>SO IT TAKES ABOUT EIGHT YEARS?>>NOT– IT SHOULDN’T FOR ALTERNATIVE ROUTES– FOR OUR TRADITIONAL INSTITUTIONS, IT CAN TAKE A WHILE. ALTERNATIVE ROUTES, THEY HAVE TO HAVE– FIVE YEARS OF DATA?>>YEAH.>>FIVE YEARS OF DATA BEFORE THEY CAN GO THROUGH ACCREDITATION, AND WE HAVE SOME THAT ARE REACHING THE POINT WHERE WE’LL MOVE THEM IN THAT DIRECTION.>>OKAY.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. MICHELLE?>>I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT. SO DO WE HONOR CERTIFICATIONS FROM OTHER PREPARATORY INSTITUTIONS OUTSIDE OF THE STATE, WHICH WE DO NOT REGULATE? SO THAT WOULD BE A VEHICLE FOR ALTERNATIVE– FOR AN ALTERNATIVE WHERE THEY’RE NOT GOING TO GET ALL OF THIS KIND OF TRAINING. AND I WAS TOLD THAT THERE WAS PARTICULARLY ONE THAT WAS AN ONLINE SORT OF A SITUATION, WHERE RESIDENTS IN DETROIT– OR DETROIT– RESIDENTS IN MICHIGAN– OR STUDENTS IN MICHIGAN COULD GET– KIND OF GET AROUND THE STATE OVERSIGHT BY DOING SOMETHING OUT OF STATE, AND THEN IT’S HONORED. ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH WHAT I’M TALKING ABOUT?>>YES. SO WE DO HAVE RECIPROCITY FOR OTHER STATES. WE DO REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE A PROGRAM, BUT WE DO ACCEPT ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PROGRAMS WITH SOME GUIDELINES IN THERE. AND MOST OF THAT IS GARNERED BY STATE LAW, SO WE DON’T HAVE VERY MUCH FLEXIBILITY AROUND RECIPROCITY. WE DO HAVE AN INCREASE OF TEACHER CANDIDATES COMING INTO MICHIGAN TO TEACH. WE DO NEED TEACHERS IN MICHIGAN. I’M SORRY, THE LAST QUESTION YOU ASKED ABOUT? OH, I THINK THE PROVIDER YOU’RE THINKING OF IS LIKELY GRAND CANYON UNIVERSITY. AND WE DO HAVE A FAIR NUMBER OF CANDIDATES WHO HAVE– GO THROUGH THAT PROGRAM AND THEN OBTAIN MICHIGAN CERTIFICATION.>>AND LIKE LEAH SAID, RECIPROCITY IS AN INTERESTING BALANCE OF NEEDING TO– CANDIDATES COME HERE FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS. YOU MOVE WITH YOUR FAMILY. YOU WANT TO COME. WE HAVE SHORTAGE AREAS, CANDIDATES COME IN. BUT WE WANT TO– TO YOUR POINT, MICHELLE– MAINTAIN OUR STANDARDS FOR WHAT IS A WELL-PREPARED AND TRAINED EDUCATOR IN SUPPORT OF OUR 10 IN 10. AND SO IT LEADS TO A LOT OF CHALLENGING DISCUSSIONS OF HOW DO WE HONOR CANDIDATES BUT HONOR OUR STANDARDS AS WELL. SO THE TEAM DOES A GOOD JOB OF WEIGHING OUT THOSE PROS AND CONS.>>WE ARE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT BETTER WAYS TO COLLECT DATA SO WE CAN LOOK AT THE TWO SETS OF CANDIDATES DIFFERENTLY AND GAIN INFORMATION ABOUT IF OUR PROGRAMS ARE– IF CANDIDATES COMING OUT OF OUR PROGRAMS ARE PERFORMING BETTER THAN OTHER CANDIDATES.>>AND I DID HAVE A– THAT– YOU JUST PROMPTED ME TO THINK OF THAT. SO BEING, YOU KNOW, THE WIFE OF A TEACHER AND DAUGHTER AND SISTER OF MANY TEACHERS– SO MY UNDERSTANDING OF HOW THE– YOU KNOW, THE– THIS PROGRAM– MY DAUGHTER IS STUDYING TO BE A TEACHER– IS, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE BIGGEST OBSTACLES OR ISSUES THAT PEOPLE HAVE IS NOT SO MUCH– I MEAN, THE CONTENT IS IMPORTANT CONTENT, AND UNDERSTANDING IT, BUT WHAT IS REALLY A BARRIER IS CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT. SO I’M JUST WONDERING HOW MUCH MENTORSHIP AND EMPHASIS IS PUT ON CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT. AND EVEN THOUGH THERE’S– I THINK AVATAR IS A GOOD SUPPLEMENT. I DON’T THINK IT SHOULD REPLACE THE HOUR REQUIREMENTS, BECAUSE I THINK REALITY CAN SOMETIMES BE CRAZIER THAN FICTION, OR MORE UNPREDICTABLE. SO I’M JUST WONDERING HOW THAT’S BUILT INTO– THE CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT PIECE IS BUILT IN.