EDUCATION OVERSIGHT BOARD MEETING MINUTES December 17, 2003 9:00 A.M. Room 512A State Capitol Building Oklahoma City, OK 73105 BOARD MEMBERS PRESENT: Kenneth Bridges, Pete Churchwell, Gerald Dickerson, Patrick Gilmore, Ed Long BOARD MEMBERS ABSENT: Ron Dryden, Don McCorkell, Sen. Penny Williams Rep. Barbara Staggs OTHER REGULAR ATTENDEES: Office of Accountability Staff: Robert Buswell, Matt Hesser, Jerry Hsieh, Leonard Hall VISITORS: Kim Brown-Senate Staff, Jim Bynum-OEA, Matt Glanville-LIN, Debbie Turlip-House Staff Call to Order and Roll Call: Mr. Long called the meeting to order at 9:08 am and declared a quorum present. Mr. Long also took this opportunity to welcome Mr. Patrick Gilmore to the board. Approval of Minutes: Minutes of the September 16, 2003 meeting were approved as submitted. Report on Transfer of Funds from State Department of Education & Year to Date Expenditures Report for FY-04: Mr. Buswell had requested an item-by-item accounting of all of the financial activity posted by the State Department on behalf of the Office of Accountability in FY-03. Buswell received the information just days before the meeting and was having difficulty making sense of it. The office records were not in agreement with the State Department of Education as to the amount of carryover at the end of FY-03. Buswell advised the board that he would get back to them with a recommendation after he had taken more time to review the information. Buswell also mentioned that it had been quiet pleasant to work with the Regents business office. They had sent him monthly statements and have been prorating various costs between the office's different programs as requested. Mr. Buswell went on to review the year-to-date expenditures with the board but indicated that until the financial information from the State Department of Education was fully understood, the present financial situation was unknown. Buswell did comment that he believed that FY-04 would be a very tight budget year for the Office of Accountability's Educational Indicators Program but the budget for the School Performance Review Program looked good. Report on the Oklahoma Educational Indicators Program: Mr. Buswell announced that much of the data had been received on time and that most things were progressing according to schedule. The only exception was data for the End-of-Instruction tests, which had not yet been received from the State Department of Education. It was Buswell's understanding that the State Department of Education had not yet received the information from the contracted testing company. It was expected that the Office would receive the data sometime later in December. Mr. Hesser stated that the Office's survey had been mailed out and that the results were coming in nicely. Mr. Hsieh reported that 68% of the surveys had been returned after only three weeks and that the Office was expecting a return rate of approximately 90 to 95%. A description of the type of questions on the survey prompted a long discussion by the board. The discussion revolved around the reporting requirements of No Child Left Behind (NCLB) and how few schools would likely have scores reported under the new law. The board directed the Office to include a short explanation of NCLB, and its impacts on state test results, to be included in the Profiles State Report. Report on the Oklahoma School Performance Review Program: Dr. Hall reminded the board that a review of Ponca City was currently underway and the first draft of the report was due the next day (December 18, 2003). Hall informed the board that 15 schools had been identified as exceeding administrative costs for the 2002-03 school year and that only four were independent school districts. There was not enough money in the School Performance Review Program's budget to review all of the schools on the list. Hall recommended that the office review Hennessey and Frontier school districts and possibly one of the smaller dependent school districts on the list. Hall felt that these schools would be the best to review based upon their size and on early cost-versus-savings expectations. Mr. Churchwell made a motion authorizing the Office of Accountability to receive and score the proposals from bidders and recommend to OSRHE the successful consulting firm for both Hennessey and Frontier with the right to refuse any or all bids. Mr. Dickerson seconded the motion and it passed unanimously. Report on the Oklahoma Statewide Testing: Mr. Hesser reported on the ACT, noting few differences from previous years. Math was the area in which Oklahoma lagged farthest behind the Nation. Students at the top of the class in Oklahoma slightly under-perform their national counterparts and students at the bottom of the class slightly out-perform their national counterparts. Oklahoma's white and Asian students lag slightly behind their national counterparts and minority students slightly out-perform their national counterparts, however, black student's performance lagged significantly behind other groups both in Oklahoma and at the National -level. Hesser went on to briefly talk about the State's SAT results and AP scores and participation rates. Report on Legislation: Mr. Buswell informed the board that the Office had been looking at making changes to the legislation that governed the Oklahoma School Performance Review Program. In particular, it was hoped that changes could be made which would allow any district to request and receive a review at zero cost to the district. New Business: Mr. Buswell distributed the calendar for the EOB meetings for the coming year that had been filed with the Secretary of State's Office. Announcements: Mr. Dickerson commended the Office of Accountability for all of the work that had been done. Mr. Long concurred and applause was offered to the staff by board members. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 10:30 a.m. The minutes of the December 17, 2003 Meeting of the Education Oversight Board were approved as submitted on February 18, 2004