Members of the Board Curriculum Committee met on Wednesday, March 7, 2001, at 5:30 p.m. in the Dining Room at the Education Center. Present were Committee Members, William Nelson, Monty Perfetti and Ric Agretto and Board Members Charlene Koch, Margaret Williams, Julie Venanzi, Lynn Glancy and Loretta Leeson. Also in attendance were Superintendent Thomas J. Doluisio and Assistant Superintendent Michele Kostem.

There were no issues addressed during Open Forum.

Mr. Doluisio opened the meeting by presenting the philosophy foundation of the Academic Standards Initiative. He noted that in math and in science, the United States registers the lowest scores among the following countries: Germany, Japan, Singapore, Korea and Taiwan. He added that the Academic Standards movement in the United States is all about maintaining our high standards of living, competing in the global marketplace, jobs, and the quality of life. The basic elements of the standards movement are as follows: adopt high internationally benchmarked academic standards, align the curriculum to the standards, adopt the concept of value added and measure your results, tell the community what is being done and report the results, students must understand that effort is what counts, use more time in an effective way, social promotions are not acceptable, and time and content have an important relationship. Bethlehem’s comprehensive school improvement plan is comprised of these important components: order and efficiency, high academic expectations, accountability, and safety nets/interventions.

Mr. Doluisio reviewed the chronology of the Phase I process. We began our affiliation with NCEE (National Council on Education and the Economy) in 1995, with a presentation by one of their consultants. We purchased their training manuals, their staff development package and their consultants. In 1995-96 we had five schools volunteer to take part in Phase I. We also began to align our curriculum to the standards in reading/language arts and mathematics. Consultants began training in the Phase I schools.

In the spring of 1997, we gave the NSRE assessment in the Phase I schools in grades 4, 8 and 10 for the first time. In 1997-98 we added seven more schools for Phase II. We continued training for Phase I and Phase II; and, we gave the NSRE again to Phase I schools and Phase II schools for the first time in the spring of 1998. Action planning with the principals started this year.

In the 1998-99 school year we added the ten remaining schools. We also appointed an administrator for elementary Academic Standards, Pamela Hubbard, and Tony Villani as the secondary administrator. At this point we started to wean ourselves from the NCEE consultants and began to do standards training with our inhouse experts. We began the LaSalle mathematics training for secondary math teachers and gave the NSRE in all schools for the first time in the 1998-99 school year. We then began to build a data base on all students in the district.

In the 1999-2000 school year, we appointed five study groups on grading, graduation requirements, portfolios, promotion/retention and special education to determine how the Academic Standards would affect these areas. We also started our safety net programs, K-12, with money budgeted for this purpose. We began a new integrated math curriculum in grades six and grade nine. We began to pilot problem solving units in the elementary schools. With a grant from the State, we produced 25 video training tapes and hosted a state-wide conference on Academic Standards. We also began to expand the standards project to other disciplines beyond reading/language arts and mathematics, especially in the middle school and now moving into the high school.

During this current school year, we piloted a program for portfolios in language arts at the middle schools and we continue to refine the curriculum. We began the work on the matrix on how we are going to promote students. We received the biggest amount of money in the Lehigh Valley from the State for increases in performance and attendance. Fourth and fifth grade elementary teachers are receiving intensive math instruction in staff development sessions at the Education Center. A ninth grade vo-tech program was initiated. We began Saturday workshops for students who cannot meet standards. We continued expanding Academic Standards to other disciplines this year.

Mr. Doluisio reviewed the events that followed to lead us to this point in time which he considers to be the beginning of Phase II. He then began a review of the seven areas of recommendations for Phase II implementation, their timelines, and the cost implications for implementation.

1. Alignment: Curriculum, Instruction, Assessment. The alignment of all curriculum areas will continue to reach either National,. State, or NCEE Standards. Special attention will be given to special education and L.E.P. students. Assessments will be taken at all grade levels by the school year 2004-2005 along with a portfolio of selected student work.
2. Academic Interventions. We will provide effective interventions and allow more time for students to achieve standards. Short term interventions are already in place. A "newcomers" program will be developed for students who transfer into the district and are below standards. This year-long program will offer intensive and accelerated curricula, with support services, to help students meet standards by the end of that academic year. Grade level retention will occur for students who do not meet the criteria for promotion to the next grade level. It is recommended that the academic interventions allocation be increased by one position to allow one for each high school.
3. Comprehensive Grading System, K-12. A new consistent, reliable, and valid reporting system will be adopted that will also report a student’s progress toward achieving standards. Time and opportunity will be provided for students achieving below the letter grade "C" to raise their performance level to meet standards. Beginning in grade 4, students who are not achieving a "C" level will receive an "F".

Recommendations for academic interventions will also be included in the reporting system.

4. Performance-Based Project. As part of the district’s graduation requirements, the project will be introduced to students in their freshman year and will conclude in the junior or senior year. This project begins with the Class of 2006.
5. Promotion Policy and Procedures. Achievement indicators will be designated for promotion consideration. A matrix will be formulated to identify students at risk for retention and a continuum of interventions to assist students K-12 will be offered. Parents will be provided notification of students at risk for non-promotion with an appeal process available.
6. Differentiated Diplomas. Differentiated diplomas will be offered according to the following three categories: Honors, Standards, and Regular. The level of diploma will be based on the achievement of state and/or national standards and completing the required number of credit hours. A matrix will be developed to assist in determining the type of diploma to be awarded. This will begin with the Class of 2006.
7. Evaluation of Implementation. The current high school evaluation process will be extended to include the elementary and middle schools, grades 4 through 12. Variables will be identified for each grade level.

Mr. Doluisio reviewed briefly the information found in the charts at the end of the document. He thanked all the committee members for their dedication and hard work on this project.

In response to a concern from Loretta Leeson regarding meeting the needs of the Gifted student, Mr. Doluisio responded that there is ample opportunity for kids to excel beyond the norm for those that are capable — in our high schools through our advanced placement program, the honors program, and also in the arts. The middle schools offer the A track and some grouping is done in the elementary schools, particularly in mathematics. Mr. Villani mentioned various ways that high school students have excelled. Mrs. Derrico explained that in the elementary schools, over the past four years, programs that are aligned to the standards have been created for the Gifted students in the areas of technology and arts and aesthetics. Mr. Rahs also added that these needs have been addressed through the building Able Learner Plans.

Mrs. Leeson asked if there would be an opportunity for a child to progress through the standards at a quicker pace rather than broadening their education and if not, could this be looked at. Mrs. Burak responded that with the proposed elementary matrix and various new criteria that will be used, the minimum requirements from grade level to grade level will become more defined.

Mrs. Venanzi asked if an eighth to ninth grade component of the academy school could be incorporated into the system. Mr. Doluisio commented that this was considered as an option until recently, when it was decided that it might conflict with another program being offered at the high schools this year. Mr. Kartsotis told Mrs. Venanzi that if a child progresses faster than expected before year end, they would not be able to return to their home school early. He added that the children who would be involved in this program would find it pretty difficult to move at that kind of pace and would probably need the whole year.

Mrs. Venanzi was told that approximately 150 elementary students would be involved in the Academy Program. Mr. Kartsotis noted that this program is designed to not only catch students up, but to give them a head start for the next school year, as well as social support for the family members.

Mrs. Venanzi asked how far we are prepared to go if parents are not in agreement with extra help for their children. Mr. Doluisio responded that parents need to be prepared for the fact that their children will be retained at their current grade level and the district will not back down on this stance. Mr. Kartsotis added that parents may also be required to sign a waiver. It was noted that teachers are requesting that the district not back down on this issue. Mrs. Leeson commented that weneed to take this issue to the community to make sure that they understand the implications before the program is implemented. Mr. Doluisio added that he feels the matrix will show parents very clearly what students need to do in order to reach Academic Standards. Mrs. Leeson was told that transportation will be provided for those students involved in these intervention programs.

Mrs. Leeson asked for a more definitive explanation to the letter grade "D". Mr. Doluisio explained that the grade letter "D" gets you through without achieving much. He added that what a "D" does not do is comply with the fact that you need to get the standards. He stated that the "D" is a loophole in the whole initiative. Students with the grade letter "D" would be candidates for the intervention workshops. Mr. Perfetti added that an important part of the after school and Saturday workshops is not just about getting students to meet the standards, but to also help them develop a responsibility toward where they need to be.

Mr. Glancy commented that he feels the standards approach is a good way to really motivate students. He commented that he would like to see the interventions start at the elementary level rather than when a student reaches his later years in school.

Mrs. Koch added her support to the process. She added that she is very proud of our school district for all of our endeavors.

Mrs. Venanzi asked for input on how the "Newcomers School" would operate. Mr. Rahs told her that they are presently looking at a non-grade or "pockets" concept where students would be bridged among several grade levels in smaller classroom settings. Dr Nelson added that they are also looking at streamlining the instruction with no frills.

Mrs. Koch expressed concern about those students who have non-supportive parents. She was told that several of our schools have programs where volunteers come in to give support to students who have uninterested parents. Mrs. Leeson added that it is not always that parents don’t care, but some parents are just overwhelmed with other things.

Mrs. Leeson asked if it has been proven that an all-day kindergarten experience accelerates a child’s learning. Mr. Doluisio commented that he believes that more time is an essential ingredient to a child’s learning experience. Mrs. Ostman told those present that in the full-day kindergarten programs at Fountain Hill Elementary, academics are interwoven throughout the entire day. Dr. Turoczi added that a full-day kindergarten program will permit the time needed for students to attain the basic skills that are needed.

Mrs. Venanzi asked if a middle school student’s schedule could be customized to address his individual areas of weakness. Mr. Acerra mentioned that creating a flex schedule, with minimal disruption to the regular school day, would be possible.

Mrs. Williams thanked everyone for the amount of time spent on this project. Mr. Doluisio asked for the Curriculum Committee members’ support to move forward with the Academic Standards Academy project. He thanked the Academic Standards Study Committee members again for their efforts.

The meeting adjourned at 8:00 p.m.

Minutes Prepared By: ___________________________________

Lynda Ruth, Confidential Secretary