>>WELL, WITHIN THE INDIVIDUAL CONTENT AREA STANDARDS, WE HAVE ITEMS RELATED SPECIFICALLY TO CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT. SO DEPENDING ON THE CONTENT AREA AND– THE CONTENT AREA AND GRADE BAND IN WHICH SOMEBODY IS SEEKING TO BECOME A TEACHER, THERE ARE SPECIFIC UNDERSTANDINGS ABOUT CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT. BUT WITHIN THE CORE PRACTICES, THE PHILOSOPHY OF CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT HERE IS– THE FOUNDATION IS BUILDING RESPECTFUL RELATIONSHIPS WITH STUDENTS, AND UNDERSTANDING THE DIVERSE BACKGROUNDS OF THE STUDENTS IN THE CLASSROOM TO MAKE EFFECTIVE INSTRUCTIONAL DECISIONS. AND SO THE PHILOSOPHY UNDERLYING THAT IS THAT ENGAGING INSTR– CLASSROOM MANAGEMENT FROM AN ENGAGING INSTRUCTION PERSPECTIVE, THAT PROVIDING THAT ENGAGING INSTRUCTION, PUTTING STUDENT LEARNING FIRST RATHER THAN CHILD BODY CONTROL, AS THE GUIDING ETHOS OF THE CORE PRACTICES. SO THAT’S WHAT WE’RE ADDRESSING.>>YEAH, I KNOW– MY NIECE WENT IN FROM ONE PROGRAM, AND SHE GOT EATEN ALIVE, BASICALLY, WHEN SHE DID HER CLASSROOM EXPERIENCE. TRIED DOING THE STARS AND ALL OF THIS STUFF– ANYWAY, BUT IT WASN’T UNTIL SHE HAD ANOTHER TEACHER, WHICH MY SISTER PAID FOR TO VOLUNTEER IN HER CLASS, TO TEACH HER HOW TO MANAGE A CLASS THAT SHE WAS SUCCESSFUL. SO I– I JUST– I THINK THAT THAT’S REALLY CRITICAL. I’M ALSO WONDERING WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT PEOPLE COMING FROM DIVERSE AREAS, I THINK IT’S REALLY CRITICAL THAT EVERY TEACHER PREP– TEACHER THAT GOES THROUGH ANY SORT OF PREPARATION BE EXPOSED TO SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS AND UNDERSTAND– TO IDENTIFY, AND ALSO HOW TO– IF THEY’RE GOING TO HAVE INCLUSION IN THEIR– HAVE STUDENTS IN THEIR CLASSROOM WHO ARE SPECIAL ED. SO IS THAT EXPLICITLY WRITTEN SOMEWHERE, THAT THAT IS A REQUIREMENT, THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE THIS TYPE OF TRAINING, SO IF THEY HAVE A CHILD IN THEIR ROOM WHO MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT LEARNING STYLE, OR HAVE SOME COGNITIVE ISSUES, OR WHATEVER, HOW TO MANAGE THAT AND BE SUCCESSFUL? IS THAT PART OF THIS CURRICULUM?>>IT IS PART OF IT. IT’S NOT EXPLICITLY WRITTEN. THE GOOD NEWS IS THAT WE’RE EXCITED BECAUSE IT’S PROBABLY THE EASIEST SET OF DIVERSE STUDENT TO FIND AND WORK WITH IN EVERY SETTING NOW, BECAUSE OF INCLUSION. THERE ARE MANY IN CLASSROOMS. WE ALSO ARE HOPING THAT IF THEY’RE IN A DISTRICT, AND THERE IS A CENTER-BASED PROGRAM, THAT THEY HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO OBSERVE SUPPORT IN CENTER-BASED PROGRAMS. SO THOSE ARE THE DETAILS THAT WE’LL WORK OUT WITH THE K-12 PARTNERS EXPLICITLY– LOOK AT THE TYPES OF DIVERSITY IN HERE, ACKNOWLEDGING THE TYPES OF DIVERSITY. I THINK CALLING THE ATTENTION OF OUR TEACHER CANDIDATES THAT YOU’RE WORKING WITH SIX DIFFERENT TYPES OF STUDENTS IN THIS CLASSROOM, SO LET’S TALK ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL PERSPECTIVES, AND BACKGROUNDS, AND SKILL SETS THAT THOSE STUDENTS BRING, AND HOW YOU’LL WORK WITH THEM. I THINK SOMETIMES WE HAVEN’T BEEN EXPLICIT IN NOTICING IT IN OUR SETTINGS, SO IT’S ABOUT THOSE KINDS OF CONVERSATIONS AND SUPPORT AND PARTNERSHIP.>>FINALLY, SINCE IT’S AN INTERNSHIP, APPRENTICESHIP, THINGS THAT SORT OF CONNOTATE PAYMENT– SO IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION IN THIS GROUP THAT IF YOU’RE ACTUALLY AN APPRENTICESHIP, YOU SHOULD BE PAID AN APPRENTICESHIP WAGE, OR YOU SHOULD BE PAID FOR THE WORK THAT YOU’RE CONTRIBUTING TO THE CLASSROOM, AS WELL AS THE MENTORS? BECAUSE IT IS AN ADDITIONAL BURDEN FOR TEACHERS. SOME PEOPLE DO IT OUT OF THE GOODNESS OF THEIR HEART. SOME OF THEM DO IT AND THEN LEAVE THE CLASSROOM FOR THE SEMESTER. SO IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT MAKING THESE TRULY AN APPRENTICESHIP, RESIDENCY TYPE MODEL, IN THE TERM OF BEING PAID FOR THEIR TIME?>>YEP, SO WE HAVE SOME RESIDENCY MODELS IN PLACE IN MICHIGAN WHERE OUR STUDENT TEACHERS ARE IN LONGER TERM PLACEMENTS AND ARE PAID FOR THEIR EXPERIENCES, AND WE’VE SHIFTED SOME OF OUR FEDERAL GRANT FUNDING AROUND TO BE ABLE TO SUPPORT THOSE PARTNERSHIPS, TEST THEM, SEE HOW WE MIGHT MAKE THEM. AND THAT’S A TESTIMONY TO BRIAN– THAT WAS HIS IDEA, SOMETHING HE REALLY WANTED US TO MOVE FORWARD, AND WE’RE HONORING HIM IN THAT WAY. WE’RE LEARNING FROM THOSE. WE HAVE ALWAYS ENCOURAGED EVERYBODY TO GET PAID FOR EVERYTHING, AND WE DON’T HAVE ANY PRACTICES IN PLACE THAT PROHIBIT IT. AND SO WHEN WE DO RECEIVE QUESTIONS, WE SAY THAT CERTAINLY, STUDENT TEACHERS CAN BE PAID FOR THEIR EXPERIENCES, PAID SUBSTITUTE POSITIONS CAN BE USED FOR THESE MENTORSHIP AND– SORRY– THESE APPRENTICESHIP HOURS. SO WHAT WE DON’T HAVE IS MONEY TO HELP SUPPORT THE PAYMENT OF THEM.