Greetings from Pasco! I'm currently sitting in the Educational Service District 123 Building and attending the State Board of Education meeting. Check back for updates throughout the day.

9:22 a.m. Board Chair Mary Jean Ryan just noted that the name of the game today is "System Performance Accountability" or as everyone likes to groan and say, "SPA." Just what does SPA mean for Washington schools? Great question. With all the powerpoints scheduled today, i'm hoping we'll get a better idea.

9:32 a.m. Edie Harding and Kris Mayer are presenting an update on the State Board's work to create system of shared responsibility. Based on the Board's research, 88 percent of the public believes that the state should provide assistance to schools and districts that consistently don't meet standards. Sort of a no-brainer, but important nonetheless.

9:38 a.m. Peter Bylsma--a consultant to the board--is now presenting on a proposed "accountability index." He notes that accountability is, "the 3rd leg of an effective state education system, after standards and assessments." Anyone think the 3rd leg metaphor is getting overused in education? Maybe its just me.

9:40 a.m. Here's how the accountability index will work: The state will measure five outcomes (reading, writing, math, science and graduation rate for all stiudents) and four indicators (achievement of all students metet stadnards, achievement vs. peers, which controls for ELL, low-income and special ed students, improvement over the years, and achievement by low income students). This creates a 5x4 matrix with 20 outcomes.

Confused? Me too. Sort of sounds like NCLB lite.

9:51 a.m. The distribution of Washington schools on the index is a bit bleak. Most schools skew below average, but Bylsma assures us that poverty doesn't overly skew the results. Under the system, you actually have a lot schools with middle to high income schools that performing significantly below average. The Board looks pretty befuddled.

Mayer says, "This is how we are shining a light on Washington's achievement gap without using AYP (from NCLB)."

9:55 a.m. Terry Bergeson says, "This will have the exact same consequences to schools as NCLB--I think we need to think deeply about that, especially in our troubled economic times." Ouch.

10:03 a.m. Edie is awesome--she cuts right to the chase: "So how is this different from AYP again?"

10:05 a.m. Bylsma, "This IS different from AYP." Here's how he says so: We will continue to use AYP (we have to), BUT we can recommend using AYP results only to determine which schools and districts in the "struggling" tier that need the most help.

10:08 a.m. This is system will also be used for recognition as opposed to merely punitive action. According to Mary Jean, "This system has more of a sense of proportion, as opposed to AYP. If you miss AYP in just one area, you miss everything. This system provides information, but doesn't breed cynicism." I can see that.

10:34 a.m. Tberg, "Because this will "sort" schools in to tiers, there are going to be a lot questions about this--especially if we use it to replace AYP. We have to be ready for that." True. I have a few myself.

10:42 a.m. John Schuster is concerned that we will just be continuing to use negative descriptors for schools such as "struggling" or "failing."

11:11 a.m. The list of schools with accountability index rating will be made public. Kris Mayer made the comment that they still have a lot to do to "frame" the issue of "continuous improvement" for the public. I'll say.

11:16 a.m. Now it's Andy Calkins from MassInsight's turn. They will be presenting on the school improvement through "innovation zones."

11:32 a.m. Calkins is walking the Board through how to talk "underperforming" through the processes they may need to adopt to improve. Labelling these schools is still a big sticking point for the everyone.

11:48 a.m. 16-32 schools will likely be in the first "innovation zone" cohort to receive target state assistance...in 2010. Can't we do anything for these schools sooner? That's still two years away. MassInsight says to rush the development of this work further would be detrimental.

Tasty tidbit: Remember the last State Board meeting? Well, all in all, 43 people offered testimony and hard-working staffer Loy McColm typed up every single one. Hero award consideration?

11:51 Public Comment Time!

11:55 a.m. The Washington Education Association says teachers continue to be skeptical about accountabilty work since it is tied to the WASL. Well, what else do you suggest? Also, the WEA reps noted that collective bargaining should be the way to accountability in schools.

12:08 p.m. Two math teachers (a husband and wife--cute!--and also the school improvement agents for their district) from Othello are testifying. They say school improvement was one of the hardest things they have ever done and they have lost a lot of teachers and the trust of others over their efforts.

Othello is a "Summit District" under OSPI's school improvement program and they very rightly asked the Board to collaborate and learn lessons from their work.

1:30 p.m. Back from lunch. MassInsight is continuing their presentation. They're making the case that changes in operations at schools in the "innovation zone" should be transformational--not just mariginal.

1:49 p.m. Tberg just asked a made a really good clarifying statement about Priority Schools that opt into the state's potential "Innovation Zone": "In these schools, all bets are off. These schools make the decision to put everything on the table, including collective bargaining, scheduling, teacher placement, pay, everything. That's what it will take to make transformational change."

2:01 p.m. And the kicker comes in...according to MassInsight, if a school fails to improve inside an "innovation zone," they are basically suggesting state intervention (or changes in higher authority, if you're in a PC mood).

2:07 p.m. MassInsight also recommends the creation of an Accountability Council--members appointed by the board and reps from other professional orgs--to make decisions based on OSPI analysis.

2:20 p.m. Tberg hates that idea.

2:52 p.m. All right, we're finally moving on to a math standards update. Thank goodness. As Mary Jean Ryan says, "It's not a State Board meeting unless we talk about math."

3:00 p.m. Long story short, Washington's new math standards are basically done and now we're approving aligned curriculum.

3:15 p.m. According to OSPI's Lexie Domaradzki, OSPI reviewers have almost completed identifying aligned math curriculum and now Linda Plattner and Strategic Teaching (the group who helped develop Washington's new standards) are beginning to check and confirm the standards against approved curriculum.

3:56 p.m. Mary Jean Ryan and Jeff Vincent have taken the issue of math and science instruction to a broader level, saying that we need to bring all the groups (PESB, OSPI, the State Board, us, everyone and their mother) working on both issues together for a legislative push for support and mandates. Yes.