Oregon Department of Education Office of Student Learning & Partnerships
Transition Advisory Committee
Members:X / Ayer, Lyn / X / Ingledue, Marcie / X / Johnson, Pattie / X / McGinnis, Kristy / X / Straw, Janet
X / Burr, Jackie / X / Jackson, Lydia / X / Kosko, Ken / X / Roberts, Janice / X / Unruh, Deanne
(Ph. Conf.)
New Members: / None / X / Ramona Reynolds, Scribe
Guests: / None
PURPOSE: The purpose of the Transition Advisory Committee (TAC) is to serve in an advisory capacity on issues related to determining transition priorities for documents, web information and development and other issues that may arise. The TAC considers the services and postsecondary outcomes for students and informs the department on strategies and plans to improve transition for students beginning at age 16 and continuing through age 21.
TAC Meeting Minutes
Thursday, February 10, 2011
9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.
Agenda Item / Discussion / ActionIndicator 14 Executive Summary Report.
Deanne Unruh joined by phone conf. / What do we do with this information?
Jackie called the meeting to order at 9:15 and introductions were made for the benefit of a new member - Ramona Reynolds, who supports Jackie and will take minutes at future meetings.
Jackie, David, & Pattie are working on this.
Jackie distributed a booklet of materials listed on the agenda.
Pattie distributed handout – Exec. Summary (goldenrod) follow up interviews 2010 with additional information to illustrate the Exec. Summary report received from Jackie. This included a table of district size info. based on # of leavers per district. The 4th page was a table of all districts listed by size category with # of leavers per district.
Pink sheet – Use of data for federal purposes vs. state use. What is reported to federal government is not always the only useful information for states. Indicator 14 process is to improve programs. This information, particularly the 3rd page data, was very helpful.
Exec. Summary: Are they (leavers) being employed in local area or do they have to go outside? (3rd page) Other variables are involved. Large districts or large areas may not have a larger percentage of kids employed as opposed to smaller areas. Some smaller areas get heads of households competitively employed so that children can also be similarly employed in later years.
Size categories help to understand data better. Kinds of jobs also helps. This info will be given to districts for their use.
Questions on how kids left school, method of access, if they accomplished what they said they’d do. This will help determine how to use data.
Jackie did onsite monitoring in Milton Freewater. Superintendent personally talked to kids and got some of them to come back. This shows that not just teachers, but administrators, also need to get involved.
We need to remember kids not just numbers (data). Reports can be made small enough to be useful. Lydia stated that the complaint is that data never gets to the people on the ground that really need it. Every year we report to administrators but it should also be given to the teachers.
Pattie will also be doing this on their website -- letting teachers know reports are available online. TCN network has lots of info available for teachers and all others. You can ask Jackie for a report or Pattie can give you the information or generate and print it for you. Confidentiality is an issue but districts can give that data under certain rules. Jackie can give data if it fits under the rules of confidentiality. ODE has to run this by the Data Unit.
Pattie went over handout of district size and description of students interviewed in 2010 – Post School Outcomes.
We need to look at all kids as well as special education kids who are successful to find out what they are doing to succeed. The question was raised as to whether other states are studying this. Deanne did not think they are, but there might be one or two that do. (At least one state is doing this). The public is usually surprised that kids enroll in higher ed but never completed a term. It’s good to look at kids who are not engaged, but the emphasis should be on those kids who are engaged in higher ed and succeeding. We need to ask what kind of support they got that enabled them to succeed. We need to focus on the positive outcomes because the negative info sometimes gets more attention.
Lydia stated that in Salem Keizer, more students are going for a GED earlier, but face difficulties, such as they cannot pay the fees to get help, not even for a GED, because they don’t have the money. It’s really unfortunate that some kids will not get the help they need because of financial difficulties.
Only primary disabilities were reported in the yellow handout from Pattie - Oregon Kids One Year Out -- Demographics of the 2008-09 Leavers, etc. She asked that this not be distributed until the numbers have been checked and verified. It should be available in a week and will be sent out. The 2 center pages show results not individuals’ efforts.
18 dropouts returned to receive diplomas, but were not claimed as special ed. Some odd information came out in the report. Committee members are concerned about dropout and grad rates and where they are going. This report was very welcome by group. On the Executive Summary, Deanne suggested that a pie chart be created out of the 5 data figures on pg 1. The reference to the term mental retardation will be changed soon to intellectually challenged. Pattie is doing a revised version of the information.
Final SPP/APR—Handouts
1 & 2 (both SPP/APR)
13 & 14 (SPP only) / Jackie advised that finals were submitted.
Indicator 1– Graduation -2 reports – single year methodology and cohort methodology – pg 3 shows differences.
Oregon received permission to have 5-yr grad rate target to meet requirements, however it increases by 5%.
Activities changed – new dropout rates have been defined differently over the years. A number of students (14 -21) were identified as special ed anytime before they left school.
Indicator 14– targets raised, activities changed, and resources added. Some large districts have very low response rates. Smaller districts have good response rates. This activity will be part of training for this next year. Districts sharing info between themselves works very well. Question: Is this because of staff or due to # of students in smaller districts? Exit interviews are also very useful and work well for districts.
We should be forward thinking by focusing on what people are involved in. Many of our students are involved in video games so schools should take the time to learn what skills are being learned in this medium. Video games give kids specific skills while playing. It’s very powerful. Other games require larger set of skills. More people or groups of people require different skills and require cooperation among groups.
HB 2283
HB2285
HB2732 / Discussion:
HB 2283: pg 3 – Discussed consent to complete in less time than 4 yrs. & Mod. Dip, Ext. Dip or Alternative Cert.
HB2285 pg. 2 Questions were asked as to who makes determination (line 20) and who determines student is not capable??
HB2732: PG.1 LINE 23 - Concerns raised by members about students filing forms - it could be very expensive for the state and another burden on already over-burdened taxpayers in a very poor economical time. In addition, such programs or educational institutions would be inundated with paper as well as allocation of staff time required to process the paperwork. / Contact your legislature if you have any problems with any of these.
Interagency / Discussion: None, out of time, meeting ended at 11:50 am.
Oregon Department of Education meetings are held in accordance with open meeting laws and accessibility requirements. If you have a disability and need assistance in order to participate in this meeting, please contact Ramona Reynolds at 503-947-5673 or 503-378-2992 (TDD).
4