>>OKAY.>>YEAH, OTHER THAN OUR KIND OF EXPERIMENTAL PILOT PROGRAMS WE’RE TRYING RIGHT NOW.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. THAT’S VERY GOOD.>>THANK YOU– EILEEN.>>I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I’VE BEEN INVOLVED IN TeachingWorks SINCE THEY STARTED DOING THIS– DOING THIS WORK. AND I THINK ONE OF THE REALLY– YOU KNOW, YOU’RE READING REPORTS, AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT STUCK OUT IN MY MIND IS THAT THIS COLLABORATION AND THE DEPTH OF THE THINKING THAT’S GOING INTO IT REALLY CHANGED EDUCATOR PREPARATION INSTITUTION’S ABILITY TO TAKE A LOOK AT WHAT THEIR PRACTICES WERE– WHAT THEIR TEACHING PRACTICES FOR THEIR EDUCATORS– HOW THEY WERE TRANSLATING INTO STUDENT ACHIEVEMENT. AND, YOU KNOW, OUR KIDS HAVE GROWN– SO WE HAVE iPADS, WE HAVE iPHONES, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, FAMILIES THAT CAN’T SUPPORT THEIR CHILDREN THE WAY THAT SOME OTHERS DO. SO IT’S OBVIOUSLY VITAL THAT THIS TAKE PLACE, AND THAT– I THINK THAT THE CHANCE OF SUCCESS FOR ANY TEACHER CANDIDATE WHO GOES THROUGH THIS NOW IS SO MUCH HIGHER THAN THE WAY THAT WE’VE BEEN APPROACHING IT IN YEARS PAST. AND [ INDISTINCT ] THAT THIS PARTNERSHIP IS GOING ON.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. EILEEN– I’M SORRY– LAURA.>>THANK YOU. AS A– PUTTING ON MY HAT AS A MENTOR TEACHER AND CLINICAL INSTRUCTOR AT WESTERN MICHIGAN UNIVERSITY IN THE COLLEGE OF ED, ON THAT MENTOR SLIDE, IT MENTIONED INCLUDING ASSESSMENT TRAINING FOR EVALUATION OF CANDIDATES, WHICH DEFINITELY IS IMPORTANT, BUT I THINK EVEN MORE IMPORTANT IS TRAINING AND COACHING FOR THE TEACHERS– COACHING OF THE CANDIDATES IN CONVERSATIONS ABOUT DATA, AND SELF REFLECTION, EXAMINING THEIR PRACTICES, EXAMINING THE WHY BEHIND WHAT– WHY WE DO WHAT WE DO. I THINK THAT’S VITAL. THAT’S A REALLY CRITICAL COMPONENT OF A MENTOR TEACHER, THAT THEY BE GIVEN THAT TRAINING.>>ABSOLUTELY. WE HAD CONSTITUENTS FROM WAYNE STATE WHO ARE USING THAT KIND OF COACHING MODEL TO TRAIN THEIR CLINICAL EDUCATORS. AND THEY WERE A VERY STRONG VOICE IN THE CONVERSATION. AND WE DO INDICATE SOME COACHING PIECES IN THE LARGER DOCUMENT, TOO. THANK YOU.>>AND THEN FINALLY, DR. Z.>>THE 19 PRACTICES OR SO– NOW THIS IS ONLY MICHIGAN’S INSIGHT, I GUESS. ARE THESE… ARE THESE EXPECTED OF THE ALTERNATE ROUTE PROGRAMS, OR– ARE THEY ENSHRINED OR– OR USED IN SOME OTHER WAY THAT INFLUENCES THE OTHER PROGRAMS AS WELL?>>SO CURRENTLY, THE LAW IS PRETTY EXPLICIT ABOUT HOW ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PROVIDERS RECEIVE THEIR CERTIFICATION, AND THIS IS NOT A REQUIRED COMPONENT OF RECEIVING THEIR CERTIFICATION. WE CAN BUILD IT INTO THE PROGRAM APPLICATION KIND OF EXPECTATIONS THAT THIS WOULD BE PROVIDED, BUT IN ABSENCE OF IT, IT WOULDN’T PROHIBIT THEM FROM OBTAINING CERTIFICATION.>>IT’S KIND OF NAIVE ON MY PART, BUT I THINK THAT IF SOMETHING WORKS, PEOPLE ARE ANXIOUS TO IMITATE IT AND USE IT, SO–>>RIGHT.>>I ALSO SUSPECT THAT THESE 19 PRACTICES HAVE THEIR ANALOGS IN OTHER STATE’S STANDARDS, OR INSIGHTS, OR WHATEVER ELSE, SO MAYBE WE’LL COME TO A COMMON VOCABULARY OR WAY OF LOOKING AT IT. ON THE OTHER HAND, IT DOES STRIKE ME THAT THERE’S MORE THAN ONE WAY TO APPROACH A SUBJECT. FOR INSTANCE, IN DANCE, YOU KNOW, THERE’S BALLET, WHERE YOU PRACTICE A CERTAIN SET OF SKILLS AND MOVES, AND THEN JAZZ WHERE YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT SET OF SKILLS AND MOVES, AND– MY– I JUST HAVE A CONCERN THAT IN ADOPTING ONE APPROACH AS THE STATE STANDARD, THAT WE MAY BE EXCLUDING OTHER APPROACHES, AND I DON’T– I DON’T KNOW WHAT YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT, BUT JUST THINK ABOUT IT, AND BE AWARE OF THE ISSUE.