Carter Leaves Oakton for Central Office Position

Q.T. Carter, who has served as principal of Oakton School for almost 10 years, has announced his decision to step down from Oakton and assume leadership responsibilities at the central office, according to a statement released by District 65 on June 26. Mr. Carter "will be reassigned to assist with the District's parent involvement intiaitve and other activities," the statement said.

Pat Markham, communications manager for the District, told the RoundTable Mr. Carter had met more than once with administration officials at the District but declined to comment further, saying it was a "personnel matter." She said the reason for the change at Oakton was "not just the scores. ... It gives a way for the District to address the challenges in this heightened-accountability atmosphere."

Ms. Markham said there had been no Board meeting to discuss the matter but Superintendent Hardy Murphy "has had conversations with some Board members." Dr. Murphy was not available for comment.

District 65 School Board Schedules Its Work For 2007-08

By Larry Gavin

On June 18, the District 65 School Board approved a "planning calendar" for 2007-08 which in a general sense sets the agenda for the Board's work for the year.

The Board's discussion focused on three of the Board's goals for 2007-08, relating to the continued implementation of the Unified System of Delivery (USD), a differentiation/enrichment study and a technology study. While the goals were adopted as independent goals in April, they collectively deal with how to educate a diverse group of students in the same classroom.

Superintendent Hardy Murphy said, "As a staff we're using this effort to lift our entire instructional program. What we're talking about is building the capacity in our classrooms to meet the needs of all of our students." He added, "We feel like we're going to have a good year discussing some very important issues for our District."

The Board also had a preliminary discussion on how to address a deficit projected for the 2008-09 school year.

Unified System of Delivery
One goal for 2007-08 is to "Continue to implement the Unified System of Delivery that ensures shared responsibility of all staff for all students so that (1) all students have access to the general education curriculum; and (2) more effective intervention and supports are implemented in regular education classrooms."

Almost 17 percent of the District's students receive special education services. Under USD these students will be educated to the maximum extent possible in the general education classroom.

Dr. Murphy said the USD represents a change in the culture of the District and is intended to break down the walls between special education and general education. He said full implementation could take from five to seven years.

Board chair Mary Erickson questioned, "How do we know if we've met this goal?"

Dr. Murphy said various indicators could be used such as whether student achievement has improved, whether the level of inappropriate placement in special education has been reduced, whether the level of push-in intervention has increased, and whether the level of staff development has increased.

"At the end of the year what we have to do as a staff is come up with a set of measures and a set of experiences that we can assemble to demonstrate to you that the District is making progress," Dr. Murphy said.

Keith Terry said, "This is one of the big issues that I have on practically all the goals. It's really hard to measure this. Where is the timeline?" What's the target? As a Board member I really don't know what the target is. I don't know how to measure it.

"Being an advocate and looking at our fiduciary responsibility, at some point in the future we would have a review, and if we had a review, are we achieving the goal? Are we near the goal? Not from a punitive perspective but from a perspective of let's analyze why we're not getting there."

Mr. Terry said he would like targets set, so the Board could measure whether the goal was met.

Mary Rita Luecke, who was a Board member when the goal was adopted, said she anticipated that the Board would receive a report from the administration on what was achieved in implementing USD in 2006-07, and that the report would include proposed steps for the coming school year.

"We thought it was worth having this goal even though there's difficulty in measuring it," she said. Ms. Luecke added though, "I think we need development of some indicators as to whether these goals have been met."

Bonnie Lockhart said it would be helpful to have clear information on what has already been done and to revisit that in April to see what progress was made.

Katie Bailey said, "I want [the year-end report] to be an open discussion, where you can talk about successes, but also talk about challenges. In reality it would be a stepping stone. We can't expect perfection in year one. What I'd like to see is the steps over the five to seven year process that we'd be making."

Dr. Murphy said the administration had presented a number of reports to the Board on special education, starting with the Cole Report. He said, "We think we'll be able to demonstrate some of the progressive things we've done in this area."

Ellen Fogelberg, director of literacy, said she would circulate an action plan the administration had prepared which contained a timeline and steps the District would be taking.

Differentiation/enrichment study
A second goal is to "conduct a comprehensive study of the District's differentiation and enrichment activities, and produce recommendations for planned implementation beginning with the 2008-09 school year to ensure that all students are challenged to the full extent of their academic potential."

