AN UPDATE ON THE STATE BOARD OF EDUCATION

PREPARED BY:MARYLAND STATE

EDUCATION

ASSOCIATION · NEA

September 27, 2016

MEETING DATES FOR THE STATE

BOARD OF EDUCATION

October 25, 2016December 6 or 13, 2016

 

Consent Agenda Items

The State Board of Education (SBOE) reviewed and approved the following: August 22 and August 23, 2016 minutes Personnel appointments July and August 2016 budget adjustments

Action Items Ms. Mary L. Gable, assistant state superintendent for the Division of Academic Policy and Innovation, reviewed the four Code of Maryland Regulations (COMAR) below with the SBOE. COMAR 13A.02.01 Local Boards of Education (Permission to Publish for Repeal) The regulations concerning meetings of local boards were adopted in 1971, prior to the passage of the Maryland Open Meetings Act. These regulations contain some requirements for the rules adopted by local boards of education for their meetings such as voting requirements for motions, and the observance of rules for executive sessions. The Open Meetings Act now governs how local boards of education conduct meetings including executive sessions and how local boards follow those statutes. The existing regulations for local board meetings are no longer needed as the local boards of education follow the Open Meetings Act.

Action: SBOE approved permission to publish the proposed repeal of COMAR 13A.02.01, for public comment.

COMAR 13A.05.07 Programs for Non-English and Limited-English Proficient Students (Permission to Adopt) MSDE seek to obtain permission to adopt the revisions to the Programs for English Learners. COMAR 13A.05.07 does not include the current federal requirements for identification and assessment of English learners. The proposed revision incorporates the World Class Instructional Design and Assessment (WIDA) standards, includes federal program requirements, and updates definitions.

Action: SBOE adopted amendments to regulations under COMAR 13A.05.07 Programs for English Learners.

COMAR 13A.12.03.02 School Counselor (Permission to Adopt) On May 12, 2015 the General Assembly passed HB 947: Professional Standards and Teacher Education Board (PSTEB)-School Counselors-Certification Renewal Requirement (Lauryn's Law). Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE) proposed amendments to meet new certification requirements required as a result of legislation.

PSTEB directed MSDE to convene a workgroup to address the requirements of the law. On February 4 2016, PSTEB granted permission to publish the amendments to COMAR 13A.12.03.02. SBOE also granted permission on May 24, 2016. It was published and MSDE recommended a non-substantive change.

The proposed amendments require a school counselor, at the time of renewal/reinstatement of their certificate, to:

show evidence of one semester hour of coursework from an Institution of Higher Education; or its equivalent;

further refine their ability to recognize and address indicators of mental illness and behavioral distress, including depression, trauma, violence, youth suicide, and

  

substance abuse; and receive professional development in the identification of professional resources and

best practices for distributing these resources to parents to help students in crisis.

Comment:

Ms. Michele Jenkins Guyton, SBOE member, stated that she does not feel this regulation goes far enough. She wants the SBOE to revisit it further; She will support the regulation so progress can be made forward.

Action: SBOE adopted COMAR 13A.12.03.02

COMAR 13A. 04.11 Programs in World Languages (Permission to Adopt) The revisions to the regulation for programs in World Languages incorporate the revised national standards that focus on literacy and real-world applications of language, to communicate effectively and interact with cultural understanding. The regulation was presented at the May 2016 SBOE meeting, for permission to publish; MSDE received no comments or questions from stakeholders during the publication period. Local School Systems (LSSs) have already begun to incorporate the revised language that aligns to the national World Readiness Standards for Learning Languages as they develop curriculum documents and professional learning activities.

At the August 2016 SBOE meeting, a request was made to further define and explain "cultural competence." Board members were provided with a draft document, Maryland World Readiness Standards for Learning Languages, including sample grade level indicators at each proficiency level that provides examples of how students can demonstrate cultural competence and understanding.

Action: SBOE adopted amendments to regulations under COMAR 13A.04.11 Programs in World Languages.

FY 2018 Budget Estimates & Request and FY 2018 County Library Capital Grant ProgramMs. Kristy Michel, chief operating officer, shared a summary of the budget. SBOE was requested to review the following items for submission to the Department of Budget and Management:

The FY 2018 base budget estimates; The FY 2018 Over-the-Target Request; and The FY 2018 Requests for State Aided Educational Institutions.

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 2 (9/27/16)

Action: SBOE adopted the FY2018 unanimously.

FY 2018 County Library Capital Grant ProgramThe FY 2018 County Library Capital Grant Projects in the State's FY 2018 Capital Budget have been provided to the State Board for review and approval.

Action: SBOE adopted the FY2018 County Library Capital Grant Program budget unanimously.

Orange Ribbon for Healthy School Hours ProgramIn the 2016 legislative session, House Bill 39 passed, establishing the Orange Ribbon for Healthy School Hours program. The program recognizes LSSs that create, implement, and enforce school start times that are consistent with school start times recommended in House Bill 39. LSSs that meet the recommendations cited in House Bill 39 will be granted Orange Ribbon for Healthy School Hours Certifications by MSDE.

The SBOE was asked to approve the criteria that LSSs must meet to prove it is enforcing school start times and criteria that are consistent with the recommendations of House Bill 39.

To qualify for an Orange Ribbon for Healthy School Hours Certification, LSS may not have:

An elementary school in the school system that requires a student to: 1) be in class before 8:00 a.m.; and 2) Board a school bus before 7:00 a.m.; or

A middle or high school in the school system that requires a student to: 1) be in class before 8:30 a.m.; and 2) Board a school bus before 7:30 a.m.

Comments:

Ms. Guyton would like to see this program strengthened. This program is not required. It is a voluntary program. Response: Mr. Walter J. Sallae, director of Student Services and Strategic Planning Branch, stated it would require more explanation of research and collaboration to win over some hearts.

Ms. Sidhu indicated there are examples of schools that have done program requirements with zero costs while other school systems that have reported it is costly. She added, that when all schools moved the time up together, it was easier; although, before child care may be impacted. Response: Three counties (Anne Arundel, Montgomery and Baltimore County) provided data with cost and other area of considerations. It was agreed that each LSS was unique and different.

Ms. Laurie Halverson, SBOE member, noted that after the schedule change was made in Montgomery County, teachers and parents were not happy. This is like a puzzle and it is not just about money. If you can afford buses and people to drive those buses, then it would be easier.

Action: SBOE adopted the Orange Ribbon for Healthy School Hours Program.

Bullying, Harassment and Intimidation Policy Update

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 3 (9/27/16)

Dr. Sylvia A. Lawson, chief performance officer, Mr. Sallae, and Mr. Michael Ford, specialist in School Safety, provided the SBOE with an update to Maryland's Model Policy to Address Bullying, Harassment, or Intimidation. In consultation with LSSs, MSDE updated the policy by expanding the definition of electronic communication to include social media communications, such as photographs, audio recordings, video recordings, or text messages, sent by way of the Internet. The updated policy also provides a definition for the term cyberbullying. Cyberbullying involves communication transmitted using any electronic device including social media sites, telephones, cellular phones, computers, or tablets. This update is mandated by House Bill 365, legislation that passed in 2016.  More importantly, this updated State policy must be followed by actions in each of the 24 local school boards, to update their respective local policies, by January 1, 2017. Comments:

Ms. Sidhu asked whether the policy deals with adult bullying. Response: Dr. Ford said the policy is designed around school systems and if there is an issue regarding adults, this is handled by Human Resources.

Ms. Guyton wants the SBOE to revisit in the future cyberbullying in order to strengthen the regulations.

One recommendation was made to edit the social media list, so it is not limited to the current list, as technology changes rapidly.

Action: SBOE approved an update to Maryland's Model Policy to Address Bullying, Harassment, or Intimidation to include a definition of "electronic communication" which itself includes "social media" as it relates to cyber bullying.

Information & Discussion Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers   (PARCC) Assessment Score ReportDr. Carol Visintainer, assistant state superintendent of Curriculum, Assessment, & Accountability and Ms. Chandra Haislet, director of Accountability and Data Systems, presented the 2015-2016 school year results for the Partnership for Assessment of Readiness for College and Careers (PARCC) state assessments. PARCC assessments were given during one window; LSSs chose that window when they estimated an 80 percent course-completion point in the school year. (See attached PowerPoint with results by performance level).

Highlights:Ms. Visintainer reviewed the data results for English Language Arts (ELA) and Mathematics. She highlighted stats showing scoring at the 3, 4, and 5 level. ELA results grade 3 through 8 showed a relatively flat performance level from 2015 to 2016 test administration.

Results were also presented by race and performance level. Staff shared that the high percentages of students scoring at the 1 and 2 levels, which is nearly 50 percent, indicates much room for improvement for the state is needed.It was noted that the gap is widening and Maryland needs to show more improvement across these subgroups.

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 4 (9/27/16)

SBOE members engaged in lengthy discussion about their concerns with the dramatic gaps in student performance for minority students. They stressed that much more needs to be done to communicate with parents and LSSs on the urgency and importance of this work.

High School Results exhibited 44 percent of students scoring in 4 and 5. Andy Smarick said what about the 56 percent of students not passing, as this is a high school graduation test. Response: This would be students in level 1 & 2 and remediation would be needed. This year we are waiting for COMAR regulations to be completed to finalize plan.

In Algebra 1, 11 LSSs outperformed the state for the percentage of students earning a performance of 4 or 5. LSSs results ranged from a low of 14.1 percent to a high of 56.7 percent.

In Algebra II, 10 LSSs outperformed the state for the percentage of students earning a performance level of 4 or 5. LSSs results ranged from a low of 0.0 percent to a high of 82.4 percent.

Grade 3-8, in English Language Arts, 11 LSSs outperformed the state for the percentage of students earning a performance level of 4 or 5. LSSs results ranged from a low of 11.9 percent to a high of 54.5 percent.

Comments:

Mr. Andy Smarick, SBOE president, indicated that SBOE had hoped to see a growth in ELA scores with the understanding last year would be low since PARCC was a new test for the state.

o SBOE requested to see more aggregated data.

Mr. Smarick reiterated his concern for middle school students and parents of students not in the highest performing cohort of students because only one in five of these students is achieving at levels on track to be college and career ready.

o Mr. Chester Finn, SBOE member, stated there is another way to look at that data. He highlighted that a third of eighth grade students are not reported as taking the middle school math assessments because they are already taking high school level algebra and that assessment. MSDE staff noted that these students are also doing very well on the exam.

Ms. Laurie Weeldreyer, SBOE member, asked about growth data being reported by LSSs to parents. Response: The growth data reported by PARCC LSSs is being studied prior to public release and will be reported in the future. Mr. Smarick requested that the SBOE receive that report in October.

Mr. Guffrie Smith, SBOE member, asked if there are examples of where school systems are succeeding in closing the gaps by race. Response: More work is needed to identify areas of weakness on specific concepts. Accountability teamwork at the local level, across the state, has that as a priority.

Dr. James Gates, SBOE vice president, said we must involve parents and

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 5 (9/27/16)

educator associations in these discussions for improvement so we may learn best practices.

Mr. Chester Finn, SBOE member, said they also want to see students grouped by district. Response: Dr. Salmon stated this would be provided before the end of the day and will be provided during executive session because identification of students would make the data sensitive.

Ms. Stephanie Iszard, SBOE member, voiced concern over the quality of instruction that must be required at each LSS, and that she wants to see the data broken out by LSS.

o Ms. Weeldreyer agreed and wants the board to develop responses to instructional practices within LSSs. 

o Dr. Gates added the need for more granular reporting on what is working, to assist the SBOE in working within LSSs. He added that there are factors in the home, with a whole new set of variables we can't control.

Ms. Jannette O'Neill-Gonzalez, SBOE member, shared that LSSs and the SBOE need to take into consideration the other factors impacting communities, which are clearly impacting student performance. She commended teachers on the work that they do. She added SBOE needs to also look at other factors in assisting these children.

Ms. Guyton voiced her concern for the achievement gaps displayed for students in special education. She wants to see comparative data.

Ms. Iszard voiced concerns about the alarming numbers for minorities. o Ms. Barbara J. Shreeve, SBOE member, agreed but because this is a new

test, feels Maryland will see increased results and that the concern is being addressed by holding this conversation.

o Ms. O'Neill-Gonzalez said this problem is historic, and asked the SBOE what extra steps are being taken to address this concern. Dr. Gates agreed.

o Mr. Finn said among the most troubling to him, is that parents are not aware of their student’s test results from last year. He also asked why they have not been informed. Response: MSDE staff indicated that distribution is left at the LSSs authority. Mr. Finn was perplexed why MSDE does not have the answer on each LSSs and noted this as a concern.

Ms. Halverson inquired why students weren’t doing well in ELA. Response: Ms. Cecilia Roe, MSDE Staff, stated that students are familiar with non-fiction text. The standards aren’t the problem. MSDE needs to help systems and teachers break down standards and use more authentic text.

Mr. Smarick noted his concern with the wide variation in performance by district. He noted that only 1 in 8 students in Baltimore City are scoring at the 4 or 5 levels. He added that the SBOE will engage this issue with a sense of urgency.

o He asked for next meeting information to include growth scores, mode effect and disaggregated data.

Maryland’s Use of Assessment and Testing in Public SchoolsDr. Karen Salmon, Maryland state superintendent, introduced report and highlighted the SBOE’s decisions on the recommendations made by the state Commission on the Use of Assessments and Testing in Public Schools workgroup.  Mr. Smarick shared that the members of SBOE diligently reviewed and discussed the recommendations at great length at the work session, held on August 22 and 23, and on September 26, 2016. SBOE developed responses to the Commission's findings. Mr. Smarick acknowledged and thanked all the LSSs for their support in answering the questions from MSDE staff. (See attached Testing Commission recommendations and response by SBOE).

Action: SBOE unanimously accepted the report of comments on the state assessments commission report and recommendations.

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 6 (9/27/16)

ESSA Accountability PlanMs. Gable introduced Dr. David Steiner, executive director, Johns Hopkins University Institute for Education Policy, who provided the SBOE with an overview of the Every Student Succeeds Act (ESSA) requirements. Each state must develop specific timelines for student performance for each separate student subgroup and these timelines with goals for subgroups must be made public. Dr. Steiner also presented a snapshot of what the SBOE could consider as a model for setting goals/scores for subgroups.

Highlights:

ESSA sets two targets and the long-term and interim goals must be shared with "the world" and one area to note is the long–term, ambitious goals, must be stated for all students as well as all subgroups.

Many states use a value-added system to show comparison data;

o highlighted considerations within Ohio’s and New York’s model;

Dr. Steiner described ESSA's requirement for interim and long-term goals and alerted that this new change can significantly impact a state’s decision to retain or modify their state assessments, as these assessments could be used for growth comparisons over time.

o The challenge is to match the message to schools, principals and families every year to a vision for the final target and multiple performance standards.

ESSA will require states to adopt a coherent and realistic system of standards and measures of growth to achieve those standards.  He also alerted what it would mean if the state decided to adopt level 4 or level 5 as the ultimate achievement goal; the ramifications for accountability for reporting on all subgroups, and for the supports required to make the progress to that level 4 or 5 by the adopted timeline. A sample snapshot projection table, entitled Student Subgroup Growth Rate Simulator, was shared. A superintendent must be able to indicate where they expect their state to be at a certain point.

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 7 (9/27/16)

Comments:

Ms. Iszard asked whether any documentation accompanied his presentation. Response: A table, entitled Student Subgroup Growth Rate Simulator, displaying an example of the standards and goals, for growth toward achieving that standard for students, was shared with the SBOE. (See attached table).

Mr. Finn asked who sets or determines if long-term goals for states are ambitious. Response: There are two ways to read ESSA. One is, that by a certain date, all subgroups will have reached the 50 percent College and Career Readiness target; which is not realistic. The second way, is to allow an accountability system that relies on whether the average of the state population has reached the target, and that gap closing is evidenced for each subgroup, which is a more reasonable option to consider. The only caveat in the second option is, the gap closure goals must be ambitious and not set at low standards.

Ms. Halverson asked how states will be measured against each other. Response: National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) has been the general measure used, and PARCC is comparable with NAEP for these purposes. Achievement of level 4 and 5 on PARCC, as a measure of proficiency, is a clear college and career readiness measure. However, other states are choosing single assessments in single subject areas.  Dr. Steiner added that there is nothing in the law that specifies what assessments must be used and what results indicate proficiency. He added that not all states are using this 4 or 5 indicator process standard.

Ms. Weeldreyer asked for examples of best practices in other states regarding gap closure. Response: ESSA is based on progress and the requirement that states set ambitious goals and adopt accountability criteria accordingly. Dr. Steiner noted that NAEP results have not progressed since 1995 (flat growth); this is why some states will have a challenge setting an ambitious goal, demonstrating growth, using their state assessment. There are few states doing PARCC now, and research shows that PARCC is one of the strongest, academically.

Ms. Iszard stated that Maryland is in a state of emergency. Our minority students are not doing well. Even with the change in curriculum and standards, the gap has not narrowed. Response: Dr. Steiner said closing gaps would be a different conversation, however, it is an unavoidable conversation. You need to own the right gap and the real gap, and then understand and work on the strategies. He then highlighted Louisiana as a recommendation on how they used the curriculum to see positive results in gap closure.

o Ms. O'Neill-González agreed with Ms. Iszard to that SBOE continue the dialogue on how to close the gap conversation.

Mr. Smarick asked Dr. Steiner for his thoughts on assessment indicators. Dr. Steiner shared that there is a public paper on indicators of ESSA, which shows student and teacher attendance is very heavily correlated.

o Suggested using proficiency in slices, such as a measure for gifted and talented being done in Ohio.

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 8 (9/27/16)

o Cautioned to be careful about the unintended consequences when linking unsupported data to high stakes testing, as there is plenty of research showing the linking of the data.

o Dr. Steiner argued that there are important linkages, such as school climate, but data not designed for high accountability should not be used for that. Parents have every right to know the safety of their schools, but this should not be put into accountability measures. Dr. Steiner warned against allocating too much significance to non-academic indicators, not more than 5 percent, due to the risks of abuse and unintended consequences. Objective factors, such as student and teacher attendance are of much more value than subjective factors, which will be reported differently once included in the accountability system

Mr. Finn asked about curriculum and who determines what to use. Response: Ms. Gable responded that the state sets minimum standards but not a model curriculum.

o Ms. Weeldreyer said the SBOE has to improve their plan for low-performing schools.

o Ms. Sidhu said there used to be a Maryland State Curriculum and that teachers had the ability to go outside the curriculum, however, a few years later it was not so voluntary.

State Board Member Discussion & UpdateState Board RetreatMr. Smarick confirmed the board retreat in October. He then asked SBOE members to send suggestions on topics they want discussed.

Mental and Social Health Subcommittee Report/Update MSDE will have our report read soon. The subcommittee has been meeting

and moving toward getting input from community, regrading human trafficking.

October Meeting Agenda Items Items for the October meeting: Charter school funding, teacher workgroup, which is finishing up, and SBOE will receive the report update, regulatory items. Ms. Weeldreyer reiterated the need to revisit PARCC data along with school calendar waiver guidance.NSABE Annual Conference Delegate

Action: The SBOE approved Mr. Guthrie Smith to attend the NASBE conference as the voting member for Maryland.

Recognition

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 9 (9/27/16)

Mr. Smarick recognized Dr. Gates for being awarded the University Presidents Medal, which speaks to his integrity and talents.

Governor’s Executive OrderMr. Smarick spoke to the Post-Labor Day executive order, and the role of the State Board in developing guidelines and regulations. Mr. Smarick spoke of the legal advice by the Attorney General’s Office for LSSs regarding calendar. He then engaged the SBOE in a discussion of next steps and the role they see themselves (SBOE) playing. Comments:

Dr. Gates said he understood the SBOE to be an independent board. He was happy to learn this Board is charged to work toward what is good for students in regard to education policy. He is under distress as this calls into question what is good for Maryland. When he sees people outside of the organization setting direction on young people, this raises concerns. While we recognize the Governor is an important citizen, this SBOE should not become his rubber stamp.

Dr. Finn offered a motion. The motion directs staff to draft guidance for approval at the next meeting that the SBOE intends to approve waivers, provided such requests are justified by LSSs. Furthermore, staff id to develop suitable regulations to carry out SBOE intent. Ms. Sidhu seconded the motion. Ms. Weeldreyer said the evidence against schools starting after Labor Day is mountainous.

Ms. Iszard stated this is an independent board and we should put students first. Mr. Smarick said the executive order is clear, the SBOE can consider waivers. He

added, unless told otherwise, we have to deal with the Executive Order as if it is legal.

o Mr. Finn exclaimed that the SBOE can approve waivers while the process is underway.

Ms. Weeldreyer said the waivers should be brief and to the point, and should be decided by the next board meeting. She asked was the intent immediate. Response: Mr. Finn said the motion states immediate waivers. The word expeditiously was added.

Dr. Gates said this is about local control and feels this board is moving in the right direction, demonstrating respect for the local autonomy of LSSs.

o Mr. Finn said this is about the yin and the yang of local control, which we heard all morning, as local school systems do not always use local control

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 10 (9/27/16)

well. In this case it is a yang.

Action: SBOE unanimously adopted Mr. Finn’s motion to approve waivers, provided such requests are justified by LSSs. The adopted motion reads:

o "Direct Staff to draft guidance that the board can approve at its next meeting that makes clear to districts, charter schools, and the public that the board intends, beginning immediately, to approve expeditiously, requests for waivers from the calendar limits set by Executive Order 01.01.2016.19, provided that such requests are justified by reasonable explanations of the educational benefits to students that will be advanced by such waivers."

o "And further direct staff to begin, during this interim, the process of developing suitable regulations to continue to carry out the board's intent as stated in this motion."

State Superintendent’s UpdateDr. Salmon provided an update on the Broadening Options and Opportunities forStudents Today (BOOST) Scholarship Program. The BOOST Program provides scholarships for students who are eligible for the free or reduced-price lunch program to attend eligible nonpublic schools. A total of $5 million is allocated to the BOOST Scholarship Program in Fiscal 2017. In the August 2016 round of scholarship awards, $4,862,000 was awarded. Some awardees declined their awards and some have not responded whether they will accept their awards. MSDE continues to review and resolve issues with certain BOOST applications and awards.

RecognitionThe SBOE recognized the Excellence in Gifted and Talented Education (EGATE) Schools. Since the inception, 39 schools from 10 of Maryland’s 24 school systems have earned the EGATE designation. Dr. Salmon welcomed members of the advisory council on Gifted and Talented Education, and representatives from the award winning schools, including:

Calverton Elementary School, Kenmoor Middle School, and University Park Elementary School, from Prince George's County Public Schools.

Hamilton Elementary/Middle School and Hampstead Hill Academy, from Baltimore City Public Schools.

Fountaindale Elementary School for the Arts and Academic Excellence, from Washington County Public Schools.

SBOE presented each winner with a certificate and commemorative photos were taken.

Opinions Ted and Diane G. vs. Montgomery County Board of Education — (16-36);

remanding the decision of the local board for reconsideration consistent with the State Board opinion.

Jared H. and Matthew Murguia v. Montgomery County Board of Education — (16-37); affirming the judgment of the local board. The SBOE declined to issue a declaratory ruling on the remainder of both appellants' requests.

Nikunj and Yogini P. vs. Montgomery County Board of Education — (16-38); affirming the decision of the local board.

Rajendra and Erika P. vs. Montgomery County Board of Education — (16-39); remanding the case to the local board, and ordering that the local board conduct an expedited review and issue a decision on the matter within thirty (30) days of the date of this decision.

Torraine Stubbs vs. Anne Arundel County Board of Education — (16-40); affirming MSEA Board Briefs Page - 11 (9/27/16)

the local board's employee dismissal decision. Daryl Young vs. Montgomery County Board of Education — (16-41); affirming the

decision of the local board. Sandra A. vs. Montgomery County Board of Education— (Order No. 16-14);

dismissing the appeal for untimeliness. Devon and Bonnie C. vs. Montgomery County Board of Education — (Order No.

16-15); dismissing the appeal for untimeliness.

Public Comments

Mr. Leslie Hettleman spoke on special education.

o Special education students are misunderstood and largely ignored in school reform.

o Feels students can achieve at a higher level, if given proper instruction supports as required by The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act (IDEA).

o Feels MSDE is sadly lacking and has failed in closing the gap for basic foundation skills.

o He asked for a full review, with a written, deliverable plan to close the gap with guidance and technical assistance in monitoring.

Mr. Rocky Bostick, spoke about diversity and abusive behavior in schools.

o Stated that a teacher abused him when he was 13 year old. He lived in fear each and every day he returned to the classroom.

o He noted that after speaking up, he had learned of more students who were touched inappropriately and bullied by teachers at his Middle School.

o Wants MSDE to investigate this further.

NOTE: For additional details and information, all handouts are stored and filed chronologically in the SBOE file cabinet on the 4th floor

MSEA Board Briefs Page - 12 (9/27/16)