>>THANK YOU. AND ON A PERSONAL NOTE, I’M THRILLED TO SEE THE ADDITIONAL CONTACT HOURS. AS A FORMER TEACHER, HAVING CHANGED WHERE I THOUGHT I WAS GOING TO END UP, STARTING AS A SECONDARY TEACHER AND THEN CHANGING MY CONTENT A COUPLE OF TIMES, AND THEN DECIDING THAT I WANTED TO BE AN ELEMENTARY TEACHER, AND WHAT I WAS GOING TO FOCUS ON IN THE ELEMENTARY EDUCAT– SO WHERE I ENDED UP AFTER FOUR YEARS IS NOT WHERE I STARTED.>>YES.>>SO I THINK HAD I HAD THESE EXPERIENCES, I THINK IT WOULD’VE HELPED ME ALONG THE WAY SOONER. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR PRESENTATION, AND THANK YOU FOR ALL OF YOU DO ON BEHALF OF PREPARING OUR TEACHERS.>>THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU.>>NOW, FOR OUR BOARD MEMBERS, IT IS NOW 10 MINUTES TO 12:00. WE ARE TO BREAK AT 12:00 FOR LUNCH, BUT WE STILL HAVE AN ADDITIONAL PRESENTATION. SO THE QUESTION BEFORE US IS DO WE WANT TO GO FORWARD WITH THE ADDITIONAL PRESENTATION AND DELAY THE START OF LUNCH, OR DO YOU WANT TO COME TO THIS PRESENTATION AFTER LUNCH?>>I THINK THIS PRESENTATION IS GOING TO REQUIRE A LOT OF DISCUSSION, AND SO I SEE IT NOT BEING SOMETHING WE CAN WRAP UP RELATIVELY QUICKLY.>>OKAY.>>IS IT POSSIBLE TO MOVE SOMETHING FROM THE AFTERNOON AGENDA UP NOW?>>THAT’S A GOOD QUESTION.>>WE COULD DO MORATORIUM IF I CAN GRAB [ INDISTINCT ]. YOU WANT US TO DO MORATORIUM RIGHT NOW?>>SURE. WILL THAT WORK WITH THE WILL OF THE BOARD MEMBERS?>>YES.>>I THINK SO.>>WELL, BUT IS THAT THE ONE WITH THE VOTE? SO ARE WE TALKING ABOUT–>>YEAH, SO WE’D JUST GO INTO REGULAR MEETING.>>WE’D HAVE TO GO INTO REGULAR MEETING.>>AND THEN WE WOULD HAVE A VOTE IN 10 MINUTES?>>BUT IS THERE– DOES THAT VIOLATE OUR POLICY ON PUBLIC COMMENT [ INDISTINCT ]?>>CAN WE DO [ INDISTINCT ] PRESENTATION NOW AND VOTE LATER?>>YEAH, PRESENTATION NOW?>>–AND DO THE VOTE– WE CAN DO THAT.>>YEAH, I– THAT’S FINE. DO WE NEED TO MOVE? DO WE HAVE TO FORMALLY MOVE TO THE–>>WELL, WE HAVE TO ADJUST THE AGENDA.>>IT WOULDN’T HURT.>>SO WE SHOULD TAKE– SO WE SHOULD TAKE A VOTE TO ADJUST THE AGENDA.>>I MOVE THAT WE AMEND THE AGENDA TO MOVE ITEM–>>11K.>>11K UP TO THE MORNING SESSION.>>SUPPORT.>>DISCUSSION?>>IT WOULD JUST BE THE DISCUSSION OF–>>JUST THE PRESENTATION.>>YEAH, PRESENTATION.>>ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.>>AYE.>>OPPOSED, NAY. MOTION CARRIES. SO WE WILL NOW MOVE TO A PRESENTATION ON– AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE A PRESENTATION ON THE EXTENSION OF THE MORATORIUM OF EDUCATOR PREPARATION INSTITUTIONS IN MICHIGAN. THE MORATORIUM ON IMPROVING NEW EDUCATOR PREPARATION INSTITUTIONS WAS ORIGINALLY INSTITUTED BY THE STATE BOARD ON AUGUST 9TH OF 2005. IT WAS EXTENDED IN AUGUST OF 2008, AGAIN IN JUNE OF 2012, AND THE LAST TIME ON OCTOBER– IN OCTOBER OF 2015. THE CURRENT MORATORIUM EXPIRES ON OCTOBER 13TH, 2018. THE ORIGINAL MORATORIUM WAS ENACTED WITH THE INTENT OF REDUCING A PERCEIVED OVERSUPPLY OF TEACHERS IN THE STATE. TODAY’S PRESENTATION IS AN INFORMATIONAL ITEM FOR WHICH WE WILL THEN VOTE ON THIS AFTERNOON. NOW, I’LL TURN IT OVER TO OUR TWO PRESENTERS, VENESSA KEESLER AND LEAH BREEN. THANK YOU.>>THANK YOU. SO AS SHEILA INDICATED, WE’VE HAD THE MORATORIUM IN PLACE SINCE 2005. IT’S BEEN RENEWED SEVERAL TIMES BY THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION. IT IS YOUR PURVIEW TO EITHER MAINTAIN THE MORATORIUM, CHANGE THE MORATORIUM, OR REMOVE THE MORATORIUM. CURRENTLY IT SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITS COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES NEW TO TEACHER PREPARATION FOR APPLYING FOR A PRELIMINARY APPROVAL AND THEN GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS TO BECOME A FULL PROVIDER. IT IS CURRENTLY ONLY APPLIED TO OUR TRADITIONAL EPIs. IT IS NOT APPLIED TO OUR ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PROVIDERS HERE IN MICHIGAN. ONE OF THE REASONS, AS SHEILA MENTIONED, THAT THE MORATORIUM WAS ORIGINALLY ENACTED WAS THE INTENT TO REDUCE A PERCEIVED OVERSUPPLY. ONE OF THE POINTS FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE BOARD IS WHAT YOU HAVE HEARD ABOUT CRITICAL SHORTAGES OF TEACHERS IN MICHIGAN AND NATIONALLY. WE DO STILL HAVE A NET SUPPLY OF TEACHERS. WE PRODUCE MORE