Ms. Erickson said this goal was adopted because the Board had not talked much about students at the upper end and some parents think their students are not being challenged. She said enrichment can take place through differentiation of instruction in the classroom, and it can also take place through specific enrichment activities.

During the public comment session, Bonnie Baum, a District 65 parent, said two of her children were not challenged through differentiation of instruction and one would be going to a private school next year as a result. She said, "It is apparent that District 65 as a system does not have the creativity or flexibility to meet the academic needs of children outside a fairly narrow range of normal or average." She said the District needed to get input from parents "who have experienced a failure of differentiation and whose children have not been challenged."

Ms. Luecke said she thought the study should define "enrichment" and "differentiation" and those terms should become part of the Board's policy manual. Referring to Ms. Baum's remarks, she also said, "One of the things we absolutely have to do is to reach people in this study who do not feel as though their children have been challenged."

Ms. Erickson said she wanted to bring in resource people who have experience in the enrichment field and who could advise the Board on what other schools are doing.

Mr. Terry said, "At some point we have to grade performance." He asked if the Board could tighten up what the goal was.

Ms. Bailey said she thought the goal for the year would be to complete the study. As to the study she said, "we do have some successes, but I think we also have some challenges. I want to be able to hear it, where are our failures, where we're not doing it, being honest about it so it's not an indictment."

Ms. Bailey also said the study should address what is needed by different grade levels, and it should prioritize recommendations for the next three to five years and state how to measure success over time.

The administration proposed that the study answer the following questions: How effective are current differentiation and enrichment efforts? What are specific areas of improvement? What are steps necessary for delivering improved differentiation of instruction and enrichment? What is the budget and timeline for implementing the recommended steps?

The Board concurred in the administration's proposal to retain a facilitator; form a committee; identify goals, objectives and terminology; review research; obtain input from the stakeholders; and report findings and recommendations.

Sharon Sheehan said she would like the administration to present the Board with the steps they planned to take in preparing the study so the Board could give input on an interim basis.

Technology study.
A third goal is to "conduct a study...and prepare recommendations regarding the funding, purposes, placement and use of technology in District instructional programs and operations."

In conducting this study, the administration plans to use a process similar to the process for the differentiation/enrichment study. They will seek input from parents, teachers, representatives from Northwestern University and a nationally recognized leader in educational technology.

The study will address how to best use technology to engage students in the classroom and how to fund new technology. The Board has previously debated whether to pay for technology out of operating revenues or by borrowing funds.

Financial issues
At the Board's Finance Committee meeting on June 11, the administration presented projections showing that the District would have an operating deficit of about $1.6 million in 2008-09. Depending on various assumptions, the deficit could be larger.

Mr. Terry said he would like the Board to do an organization review or a program review that analyzed the effectiveness of the District's programs. "If we are going to have to make some budgetary adjustments, how do we do that without a real hard question and answer session on the effectiveness of programs, the effectiveness of activities that we do?" he said.

Ms. Sheehan said, "If you're on the larger end of [the projected deficit], there's some severe cuts that have to happen." She said she did not want to be forced to make a quick decision on where to make cuts. "I want to understand the process that we're going to follow to analyze what the situation is and how we're going to approach it," she said.

Ms. Erickson referred the matter to the Finance Committee. The Finance Committee will also review the District's Long Range Financial Plan.

Other issues
Some of the additional items on the Board's calendar include reviewing reports on the ACC program and District-wide multicultural activities, the TWI program, the middle school study implementation, the District's improvement plan, ISAT results and the arts program.

In a brainstorming session, Ms. Bailey suggested the Board should consider adopting a new strategic plan because the District's current plan expires in 2008.

Jerome Summers suggested the Board discuss a goal that every child read at grade level by second grade, and that the Board address a school in the Fifth Ward.

Ms. Erickson said these issues could be proposed when the Board discussed goals for 2008-09.

High Compliance for Three- Year Math Requirement

By Jennie Berkson

In the first class at Evanston Township High School to graduate with a three- year math requirement, 94 percent of students met the graduation requirement in four years.

In 2002 the District 202 School Board adopted new graduation requirements for math: three years instead of two. This decision meant that ETHS had higher standards than those required by the State Board of Education, which instituted the additional year requirement in 2005 for the class of 2009.

According to the presentation by Eugenia Brelias, math department chair, and Dr. Judith Levinson, director of research, evaluation and assessment, the math department has made significant changes in curriculum, instruction and program structures to support the implementation of the three- year math graduation requirement. "The focus has been on revising the regular- level curriculum," administrators reported.

New courses, such as Bridge 2 Algebra, were developed, and new curricular resources, such as the Agile Mind instructional technology, have been utilized to enhance student learning. In addition, ETHS increased coordination with District 65, and the math computer lab was established to support the integration of Web-based curriculum.

Still, these efforts were not enough to ensure that 100 percent of the class met the requirements. 37 of 642 students had fewer than the six credits of math required to graduate. Twenty-six of the students were black, and 29 were low-income. Ms. Brelias told the Board she had personally interviewed (in depth) two of the 37 students who did not meet the requirement. She reported that both students had experienced "serious personal issues" during high school, which negatively impacted their ability to meet the requirement. "The school did outreach but we need to do more," she said.

Marilyn Madden, assistant superintendent/principal, pointed out that most of the students who had missed completing the requirement only need one or two more math credits to finish. She said, given the course offerings in summer school and next fall, students would not have a problem completing the requirements by summer or at the latest, next January, and would be able to graduate then.

According to administrators, next year more efforts will be made to ensure that a greater percentage of students complete the requirement in a timely fashion. "There will be more curriculum changes and more focus on ninth grade transition," said Ms. Brelias. The new ETHS scheduling and resource design, System of Supports (SOS) and the Professional Learning Communities, will be of particular assistance, she said. SOS will give at- risk students increased access to teachers.

"Ninety-four percent is remarkable," said Board member Jane Colleton. "I was not a big fan of the increased requirement, and it is clear that a lot of students have issues." She agreed that System of Supports would be helpful in providing students with the assistance they need to meet the requirements.

System of Support Planning Meetings

Evanston Township High School parents and the community are encouraged to share their feedback about the new System of Supports (SOS) program at planning meetings this summer. Working meetings are scheduled for 1-3:30 p.m. on July 24 and Aug. 9 in Room N 112 at ETHS, 1600 Dodge Ave. These meetings are open to the public. (See article in June 13 RoundTable for more on SOS.)

202 Administration Hears About Hebrew Program Concerns

By Jennie Berkson

Dozens of parents of Hebrew language students attended the June 18 District 202 Board meeting to express their concerns that next fall would bring overcrowded classrooms and inappropriate level assignments because of policies determining when a new section of a course can be opened.

"We are honoring all the student requests that were made for Hebrew next year, and we are honoring the placement of all students at their level of knowledge of the language," Superintendent Eric Witherspoon told the RoundTable. "We highly value our Hebrew program as one of our world languages and want the program to continue to grow."
However, Dr. Witherspoon did explain that "the number of sections of each program in each department is determined in a sectioning process that considers student enrollment requests. We also have provisions in our master contract that govern and limit a teaching load."

According to administrators, a normal full teaching load is 120 to 130 students, or five classes. Marilyn Madden, Assistant Superintendent/Principal told the RoundTable that after Monday night's meeting, she had talked to over 30 parents and as a result the number of students signed up for Hebrew was 99, instead of the 97 who had signed up in March.

Normally, such enrollment would justify only four sections. But because there was a large demand for the advanced level of Hebrew and a need to provide basic instruction in the beginning classes, Ms. Madden said that the decision had been made to provide five sections of Hebrew, rather than the four originally slated. "You can't have 39 kids in a class and you can't put students just learning a new alphabet with students who are already more fluent," she said.

Dr. Witherspoon told the RoundTable that Latin and German have also been limited to 4 sections for next fall. "Overall enrollment in World Languages remains high," he said, "but more students are selecting other languages."

Parents also questioned why Advanced Placement (AP) Hebrew is not offered at ETHS. This is a particular problem for some students who come from Jewish day schools to ETHS and are already conversant in Hebrew at a fairly high level.

According to Laura Cooper, Assistant Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction, an AP level of a subject can only be offered by a high school if the College Board, which is the regulating organization for such matters, has developed an AP course in the subject which is not the case for Hebrew. At the Board meeting, Dr. Cooper explained that students who wish to study Hebrew at the college level can do so through a no-cost arrangement with Northwestern University, although students have to arrange their own transportation to campus.