quality education commission osba regional meetings september 2002

Quality Education CommissionQuality Education Commission

OSBA Regional MeetingsOSBA Regional MeetingsSeptember 2002September 2002

Conclusions

Recommendations

Introduction

The Model

Quality Education CommissionQuality Education CommissionIntroductionIntroduction

Oregon’s education goalsOregon’s education goals“…“…the best educated citizens in the nation and the world.”the best educated citizens in the nation and the world.”

““Access to a Quality Education must be provided for all Access to a Quality Education must be provided for all

of Oregon’s youth…”of Oregon’s youth…” ORS 329.035 ORS 329.035

Quality Education Goals Quality Education Goals

ORS 329.015 ORS 329.015

• Academic excellenceAcademic excellence

• Rigorous academic standardsRigorous academic standards

• Applied learningApplied learning

• Lifelong academic skillsLifelong academic skills



Commission ChargeCommission Charge

Use research, data, professional judgment, and Use research, data, professional judgment, and

public values to identify:public values to identify:

Best practices for meeting the Quality Education Best practices for meeting the Quality Education Goals in statute and their cost.Goals in statute and their cost.

Current education practices in Oregon and their Current education practices in Oregon and their costs.costs.

Expected student performance using these practices.Expected student performance using these practices.

Purpose of the Quality Education ModelPurpose of the Quality Education Model

• To determine the level of statewide resources To determine the level of statewide resources

needed for schools and students to meet the needed for schools and students to meet the

quality education goals established in law.quality education goals established in law.

• To provide a policy tool that decision-makers can To provide a policy tool that decision-makers can

use to develop education budgets.use to develop education budgets.

Quality Education CommissionQuality Education CommissionThe ModelThe Model

Prototype SchoolsPrototype Schools

Elementary Elementary Middle Middle High High

• Identifies Cost per Student based on assumptionsIdentifies Cost per Student based on assumptions

• Calculates statewide cost and state contribution Calculates statewide cost and state contribution

to support Quality Educationto support Quality Education


In the Full Model each prototype school contains additional In the Full Model each prototype school contains additional

resources beyond the baseline for:resources beyond the baseline for:

• Added time for students having trouble reaching standardsAdded time for students having trouble reaching standards

• Curriculum development and technology supportCurriculum development and technology support

• On-site instructional improvement On-site instructional improvement

• Professional development for teachers & administratorsProfessional development for teachers & administrators

• Assistance with record keepingAssistance with record keeping

• Adequate classroom supplies and textbooksAdequate classroom supplies and textbooks

Each Prototype School Each Prototype School


To create a system of high-performing schools, To create a system of high-performing schools,

we need:we need:

• Adequate resources Adequate resources

• Educational practices based on Educational practices based on

research and local decision-makingresearch and local decision-making


Intangible factors in the ModelIntangible factors in the Model

Examples of Quality Indicators:Examples of Quality Indicators:

-Instructional leadership-Instructional leadership

-Teacher quality-Teacher quality

-Parent and community involvement-Parent and community involvement

-Effective Instructional programs-Effective Instructional programs

-Orderly learning environment-Orderly learning environment


Full QEM 2002 CostFull QEM 2002 Cost

2001-032001-03 2003-05 2003-05 2003-05 2003-05 Budget* Budget* CSL**CSL** QEMQEM

State School State School Fund Amt.Fund Amt. $4.946 bil$4.946 bil.. $5.596 bil$5.596 bil.. $6.995 $6.995

bilbil..

Amt per student (ADMw)***Amt per student (ADMw)***Year 1Year 1 $ 5,081$ 5,081 $ 5,786$ 5,786 $ 6,589$ 6,589Year 2Year 2 $ 4,924$ 4,924 $ 6,000$ 6,000 $ 6,832$ 6,832

* * Does not include School Improvement Fund. Includes $261 million cut Does not include School Improvement Fund. Includes $261 million cut ** Current Service Level – Based on 2000-01 School Program Levels** Current Service Level – Based on 2000-01 School Program Levels*** Student enrollment – weighted average daily membership*** Student enrollment – weighted average daily membership

Quality Education CommissionQuality Education Commission2002 Recommendations2002 Recommendations


Student Performance ExpectationsStudent Performance ExpectationsFor Reading and Math Using Best PracticesFor Reading and Math Using Best Practices

90% of all students would reach reading and math 90% of all students would reach reading and math

benchmarks in this decadebenchmarks in this decade

Elementary by 2005Elementary by 2005

Middle school by 2008Middle school by 2008

High school by 2010High school by 2010


Implementation PrioritiesImplementation Priorities

Stay the CourseStay the Course

Maintain the focus on reading in the early gradesMaintain the focus on reading in the early grades

Increase Staff Professional DevelopmentIncrease Staff Professional Development

Support High School RestructuringSupport High School Restructuring

Questions and DiscussionQuestions and Discussion

Visit our website at www.ode.state.or.usVisit our website at www.ode.state.or.us

Quality Education CommissionQuality Education CommissionQuestions and DiscussionQuestions and Discussion

quality education commission osba regional meetings september 2002

Documents

education budgets

model slide

current education practices

best practices

assumptionsidentifies

oneducational practices

local decisionmaking

oregons youth ors