TEACHERS THAN WE HIRE EACH YEAR IN MICHIGAN AS NEW TEACHERS. HOWEVER, WE DO KNOW THAT THERE ARE REGIONAL SHORTAGES AND SHORTAGES IN SPECIFIC CONTENT AREAS– SO HARD TO FILL POSITIONS, HARD TO FILL PLACES. SINCE THE MORATORIUM WAS FIRST INTRODUCED, IT MIGHT ALSO BE IMPORTANT FOR YOU TO KNOW THAT FIVE EPIs HAVE CLOSED, SO WE HAVE FEWER INSTITUTIONS PREPARING TEACHERS THAN WE DID PREVIOUSLY WHEN THIS MORATORIUM WAS FIRST INDICATED. REALLY, THIS IS– THERE ISN’T A LOT OF CONTENT TO PRESENT TO YOU TODAY, BUT WE WANTED TO HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS. WE DO– AS MDE, WE ARE RECOMMENDING A CONTINUANCE OF THE MORATORIUM. WE WOULD PREFER THE CONTINUANCE FOR TWO MAIN REASONS. ONE IS THAT WE HAVE FEWER TEACHER CANDIDATES GOING THROUGH PROGRAMS RIGHT NOW. WE DON’T DISAGREE WITH COMPETITION AS A WHOLE, BUT THERE AREN’T REALLY ENOUGH TEACHER CANDIDATES TO KEEP OUR CURRENT PROGRAMS OPEN RIGHT NOW. SOME OF THEM ARE HAVING TO CONSIDER WHETHER TO CLOSE JUST DUE TO LOW ENROLLMENT. SO INTRODUCING MORE INSTITUTIONS THEN STRETCHES OUR TEACHER PROGRAMS THINNER. THE SECOND IS, SELFISHLY FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, THE FEWER THAT WE HAVE TO WORK WITH, THE BETTER QUALITY MEASURES THAT WE CAN PUT IN PLACE, THE MORE TIME THAT WE CAN SPEND WITH THEM, THE BETTER PARTNERS THAT WE CAN BE IN OVERSEEING AND SUPPORTING THEIR PROGRAMS. SO RIGHT NOW WE’RE WORKING WITH 32 TRADITIONAL INSTITUTIONS, AND IF WE HAVE MORE, THEN WE WILL HAVE TO EXPAND OUR SUPPORT TO MORE INSTITUTIONS.>>THE LAST– JUST TO BUILD ON WHAT LEAH SAID, AS YOU KNOW, WE’VE BROUGHT TO YOU THE LAST THREE MONTHS A NUMBER OF CHANGES THAT REALLY AFFECT PREPARATION INSTITUTIONS FIRST. SO CERT STRUCTURE CHANGES, PROGRAM CHANGES, AND THEN THESE CLINICAL EXPERIENCES. AND LIKE THE PRESENTATION RIGHT BEFORE REALLY HIGHLIGHTED, WE DO A GREAT DEAL OF IN DEPTH TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE WITH EACH EPI AND THEIR K-12 PARTNERS TO MAKE SURE THESE PROGRAMS ARE BUILT TO MEET THE NEEDS OF THE CANDIDATES, AND ULTIMATELY, OF THE STUDENTS THEY’RE SERVING. SO THE ABILITY OF US TO DO THAT DEEP TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE WITH THE NEW REQUIREMENTS IS VERY IMPORTANT AND VERY KEY TO OUR ACCOMPLISHING OUR 10 IN 10 GOALS. SO JUST THINKING ABOUT FOCUSING ON INCREASING QUALITY AND ONBOARDING THE PRACTICES WE HAVE WITH WHO WE HAVE, VERSUS ONBOARDING NEW PROGRAMS. AND LIKE LEAH SAID, WHEN NEW PROGRAMS COME ONBOARD, IT’S ABOUT EIGHT YEARS BEFORE THEY GO THROUGH ACCREDITATION. THERE’S AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE’S A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT. SO IT DOESN’T EVEN IMMEDIATELY HELP WITH THE NEW SUPPLY PROBLEM, BECAUSE IT’S YEARS BEFORE THOSE PROGRAMS ARE READY TO GRADUATE ANY CANDIDATES ANYWAY. SO THAT’S OUR RATIONALE FOR EXTENDING THE MORATORIUM, AND WE’LL TURN IT BACK TO YOU, SHEILA, FOR DISCUSSION.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. AND WE HAVE QUESTIONS BY CASANDRA AND DR. Z.>>SO DOES THE– A FEW QUESTIONS. DOES THE DEPARTMENT HAVE ANY RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING THE ALTERNATIVE ROUTES? SHOULD WE AMEND THIS TO INCLUDE THAT?>>SO WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT INTERNALLY. ON ONE HAND, YES, BECAUSE ONBOARDING NEW PROVIDERS OF ANY KIND IS TIME INTENSIVE AND CHALLENGING, AND THOSE REASONS STAND. ON THE OTHER HAND, NO, BECAUSE SOME OF THE SHORTAGE AREAS– SOME ALTERNATE ROUTES ARE DEVELOPED SPECIFICALLY TO MEET SHORTAGE AREAS, SHORTAGE REGIONS, SHORTAGE SITUATIONS, AND RETAINING THAT FLEXIBILITY SEEMS POTENTIALLY IMPORTANT. AND ALSO, THERE IS– A LOT OF– ALTERNATE ROUTES ARE IMPORTANT TO OTHER DECISION MAKERS IN THE STATE. SO WE WANT TO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT’S AN IMPORTANT– THAT KIND OF COMPETITION THROUGH THAT ELEMENT IS IMPORTANT, AND AGAIN, WE KNOW THAT THEY MEET THESE ASPECTS. PRAGMATICALLY, WE DON’T HAVE THE SAME TYPE OF– WE– YES, THOSE ARE OUR BASIC TWO REASONS. SO WE WENT BACK AND FORTH AS WELL ON THIS ONE.>>DO YOU DO THE SAME LEVEL OF ONBOARDING FOR AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PROGRAM AS YOU DO FOR A TYPICAL?>>WE DO NOT. IT DOES TAKE THE TEAM A DECENT AMOUNT OF TIME TO WALK THEM THROUGH THE APPLICATION, WHAT’S REQUIRED, DO THE TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE, BUT AS LEAH MENTIONED IN THE PRESENTATION BEFORE, A LOT OF WHAT ALTERNATE ROUTES HAVE TO– ALL OF IT IS PRESCRIBED IN LEGISLATION. SO WE DON’T HAVE AS MUCH FLEXIBILITY AS WE DO WITH OUR EPIs TO ADD, SUBTRACT, WHATEVER, BUT IT DOES TAKE THE TEAM A LOT OF TIME TO GET THE ONES ON BOARD. SO THAT IS POTENTIALLY AN ARGUMENT IN FAVOR, BUT POTENTIALLY AN ARGUMENT AGAINST AS WELL.>>AND HOW MANY ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PROGRAMS DO WE HAVE?>>WE HAVE SEVEN ALTERNATIVE ROUTES THAT PREPARE TEACHERS, AND TWO THAT PREPARE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS. WE HAVE HAD OTHERS THAT HAVE OPENED AND THEN CLOSED.>>AND DO WE ANTICIPATE ANY ADDITIONAL ONES COMING UP?>>WE’VE HAD, ACTUALLY– I THINK TWO OR THREE JUST THIS YEAR, SO– AND THERE ARE CERTAINLY OTHERS THAT COULD BE ELIGIBLE. ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS IS THAT THEY’RE BASED ON A NATIONAL– A PROGRAM THAT HAS DEMONSTRATED EFFECTIVENESS ON A NATIONAL LEVEL, AND THERE ARE CERTAINLY OTHER LARGE PROVIDERS OUT THERE THAT HAVE NOT YET APPLIED IN MICHIGAN. IN FULL DISCLOSURE AS WELL, THE LAST TIME THAT I WAS AT THE TABLE DISCUSSING THE MORATORIUM, THE BOARD SPECIFICALLY ASKED THAT IF WE HAD OTHER INSTITUTIONS THAT WERE INTERESTED IN BECOMING EPPs, THAT YOU BE NOTIFIED. AND WE HAVE HAD TWO OVER TIME EXPRESS INTEREST, AND THOSE ARE DAVENPORT, WHO IS CURRENTLY AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE PROVIDER– THEY’VE EXPRESSED INTEREST IN BECOMING A TRADITIONAL UNIVERSITY OR COLLEGE– UNIVERSITY PROVIDER– AND HILLSDALE, WHO HAD A PROGRAM AND CLOSED THEIR PROGRAM, IS LOOKING POTENTIALLY TO REOPEN A PREPARATION PROGRAM.>>OKAY, THANK YOU. DR. Z?>>HISTORICALLY, MICHIGAN HAS BEEN AN EXPORTER OF TEACHERS, AND THAT IS– THAT IS GOOD FOR MANY PEOPLE. THE PEOPLE WHO COME FROM OTHER STATES TO GET TRAINED HERE, THE STATES IN WHICH THEY EVENTUALLY WIND UP. IT’S ALSO GOOD FOR OUR OWN STATE INSTITUTIONS, LIKE MICHIGAN STATE AND UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, WHICH BECOME NATURAL– NATIONAL LEADERS, AS OPPOSED TO MERELY STATE OR REGIONAL LEADERS. AND OCCASIONALLY THERE ARE NEW OR INNOVATIVE APPROACHES WHICH AN INSTITUTION MAY WISH TO ESTABLISH HERE, BUT IF OUR LAWS ARE RESTRICTIVE OR PRESCRIPTIVE, TOO PRESCRIPTIVE, THEN THAT TENDS TO DISCOURAGE THAT. SO IT DOES SEEM TO ME THAT IT WOULD BE IN THE INTEREST OF… THE COMMON GOOD TO BE UNAFRAID OF TEACHER OVERAGE IN THE CONFIDENCE THAT IF WE’RE TURNING OUT A QUALITY PRODUCT, WE CAN EXPORT THEM. FURTHER, THERE ARE OTHER TEACHER PROGRAMS– HILLSDALE, A GOOD EXAMPLE, CONCORDIA UNIVERSITY IN ANN ARBOR– WHICH HAVE TRADITIONALLY PREPARED TEACHERS FOR NATIONAL CONSTITUENCY, THE VAST MAJORITY OF WHICH DON’T END UP IN MICHIGAN. SO, AGAIN, I THINK THERE ARE– WE CAN NARROWLY SEE OURSELVES AS RUNNING A TIGHT SYSTEM, OR WE CAN SEE OURSELVES AS FACILITATING PRIVATE INVESTMENT IN A PUBLIC GOOD. SO I GUESS– I’D LIKE US TO LOOK AT IT IN THAT PERSPECTIVE, AND PERHAPS LICENSURE OR– OR THE LICENSE TO– OR CERTIFICATION TO TEACH IN MICHIGAN IS WHERE WE SHOULD BE RESTRICTIVE OR MORE PRESCRIPTIVE, AND THE TEACHER PREPARATION PROGRAMS BE A LITTLE MORE FREE TO PURSUE DIVERSE VISIONS OF QUALITY AND EDUCATIONAL PHILOSOPHY.>>THANK YOU. TOM AND THEN–>>I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD WHAT YOU SAID. WE DON’T HAVE A TEACHER SHORTAGE NOW, NOR DO WE EXPECT ONE IN THE FUTURE? IS THAT RIGHT?>>KIND OF. RIGHT NOW, WE STILL PRODUCE MORE TEACHERS THAN ARE EMPLOYED EACH YEAR IN MICHIGAN AS NEW TEACHERS. HOWEVER, WE KNOW THAT CERTAIN SCHOOL DISTRICTS AND AREAS OF THE STATE HAVE DIFFICULTY– SO THE U.P. IS A GREAT EXAMPLE. WE DON’T HAVE ENOUGH TEACHERS WHO WANT TO GO WORK IN THE U.P. AND WE KNOW THAT IN CERTAIN CONTENT AREAS WE DON’T HAVE ENOUGH TEACHERS. SPECIAL EDUCATION IS ALWAYS AN EXAMPLE OF THAT. SO WE WOULD LIKE MORE TEACHERS IN THE POOL, FOR CERTAIN.>>AND THEN, SO I WOULD JUST THINK THAT MAYBE MORE CHOICES WOULD MEAN MORE CANDIDATES WOULD MAYBE GRAVITATE TOWARDS SOMETHING– SO THEY’D JUST– YOU KNOW, GRAVITATE TOWARDS GOING INTO IT, BUT MAYBE THEY WANTED– WHETHER IT’S VOCATION, OR EXPERTISE AT THAT PARTICULAR INSTITUTION, OR WHATEVER IT IS THAT THEY– SO I WOULD TEND TO LEAN TOWARDS– AND JUST IN GENERAL– I’M NOT SOMEBODY THAT LIKES TO RESTRICT COMPETITION ANYWAY.>>THE OTHER PART TO CALL OUT THAT– YOU JOGGED MY MEMORY. THANK YOU, TOM– IS THAT WHILE– LIKE, LEAH’S TRYING TO DRAW A VERY CAREFUL DISTINCTION HERE BETWEEN WE STILL PRODUCE MORE THAN WE SEE HIRED, BUT WE EXPORT, OR THEY GO SOMEWHERE THERE’S SHORTAGES, BUT WE ALSO SEE A DECLINE IN THE NUMBER OF CANDIDATES GOING INTO PROGRAMS. SO I THINK OUR BIGGER POINT IS THE MORATORIUM– WE CAN DO WHAT YOU VOTE ON FOR THE MORATORIUM, BUT OUR BIGGER POINT– WE WANT TO DRAW ATTENTION TO THE NEED TO RECRUIT TEACHERS INTO THE PROFESSION, PERIOD. WE NEED CANDIDATES GOING TO EDUCATOR PREP PROGRAMS, AND THAT’S ONE OF OUR STRATEGIC PLAN ARMS. SOME OF THE SHORTAGES MIGHT BE COMING, AND ALMOST EVERY EPI, EPP REPORTS THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY’RE SEEING A DROP IN CANDIDATES, THEY’RE SEEING FEWER. WE’VE TALKED ABOUT IT AT THE BOARD TABLE A LOT– ALL OF THE REASONS THAT THERE MIGHT BE A LACK OF CANDIDATES ENTERING EDUCATION. SO AGAIN, IF WE– TO YOUR POINT, IF WE LIFT THE MORATORIUM, LET’S SAY, AND WE HAVE ALL THESE CHOICES, BUT WE DON’T HAVE ANYBODY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE CHOICES– WE HAVE TO KEEP TALKING ABOUT– IT’S NOT GOING TO BE DIRECTLY ADDRESSED BY THIS DECISION, BUT I WANT TO JUST TAKE THIS TIME AT THE BOARD TABLE TO KEEP TALKING ABOUT HOW DO WE GET MORE OF OUR YOUNG PEOPLE INTERESTED IN TEACHING? WE HAVE TO SOLVE THAT AS WELL.>>THANK YOU. BECAUSE I WAS LOOKING AT THE RESEARCH RECENTLY FROM 2010-2011 TO 20– I BELIEVE IT WAS 2015-2016– MICHIGAN ITSELF SAW A 57% DROP IN KIDS GOING INTO EDUCATION, WHICH THEN IMPACTS THE TEACHER PREP PROGRAMS. SORRY– MICHELLE?>>YEAH, I WAS GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING, AND WE’VE HAD ALL THESE CLOSURES, BECAUSE I ASSUME THEY COULDN’T GET ENOUGH CANDIDATES TO COME. SO I’M WONDERING IF WE– IF WE SORT OF DILUTE THE– THE MARKET WITH MORE PROVIDERS, IF IT WOULD MAKE IT MORE UNSTABLE OR MORE DIFFICULT FOR THE OTHER INSTITUTIONS TO STAY AFLOAT. I DON’T– I MEAN, I DON’T KNOW. IT’S JUST SOMETHING– SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. ALTHOUGH, I’M WONDERING WITH THE BABY BOOMER– AND I AM ASSUMING THERE’S GOING TO BE A LOT OF PEOPLE LEAVING THE PROFESSION– I KNOW A LOT HAVE ALREADY– THAT THERE’LL BE A NEED. AND SO NOBODY’S COMING IN, AND YET, THERE’S GOING TO BE A NEED. SO– AND I WAS ALSO WONDERING IF THERE CAN BE ACCREDITATION FOR SELECTIVE AREAS, LIKE SPECIAL EDUCATION– YOU CAN BE ACCREDITED IN TEACHING SPECIAL ED TEACHERS OR ACCREDITED IN SCIENCE AND MATH, OR WHATEVER– IF– TO INCREASE– HOPEFULLY INCREASE, MAYBE, THE NUMBERS WHERE IT’S ACTUALLY NEEDED, INSTEAD OF ACCREDITING A FULL-BLOWN ANY SUBJECT PROGRAM. SO I JUST THOUGHT I’D THROW THAT.>>YEAH, THAT IS CERTAINLY WITHIN THE BOARD’S PURVIEW. WE WOULD ASK IF THE BOARD DECIDES TO VOTE ON A SELECTIVE MORATORIUM, THAT WE BE GIVEN SOME TIME TO COME BACK TO YOU WITH A PROCESS FOR WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE. WE DON’T HAVE THAT FOR YOU TODAY. SO THAT IS ONE OF YOUR OPTIONS ON THE TABLE, BUT WE WOULD COUPLE IT WITH A SHORT-TERM EXTENSION OF THE CURRENT– OF THE STATUS QUO SO THAT WE COULD [ INDISTINCT ].>>WE HAVEN’T HAD TO HAVE A NEW INSTITUTION APPLY, OBVIOUSLY, IN 15 YEARS, SO WE’D LIKE TO RESURFACE OUR MATERIALS AND SUPPORTS AND FIGURE OUT THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT WORK, IF THE BOARD DID LIFT THE MORATORIUM.>>SO TO– WAS THERE ANOTHER QUESTION– SORRY?>>YES, EILEEN.>>YES, AND I WOULD ALSO SAY IN RESPONSE TO DR. Z’S CONCERNS, I’M PULLED BY DAVENPORT, WHICH IS NOW DOING ALTERNATE CERTIFICATION, BECAUSE TO HAVE THEM HAVE A– YOU KNOW, A TRADITIONAL PROGRAM MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. IT’S A CROSS POLLINATION PROCESS THAT I THINK WOULD BENEFIT TEACHERS DRAMATICALLY. AND HILLSDALE CERTAINLY DID HAVE ITS OWN PROGRAM BEFORE. I WAS ON THE BOARD. I DON’T KNOW IF YOU WERE WHEN THAT ALL BLEW UP. BUT I THINK THAT WE’VE MOVED SO DRAMATICALLY, AND THE FIELD IS VERY DIFFERENT NOW, TO BE A TRADITIONAL EPI THAN IT WAS BEFORE. AND I THINK PART OF YOUR PROCESS, IF YOU’RE GOING TO CONSIDER OPENING IT UP– OR IF WE ARE– WOULD BE TO HAVE THEM RESEARCH THAT, AND THEN WRITE A COVER LETTER OR A MINI APPLICATION THAT SHOWS THAT THEY SEE THE DIRECTION THAT HAS CHANGED SUBSTANTIALLY. THERE’S NO POINT IN HAVING THEM COME IN UNDER THE ILLUSION THAT, FOR EXAMPLE, TeachingWorks DOESN’T EXIST. AND THE STAFFING THAT IT TAKES TO DO THIS WELL, THE NUMBER OF PEOPLE, IS PRETTY SIGNIFICANT. I MEAN, IT WAS– IT’S THAT WAY ANYWAY, AND NOW WE’RE TALKING ABOUT REALLY DIGGING INTO OUTCOMES FOR CHILDREN TRANSLATING INTO PREPARING TEACHERS, WHICH IS THE BEST WAY OF ALL TO DO IT. SO I WOULD BE VERY THOUGHTFUL ABOUT HOW WE SAY TO THEM, “YES,” BUT NOT– NOT LAST YEAR’S TEACHERS OR THREE YEARS AGO.>>YEAH, THERE IS DEFINITELY A CONCERTED AMOUNT OF EFFORT FROM YOUR MDE TEAM THAT GOES INTO EVERY ENTITY THAT IS INTERESTED IN BECOMING A PROVIDER. THEY NEED A– THEY– IT’S A LOT OF CONVERSATION ABOUT HOW THAT HAPPENS, THE SUPPORT, THE EXPECTATIONS, TO ENSURE THAT WE WOULD PRESENT YOU WITH A QUALITY OPTION AT THE END OF THE PRELIMINARY PROCESS.>>AND TO BUILD ON WHAT LEAH JUST SAID, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT FROM THE CANDIDATE PERSPECTIVE, ATTENDING A VERY SMALL PROGRAM WITH ONLY, YOU KNOW, A COUPLE FACULTY, OR NOT A LOT OF RESOURCES FROM THE UNIVERSITY, WITH THE BREADTH OF WHAT THAT CANDIDATE IS EXPECTED TO BE ABLE TO DO WHEN THEY’RE DONE IS SOMETHING TO CONSIDER, SO–>>MAYBE– I’M SORRY. I COULDN’T STAND IT– MAYBE PARTNERING– MAYBE HILLSDALE COULD PARTNER WITH GRAND VALLEY IN SOME OF THIS. YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE’S ANOTHER WAY OF LOOKING AT IT.>>THERE IS NOTHING THAT PROHIBITS THEM FROM DOING THAT CURRENTLY. SO THEY COULD CERTAINLY ESTABLISH COOPERATIVE PARTNERSHIPS RIGHT NOW.>>OKAY, THANKS.>>SO TO RECAPTURE THE– WHAT WILL BE BEFORE THE BOARD IN THE AFTERNOON, THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE DEPARTMENT UP FOR VOTE IS THAT WE EXTEND THE MORATORIUM AS IS. IF YOU DON’T DO THAT, YOUR OPTIONS INCLUDE: LIFT THE MORATORIUM ENTIRELY, OR APPLY A SELECTIVE MORATORIUM. IN BOTH CASES, LIKE I SAID, JUST PREEMPTING, WE WOULD AT THAT POINT ASK THAT YOU EXTEND THE MORATORIUM FOR–>>THREE MONTHS?>>THREE MONTHS, WE SAY, TENTATIVELY– THREE MONTHS SO WE COULD, LIKE LEAH SAID, AT A MINIMUM, GO BACK AND– AND TO EILEEN’S POINT– GET OUT THE OLD APPLICATION MATERIALS, WHICH NOW NEED TO BE UPDATED TO REFLECT CAN YOU PROVIDE A PROGRAM THAT MEETS ALL THESE STANDARDS AND ALL THESE PIECES THAT WE’VE BEEN GOING THROUGH? OR IF IT’S A SELECTIVE MORATORIUM, TO COME BACK WITH A RECOMMENDATION ON SELECTIVE TO WHOM, AND HOW WOULD WE DO THAT? SO IF YOU DO ANYTHING OTHER THAN EXTEND THE MORATORIUM, WE ARE ASKING FOR A FOLLOW-UP OF A SHORT-TERM EXTENSION SO WE CAN DO SOME ADDITIONAL WORK TO MEET THE BOARD’S NEEDS.>>OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, VENESSA AND LEAH. AND BOARD, WE WILL BE REVISITING THIS THIS AFTERNOON. IT IS NOW 12:10, AND– IS 50 MINUTES ENOUGH TIME FOR LUNCH? CAN WE BE BACK HERE BY 1:00 TO START WITH THE AFTERNOON MEETING AND PUBLIC COMMENT? WILL THAT WORK? OKAY, VERY GOOD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

1 thought on “Michigan State Board of Education Meeting for September 11, 2018 – Morning Session”

  1. This is GREAT Gina! Love what your doing for Michigan classrooms! Cultural Diversity is much needed. Educating teachers on cultural diversity is tantamount on understanding whom they are teaching.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *