INSIGHT—Winter 2013 by Texas Association of School Administrators

TEXAS ASSOCIATION OF SCHOOL ADMINISTRATORS PROFESSIONAL JOURNAL

WINTER 2013

INSIGHT Edinburg CISD Board of Trustees TASA’s 2013 Outstanding School Board

story, page 22

WINTER 2013 Volume 28

No. 4

Edinburg CISD 2013 Outstanding School Board Page 22

Featured Articles Leadership Focus

Houston’s Road to the Broad Prize

by Terry Grier Highlights how Houston ISD won its unprecedented second Broad Prize

Developing More Meaningful Definitions of College Readiness

by Michael Dahlin and John Cronin Recommends complementing traditional quantitative measures with more qualitative tools to help determine college and career readiness

Texas PTA—The Right Choice

by Kyle Ward Focuses on community and student engagement resources offered through Texas PTA

TASA’s 2013 Outstanding and Honor School Boards

by Suzanne Marchman Spotlights Edinburg CISD as Outstanding School Board in Texas; Aldine Hillsboro, Mesquite and Wortham as Honor Boards

Mastering the Art and Science of Leading

By Elizabeth A. Clark Challenges school leaders to engage in pedagogically centered leadership to effect true school transformation

The Texas Superintendent’s Bullying Primer

by David P. Thompson and Stacey L. Edmonson Examines key policy issues related to districts’ response to bullying

TSPRA Voice

Regaining Trust and Voter Support for a Bond and TRE Election

by Gustavo Reveles Shares strategies one Far West Texas district employed to conduct a successful bond/ TRE election

WINTER 2013

Officers

DEPARTMENTS TASA Fall Calendar President’s Message Executive Director’s View

5 7 9

Darrell G. Floyd, President, Stephenville ISD Alton L. Frailey, President-Elect, Katy ISD Karen G. Rue, Vice-President, Northwest ISD Jeff N. Turner, Past President, Coppell ISD

Executive Committee Paul Clore, Gregory-Portland ISD, 2 Vicki Adams, Palacios ISD, 3 Trish Hanks, Friendswood ISD, 4 Shannon Holmes, Hardin-Jefferson ISD, 5 Eddie Coulson, College Station ISD, 6 Fred Hayes, Nacogdoches ISD, 7 Rex Burks, Simms ISD, 8 Louis Baty, Knox City-O’Brien CISD, 9 Alfred Ray, Duncanville ISD, 10

TASA Headquarters Staff

Executive Director

Associate Executive Director, Administrative Services

Assistant Executive Director, Services and Systems Administration

Director of Communications and Media Relations

Design/Production

Johnny L. Veselka Paul L. Whitton, Jr.

Wayne Rotan, Glen Rose ISD, 11 John Craft, Killeen ISD, 12 Douglas Killian, Hutto ISD, 13 Shane Fields, Albany ISD, 14 Leigh Ann Glaze, San Saba ISD, 15

Ann M. Halstead

Robert McLain, Channing ISD, 16 Kevin Spiller, Seagraves ISD, 17

Suzanne Marchman

Kevin Allen, Iraan-Sheffield ISD, 18 Jose G. Franco, Fort Hancock ISD, 19

Anne Harpe

INSIGHT is published quarterly by the Texas Association of School Administrators, 406 East 11th Street, Austin, Texas, 78701-2617. Subscription is included in TASA membership dues. © 2013 by TASA. All rights reserved. TASA members may reprint articles in limited quantities for in-house educational use. Articles in INSIGHT are expressions of the author or interviewee and do not necessarily represent the views or policies of TASA. Advertisements do not necessarily carry the endorsement of the Texas Association of School Administrators. INSIGHT is printed by 360 Press Solutions, Cedar Park, Texas.

Kevin Brown, Alamo Heights ISD, 20 Buck Gilcrease, Hillsboro ISD, Legislative Committee Chair

At-Large Members Jodi Duron, Elgin ISD, At-Large Cheryl Floyd, Huckabay ISD, At-Large Martha Salazar-Zamora, Round Rock ISD, At-Large Nola Wellman, Eanes ISD, At-Large

Editorial Advisory Committee Darrell G. Floyd, Stephenville ISD, Chair Kevin Brown, Alamo Heights ISD John Craft, Killeen ISD Shane Fields, Albany ISD Buck Gilcrease, Hillsboro ISD Karen G. Rue, Northwest ISD Martha Salazar-Zamora, Round Rock ISD

INSIGHT

TASA Winter Calendar January 14

Budget Boot Camp

ESC Region 11, Fort Worth

Leadership for the Digital Learning Age

Alan November

ESC Region 11, Fort Worth

Leadership for the Digital Learning Age

Alan November

Austin Marriott North, Round Rock

Leadership for the Digital Learning Age

Alan November

ESC Region 4, Houston

25–26

TCWSE Annual Conference

Hilton Austin Hotel, Austin

Budget Boot Camp

Austin Convention Center, Austin

26–29

TASA 2014 Midwinter Conference

Austin Convention Center, Austin

28–29

Aspiring Superintendents Academy

Austin Convention Center, Austin

29–30

Principals Visioning Institute

Hilton Garden Inn, Austin

February 3–4

Engaging the Net Generation

Schlechty Center

DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel, Austin

4–5

Academy for Transformational Leadership

Schlechty Center

DoubleTree by Hilton Hotel, Austin

6–7

Academy for Transformational Leadership

Schlechty Center

ESC Region 7, Kilgore

Leadership for the Digital Learning Age

Alan November

ESC Region 20, San Antonio

16–19

Texas Assessment Conference

Hilton Austin Hotel, Austin

26–27

First-time Superintendents’ Academy, Session 3

Austin Marriott North, Round Rock

TASA Spring Leadership Conference

Austin Marriott North, Round Rock

March 25–26

GOODWIN-LASITER, INC.

Good News. Bad News. Concern.

PRESIDENT’S MESSAGE While the NCLB waiver Texas received from the USDE provides our school districts with some needed relief from the federal system, one of the primary requirements of the waiver is that Texas redesign its educator appraisal system and develop a new principal evaluation and support system.

he federal government recently approved Texas’ waiver request from the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation in exchange for state-developed plans to prepare all students for college and career readiness, focusing aid on students in greatest need, and support of effective teaching and leadership.We would consider that good news. However, sometimes the devil is in the details. While the NCLB waiver Texas received from the USDE provides our school districts with some needed relief from the federal system, one of the primary requirements of the waiver is that Texas redesign its educator appraisal system and develop a new principal evaluation and support system. These newly designed systems are scheduled to be implemented in the 2015-2016 school year but have yet to be developed.The most contentious piece of this change is going to be an effort by some to tie student outcomes to those evaluations—a concern. The feds did not grant Texas’ waiver request for specific provisions of NCLB as it relates to House Bill 866.We would consider that bad news because if that waiver had been granted, it would have included potential math and reading assessment relief for certain students in grades 3, 5, and 8. Another area of concern is that of the HB 5 rules developed by the State Board of Education.The intent of HB 5 was to create more flexibility for schools in an attempt to provide greater opportunities for college-ready and career-ready students.A return to the old 4x4 system, or requiring Algebra II of all students, would be contrary to the legislative intent of increased flexibility. TASA was heavily involved, along with many other educator organizations, in proposing alternatives to such efforts. HB 5 was designed in an attempt to transform the current structure and enable students to pursue their interests via diploma endorsements—a worthy, worthwhile, and necessary effort. HB 5 did not simply “revise” the old 4x4 system, it repealed the minimum graduation plan and replaced the recommended graduation plan with the foundation plan and endorsements.This provides an opportunity for school districts to listen closely to their communities, local businesses, and parents to see that appropriate endorsements are offered at their local high schools. It will be incumbent upon local districts to ensure that the SBOE decisions are implemented with rigor, flexibility, and by recognizing different student needs. During these difficult changing times in education, I urge you to: 1) become actively involved in TASA’s efforts to help students and administrators, 2) encourage another administrator or aspiring administrator who is not yet a member to join TASA, and 3) become actively involved in TASA’s School Transformation efforts by joining the School Transformation Network, participating in regional consortia work, and sharing your ideas on TASA Connect.

WINTER 2013

2014

Midwinter Conference

Austin Convention Center • Austin, TX • January 26–29, 2014

Don’t miss these important General Sessions! First General Session Monday January 27, 3:30–5 p. m.

World Class Learners: Educating Creative and Entrepreneurial Students

Yong Zhao Presidential Chair and Associate Dean for Global Education, College of Education, University of Oregon

Second General Session Tuesday, January 28, 2:30–3:45 p. m.

The State of Education: The Commissioner’s Perspective

Michael L.Williams Commissioner of Education, Texas Education Agency

Third General Session Wednesday, January 29, 9:45–11:15 a. m.

Learning in a Digital World

John D. Couch Vice President of Education, Apple

PLUS: A Three-Day Schedule of Outstanding Thought Leader and Concurrent Session Speakers

TASA Supporting Student-Centered Schools he 2014 Midwinter Conference is just around the corner, and this year’s Conference offers unparalleled professional development and networking possibilities. We are pleased to announce a special opportunity this year for teachers and content specialists to gain hands-on experience in creating, distributing and using digital content in a one-day Digital Content Leadership Academy to be held during the conference on Monday, January 27.

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S VIEW Please join us at the 2014 TASA Midwinter Conference and learn more about the outstanding work going on in school districts across the state, hear from experts that challenge the status quo with innovative ideas, and take advantage of this great networking opportunity.

MIDWINTER

This academy is designed to expand the state’s growing cadre of teachers proficient in digital content creation. Participants will hear from a panel of superintendents who have implemented iTunes U courses and educators who actually created the TASA on iTunes U course content. Participants will break into groups based on instructional level and content area, and dive into the real work of creating online content.Those who register for this academy may also attend the entire Midwinter Conference for the special registration fee of just $50 per person. In addition to providing innovative professional development for teachers at the 2014 Midwinter Conference, we will also be debuting the TASA Innovation Zone, an opportunity for up to 15 early-stage education companies to share their products or services with a three-member panel of district-level school leaders, informing education leaders about the latest and greatest “innovations” and providing companies with meaningful input and guidance when it is most needed. While this year’s conference offers concurrent sessions that are critical to school leaders, like HB 5 implementation strategies, school safety, and finance, there will also be a special strand on school transformation which will feature sessions that highlight digital integration, flipped classrooms, ePortfolios, and presentations from district and campus leaders that have implemented the visioning principles as well as districts in the Texas High Performance Schools Consortium (THPSC). The 23 Consortium districts are working together to research, explore, develop and implement an assessment and accountability framework that is not over-reliant on highstakes testing and meets the needs of urban, suburban, and rural communities. Even though schools, teachers, and parents received some relief from changes made to the testing and accountability system this session, it is imperative to expand this work statewide and to learn with other districts that are engaged in similar transformation work. To that end, the THPSC is inviting other districts to join in the transformation work as Consortium Associates and partner with the Consortium members as we expand this statewide effort. As a Consortium Associate, your district will have the benefit of learning with innovative leaders committed to the vision principles and to creating futureready students. Please join us at the 2014 TASA Midwinter Conference and learn more about the outstanding work going on in school districts across the state, hear from experts that challenge the status quo with innovative ideas, and take advantage of this great networking opportunity.

WINTER 2013

Houston’s Road to the Broad Prize by Terry Grier

he best hitters in baseball will tell you they never step up to the plate trying to hit a home run. Instead, they concentrate on fundamentals with the expectation of consistently making solid contact with the ball.When you do that, sometimes the ball goes out of the park. That’s the approach that our Board of Education and staff take to teaching children in the Houston Independent School District. For years, we have remained focused on the proven strategies for raising the level of academic achievement for students from all backgrounds. We recruit—and do our best to retain—teachers with a track record of getting the most out of their students, and then we give them relevant professional development. We hire tutors to work with students who have fallen behind, and we give them extra class time in the subjects giving them the most trouble. We believe all students, if properly prepared, can handle college-level Advanced Placement classes and we expect them to take AP exams. This fundamental approach to teaching is the reason why Houston students are achieving at a level that earned Houston ISD the 2013 Broad Prize for Urban Education. It takes dedication and hard work—from students and teachers, from principals and staff, from every member of Team HISD—to bring home the most coveted award in public education and the $550,000 in scholarships that come with it.

The Broad Prize for Urban Education, established in 2002, is the largest education award in the country given to school districts. Houston ISD was the first Broad Prize winner in 2002, and now becomes the only distirct to have won the award twice.

More specifically, it takes strong, year-upon-year improvement.The Broad Prize is awarded annually to the district that consistently demonstrates the greatest overall improvement in student performance while at the same time reducing achievement gaps among low-income and minority students. This prize isn’t designed to praise districts that are already good. Its purpose is to honor districts that aim to become great. At the Houston Independent School District, that’s our mission. And it’s why we were the first district to win the Broad Prize twice—first in 2002 and again in 2013.

The 75 largest school districts across the country are eligible for consideration for a Broad Prize, and nominations are not accepted. From that group, four finalists are selected by a review board that studies state assessments; achievement gaps; demographic data; graduation and participation rates; and results for college-level SAT, ACT, and Advanced Placement exams.

INSIGHT

Broad Prize officials pointed to Houston’s efforts to boost student success, close achievement gaps, and ensure our students are better prepared for their future—whether that be college or a career—as the key reasons why we were awarded the 2013 Broad Prize. Despite a new, more rigorous achievement test introduced in 2012 and a student body that is 80 percent economically disadvantaged, we exceeded expectations in elementary, middle, and high school math and science; and in elementary and middle school reading. From 2009 to 2012, significant growth was reported in the proportion of Hispanic students at the advanced level in math and science. Among urban districts nationwide, HISD had the highest SAT participation rate—generally for all students, and specifically for Hispanic and African American students. We also had the highest increase in the number of students taking Advanced Placement exams. Between 2009 and 2012, the average annual increase in the number of Hispanic students taking the exams was five times greater than the average among other urban districts. We’re closing the achievement gap. When looking at students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, we’ve cut the gap in half in high school math and science, and nearly that much—40 percent—in middle school math and science. We’ve cut the gap by the same amount in the same areas for our Hispanic students.

There is more to our students’ success than just numbers. We were lauded by the Broad Prize Foundation for our exemplary student achievement practices. They pointed to our efforts to truly invest in our teachers and principals, and our emphasis on professional development and accountability. We want our employees to do well so we provide them with the tools and opportunities they need to be successful. We also hold them accountable. Everyone is expected to improve. We retain and reward those whose students are making strong academic progress, and we exit those teachers who are not getting results. Over the past three years, HISD’s teacher retention rate among those whose students make two years of academic progress in just one year is about 90 percent. Meanwhile, we have exited from our district more than 500 teachers whose students did not learn the necessary skills. We offer extensive professional development and mentoring for our employees. Teacher evaluations are linked to student performance and bonuses are paid to top personnel. This puts an emphasis on self-examination. Teachers regularly analyze data to determine the effectiveness of their instructional strategies and then share their findings with their counterparts.

We also invest resources where they are needed. In 2010, we launched the Apollo 20 program which called for longer school days and intensive tutoring at our lowestperforming campuses. We recently learned Also impressive: our graduation rate increased that the program has cut in half the math by 12 percentage points from 2006 to 2009, achievement gap at secondary schools and is which is twice as fast as other urban districts on track to eliminate the math achievement gap at the elementary level in three years. around the country.

The foundation also praised HISD for our efforts to ensure all students are college and career ready. We know that our success depends on the success of our students.We’ve opened graduation labs, twilight high schools, and door-to-door campaigns in an effort to get our students in school and graduated.The programs are working. Our graduation rate is 78.8 percent—higher than it’s ever been. We also offer a slate of college-readiness programs designed to ensure that our students are not just thinking about college, but prepared to enroll and graduate. We have a variety of dual-enrollment programs that allow students to complete their high school coursework while also earning college credit. The Futures Academy program, in particular, offers high school students the chance to earn industry certifications, college credit, and even an associate’s degree in a high-wage, high-demand field. We offer the PSAT free to all sophomores. For juniors, the SAT is offered free and during the school day to ensure all students have access to the test.As a result, the number of Houston students taking the SAT has doubled since 2007. We also place a strong emphasis on Advanced Placement exams. Each high school in HISD offers at least 15 AP courses and the district pays for students to take the accompanying exam. At HISD, we believe every child can be successful, no matter their background or circumstances.We may not be able to control what happens at home, but we can control what happens in the classroom.That is where we put our focus, and sometimes we manage to knock the ball out of the park. n Terry Grier, Ed.D., is superintendent of the Houston Independent School District.

WINTER 2013

South Belton Middle School, Belton ISD

Gilliam Academy, Dallas ISD

Gloria Marshall Elementary, Spring ISD

McMillen High School, Plano ISD

McCoy Elementary, Georgetown ISD

Lytle Middle School, Lytle ISD

We believe in the profound impact education has on an individualâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s life and society as a whole. In support of this belief, we are dedicated to designing environments that inspire, support and promote the discovery and exchange of knowledge through our commitment to learning, stewardship and craft.

Developing More Meaningful Definitions of College Readiness by Michael Dahlin and John Cronin ne of the authors of this article (the much, much older one) has two daughters in college: one a civil engineering major (and music minor), and the other one a business major (with a theater minor).When not complaining about the drain they impose on his bank account, the father brags incessantly about how well prepared his daughters were for the college experience. And while, in many respects, the academic preparation of these two young women was similar, they have profoundly different interests and courses of study. After all, being ready to study what’s needed to start and run a business is, in many aspects, different from the knowledge and skills needed to meet the license requirements for civil engineering.Thus for these two young women, and for most students, what it means to be college ready has a unique definition. Nevertheless, educational policy makers have gravitated to the concept of “college and career ready” primarily as a response to the relatively low proficiency standards associated with No Child Left Behind. And for purposes of simplicity, it’s become fashionable to associate the college portion of readiness with performance at the benchmark level on either the ACT or SAT admission test (for the ACT a score of 18 in English, 21 in Reading, 22 in Mathematics, and 23 in Science; for the SAT a combined score of 1550 on theVerbal, Math, and Writing portions). Students demonstrating the ACT benchmark are reliably projected to pass introductory college courses in English, social science, mathematics, and science (ACT, 2013). Students demonstrating the SAT readiness benchmarks are projected to have a 65% probability of achieving a first year GPA of 2.67 or higher (College Board, 2011). While a single definition of proficiency may provide one general indicator of a school’s performance relative to an arguably low bar of college readiness, this one-size-fits-all definition is not going to be helpful to students, teachers, and parents.A single benchmark doesn’t account for real differences that exist across colleges and fields of study, and admissions tests do not assess many of the key skills and strategies needed to compete in college and ultimately the workforce.As a result, we recommend that school systems complement traditional quantitative measures with more qualitative tools to help students and their families best determine what it means to be prepared for their particular aspirations for either college or career.

Quantitative Definitions While admissions tests are not definitive indicators of college readiness, they continue to play a role in the admissions process. In Texas, particularly, where state laws (TEC 51.803 through 51.809) require all enrolling college students to demonstrate one of several specified “college readiness” metrics, the benchmarks provided by ACT and SAT are particularly convenient. Nevertheless, merely achieving the ACT or SAT college readiness benchmarks is no guarantee that the student has met even the basic admissions cut score for state universities or selective private schools. Table 1 shows the published composite ACT and SAT college readiness benchmarks in relation to the average scores for five of the largest universities in Texas.The average student admitted to each institution achieves admissions scores that are considerably higher than the established benchmarks. Equally important, however, is the information that can be gleaned by evaluating the average admissions scores achieved by students who intend to pursue various majors. For an aspiring computer programmer, for example, where one stands relative to peers pursuing that major is as important as where one stands relative to an admissions cut score.Table 2 summarizes this information for the 20 most common intended majors identified by students on

WINTER 2013

Table 1. College Readiness Benchmarks and Average ACT and SAT Scores for Five Texas Universities Name of University Texas A & M University of Texas at Austin Texas Tech Texas State University at San Marcos Baylor University College Readiness Benchmarks

Average Composite ACT Score 27 28 24 23 27 21

Average Composite SAT Score 1215 (Verbal and Math Only) 1859 1653 1555 1823 1550

Source:Average ACT and SAT scores obtained from http://colleges.findthebest.com/). Note: ACT composites are the unweighted averages of the subject area scores, whereas SAT composites are the sums of the subject area scores.

Table 2. Average Student SAT Score by Intended College Major Intended College Major

Sample Size

Critical Reading

Mathematics Writing

Composite

Social Sciences

23764

574

558

559

1691

English

20278

587

532

572

1691

Physical Sciences

17933

558

588

540

1686

Foreign Language

10025

572

545

562

1679

Mathematics

14001

522

606

522

1650

Liberal Arts

15219

559

539

549

1647

Biological Sciences

78311

544

560

536

1640

108389

531

587

516

1634

History

17528

545

516

1577

Communications

43225

524

506

520

1550

Computer Science

31164

510

539

486

1535

Visual and Performing Arts

97709

513

501

503

1517

Legal Studies

40256

511

506

499

1516

Architecture

25761

492

536

487

1515

152679

490

523

487

1500

64174

505

492

496

1493

239207

489

503

485

1477

81056

481

486

477

1444

9852

448

474

439

1361

Engineering

Business Psychology Health Professions Education Recreation and Fitness

Source: Average SAT by Intended Major from College Board, 2010. Note: while the composite benchmark is 1550, the individual subject area benchmarks are 500.

INSIGHT

the SAT questionnaire.The shaded portion of the table shows all disciplines in which the average subject score or composite score of students pursuing the major is at or above the SAT college readiness benchmark (500 for subject areas, 1550 for composite scores). For many majors, a student who just met the SAT college readiness benchmark would be in the lower half of all students intending to pursue that discipline. The bolded examples illustrate some interesting differences in subject area performance among students. For example, liberal arts students pursuing an English major have much higher composite scores than their peers who are pursuing business degrees, and while you’d expect English majors to have high reading aptitude, they also score relatively highly in mathematics, too. Similarly, engineering majors, as expected, have high math scores, but they also perform above average in reading.And while business and psychology majors achieve scores near

the college readiness benchmark, a student achieving those scores might struggle to compete in majors like English and engineering. Further, the secondary level coursework necessary to prepare a student for college study in engineering would likely be entirely different than the coursework necessary to prepare a student intending to major in psychology.This highlights a major shortcoming associated with composite measures of college readiness: there are no single quantitative measures of college readiness that are accurate for all colleges and all courses of study.

Qualitative Definitions While quantitative definitions of college readiness may be easier to assess and to report, such measures primarily reflect academic achievement. Additional skills and traits, however, play critical roles in a student’s likely success in college or in a career. For example, David Conley (e.g., Conley, 2012,

2013) outlines and describes what he calls Four Keys to College/Career Readiness, which include cognitive strategies (“Think”), content knowledge (“Know”), transition knowledge/skills (“Go”), and learning skills/techniques (“Act”), as shown in Figure 1. Under Conley’s framework, Key Cognitive Strategies (“Think”) are ones that a student must employ when doing college assignments. These include the ability to formulate and test hypotheses, apply problem-solving strategies, identify and gather relevant sources of information, make sense of multiple or conflicting viewpoints, and produce output using a variety of formats. Conley’s Key Content Knowledge (“Know”) refers to the academic content that all students must know in order to succeed in college.This is the key that most

Figure 1. Conley’s Four Keys to College and Career Readiness

“Think”

“Know”

Key Cognitive Strategies

Key Content Knowledge

Formulating Hypotheses

Core Subject Masteries

Problem Solving

Specific Career Skills

Synthesizing Information

“Go”

“Act”

Key Transition Knowledge and Skills

Key Learning Skills and Techniques

Preparing for College

Motivation/”Ownership”

Navigating Financial Aid

Time Management

Managing Daily Life in Post-secondary Environment

Progress Monitoring

Note: Figure adapted from (Conley, 2012)

WINTER 2013

Dream it. Do it.

What will you do with Centricity2 ? ™

Put the power of community at your ﬁngertips

Find out how Schoolwires® Centricity2 website and content management system can help you connect your entire district to the people, information and services you need to succeed. schoolwires.com

CENTRICITY2 & WEB HOSTING SERVICES

E-RATE ELIGIBLE

closely resembles the academic achievement typically captured within standardized tests such as ACT and SAT. However, Conley specifically includes technical content areas that pertain to success within specialized career fields. Such specialized knowledge may not necessarily be captured within standardized tests of academic achievement. Key Transition Knowledge and Skills (“Go”) refer to practical knowledge that makes it easier to adjust to life in college or the work world. Specifically, these include understanding what courses to take in high school to best prepare for college-level work, understanding the process of obtaining financial aid, and knowledge of how dayto-day life changes after high school.While critical, Conley argues that students from traditionally disadvantaged groups are least likely to possess these practical skill sets, decreasing the likelihood that they may succeed. Conley’s Key Learning Skills and Techniques (“Act”) refer to two general categories or attitudes: student “ownership” in the learning process, and learning techniques. Student ownership refers to behaviors associated with motivation, such as setting and monitoring progress towards specific goals, or seeking additional help when necessary. Learning techniques refer to the ability to manage time, memorization skills, and technology (e.g., computer) skills.

provides evidence of Conley’s “Act” domain. References These kinds of activities complement standardized tests and conventional teacherACT (2013). ACT profile report – made assessments. national: Section IV, career and educational aspirations. Retrieved from http://www. Comprehensive Definition act.org/newsroom/data/2013/pdf/profile/ The development of a comprehensive set Section4.pdf. of metrics for identifying college/career readiness would be a great boon for parents ACT (2013, September).What are the ACT and college-bound students. Many schools college readiness benchmarks? Retrieved routinely capture quantitative measures from http://www.act.org/research/ like college admissions scores and results policymakers/pdf/benchmarks.pdf. of Advanced Placement tests. However, these benchmarks don’t always account for College Board (2010). 2010 college-bound differences across schools or across specific seniors total group profile report. Retrieved fields of study, so students who meet these from http://cdn3.joshuakennon.com/ general benchmarks may not actually possess wp-content/uploads/2011/12/2010-totalthe necessary training or content knowledge group-profile-report-cbs.pdf. appropriate to their aspirations.Additionally, as Conley identifies, many of the strategies, College Board (2011). SAT benchmarks: attitudes, and practical knowledge critical to Development of a college readiness success in college are not assessed within the benchmark and its relationship to standard measures. secondary and postsecondary school performance. Retrieved from http:// Augmenting the quantitative measures research.collegeboard.org/sites/default/ already collected by schools with as many files/publications/2012/7/researchreportof the qualitative measures as feasible would 2011-5-sat-college-readiness-benchmarkconstitute a large step forward for many secondary-performance.pdf. schools. Conley (2012) provides a behavioral checklist for the salient skills and strategies Conley, D.T. (2012, May). A complete identified under his paradigm, and many of definition of college and career readiness. them could be directly assessed within the Educational Policy Improvement Center. school setting. In particular, his Key TranRetrieved from http://epiconline.org/ sition Knowledge and Skills (e.g., how to Issues/college-career-readiness/definition. apply for financial aid) would be particudot. larly important to evaluate within students from traditionally disadvantaged groups, Conley, D.T.(2013). Getting ready for since deficits in these skill sets are unlikely college, careers, and the common core: what to be made up outside of school. Assessing every educator needs to know. San Francisco, students for these skills, and then providing CA: Jossey-Bass. training where shortfalls are identified may go a long way towards increasing the likelihood of college success. n

Conley’s framework for defining college/ career readiness presents a thoughtful, more holistic conceptualization of the skills, content knowledge, motivation, and social support necessary to succeed in college or in the workforce. These concepts can be difficult to assess and report in a standardized way, but they are so instrumental to students’ success that they should absolutely be a focus in school and classroom. For example, classroom teachers can design projects and tasks that assess the student’s ability to demonstrate Conley’s “Think” domain, Michael Dahlin is Senior Research Scientist and a student’s ability to engage and persist and John Cronin is Director, Kingsbury through a complex, long-term project Center, Northwest Evaluation Association.

WINTER 2013

Texas PTA The Right Choice by Kyle Ward his past legislative session was a busy one for school leaders and parents. Parents and educators came together like never before to work for education reform that makes sense for students. Texas PTA advocated for changes to high school graduation requirements and a reduction in the number of state-mandated assessments students must take, and sought a broadening beyond test scores of the snapshot the state takes of our schools.

Texas PTA + School Leaders = Positive and Meaningful Community and Student Engagement

We’re busy now, as I am sure you are, working with members of the State Board of Education to ensure that rules adopted for the new graduation requirements respect the intent of the Texas Legislature. It was clear that legislators want to give high school students more choices with regard to the courses that may be taken for endorsements and for advanced courses.Texas PTA is sending a clear message to SBOE members that students need relevant, rigorous choices. A one-size diploma does not fit all. We are also excited about the new community and student engagement self-evaluation that schools will begin conducting this year. It’s a step in the right direction toward acknowledging that parent and community engagement in schools is a key component of students’ academic success. And it is an acknowledgement that schools should be evaluated on more than student test scores. PTAs offer many programs to engage parents, students, and the community in the life of your school. That is what Texas PTA does best—it empowers parents to be involved in their children’s school experience and encourages students to explore their interests through various programs we sponsor. You may not even be aware of the depth of programming that can be accessed with a phone call or email to Texas PTA. All the resources that Texas PTA has developed are available to PTA schools for the asking. Here are a few examples:

INSIGHT

Reflections Art Program

Proven Family Engagement Strategies

Healthy Lifestyles Resources

Schools of Excellence Recognition

Driver Safety

Father Engagement Resources

Bullying Prevention

Leadership Development

Free Parent Education Programs

Emerging Leaders Academy

Green-School Environmental Resources

Student Engagement through PTSA

Clean School Bus Grant Program

Scholarships for Students and Faculty

www.txpta.org

In addition,Texas PTA is developing a toolkit that may be used by local schools and ISDs as they develop criteria this year to evaluate community and student engagement. Our toolkit will provide a list of questions that may be used in developing your district’s criteria for evaluation. It will also provide a list of programs, activities, and initiatives that PTAs all across the state provide to parents, teachers, and students, designed to improve the educational experience for our students.

Sample Texas PTA Toolkit Questions n

Does your campus host a CATCH night to promote health awareness?

Does your district participate in “Principal for a Day” program?

If you are a PTA school or school district, these materials are easily accessed through your local PTA leadership and the Texas PTA website, www.txpta.org. If your school or district is not affiliated with Texas PTA and you would like to learn more about becoming a PTA school, please contact Mary Jo Burgess, director of Member Services, 512-320-9821. To learn more about the Texas PTA Toolkit for Evaluating Community and Student Engagement, reach out to your local PTA board or contact Texas PTA, 512-476-6769 or 800-TALK-PTA. In the meantime, here are a few steps to get you started: n

Invite your local PTA leaders to participate on the local committee that will develop the criteria for evaluation.

Does your campus participate in the PTA Reflections program?

Identify the parent, community, and student engagement activities utilized at each campus.

Does your district have a community advisory committee or ask for community members to serve on district committees?

Identify measures of success for each activity.

Does your district offer an ISD leadership class?

Discuss ways to increase engagement and set goals, identifying new programs and activities to offer.

Does your campus participate in a community garden program, or other service project (Blue Santa, collecting canned goods) benefitting a local non-profit?

Does your campus/district have internship programs with local businesses?

Kyle Ward, CAE, is executive director of Texas PTA.

The new community and student engagement evaluation is a step in the right direction toward acknowledging that parent and community engagement in schools is a key component of students’ academic success.

WINTER 2013

You’re Building a Legacy.

Early Dallas ISD leaders sought a higher benchmark for “Woodrow,” the district’s fifth high school. Their bold investment has yielded both Heisman Trophy winners and esteemed scholars, and has served as a model through changing times.

Your guidance shapes your students’ lives for generations. Their impact and achievements are your legacy. Naturally, your ethic extends to the quality of teaching spaces and the choice of proven materials to build them.

Quiet masonry schools encourage learning. They are low-maintenance, and easily adapted, unlike less versatile ICF and tilt-up systems. For helpful contacts and resources, please visit TexasMasonryCouncil.org or call (254) 300-4544.

Woodrow Wilson High School Dallas ISD, built 1928 Architect Mark Lemmon

TAPE members receive the following benefits:

The Texas Association of Partners in Education TAPE provides resources and tools that enable schools, businesses and communities to build partnerships for K-12 student success.

Resources – Members have access to practical resources and tools through training programs, publications, online media, and workshops that enhance partnership programs. Relationships – Members share experiences and best practices with colleagues to gain ideas and get support through forums, events, social media, and online resources. Recognition – Member news and accomplishments are highlighted on TAPE’s website, in e-newsletters, and through social media and statewide awards. Reach – Members can grow professionally by serving on TAPE committees and the Board of Directors and by conducting presentations on behalf of TAPE.

(512) 473-8377

Join Online and Receive 10% off your Membership for 2014!

www.tape.org

WINTER 2013

Edinburg CISD TASA’s 2013 Outstanding School Board by Suzanne Marchman he board of trustees from Edinburg Consolidated Independent School District was named the 2013 Outstanding School Board at the 53rd annual TASA/TASB Convention in Dallas. The Texas Association of School Administrators annual School Board Awards Program recognizes outstanding Texas school boards for their commitment to their students and their communities. Edinburg CISD was selected from among five school board finalists, including Aldine, Hillsboro, Mesquite and Wortham. Each finalist was interviewed by a committee of Texas school superintendents, chaired by the superintendent of last year’s Outstanding School Board winner, James Ponce of McAllen ISD. The selection committee’s decision is based on several criteria, including the board’s support for educational performance, support for educational improvement projects, commitment to a code of ethics, and maintenance of harmonious and supportive relationships among board members. “The Edinburg school board exhibits an unwavering commitment to its students, setting high expectations while providing the tools, technology, support and safety they need to be empowered to succeed,” said Ponce.“This board establishes programs and policies to benefit all students–from International Baccalaureate to dropout recovery to student safety programs– making Edinburg truly an honor board for all of Texas to emulate.” Members of the Edinburg board erupted into cheers when it was announced at the annual TASA/TASB Convention that they were the 2013 Outstanding Board. The ECISD trustees include: Juan “Sonny” Palacios, Jr. (President), Dr. Martin Castillo (Vice President), Jaime R. Solis (Secretary), Jaime R. Chavana, Carmen González, Robert Peña, Jr., and David Torres.

INSIGHT

“Opinions may vary among Board members, and disagreements may arise at different times, but ultimately the Board makes decisions in the best interests of our students, employees and taxpayers. In the end, we are all united because we are advocates for the children and for the betterment of our community,” said board member Castillo. The Edinburg board oversees a district that encompasses 945 sq. miles or two-thirds of Hidalgo County. The district has 34,000 students and a staff of over 4,500 employees, of which approximately 2,500 are teachers. Superintendent Dr. René Gutiérrez said,“Edinburg CISD Board of Trustees is a dedicated and highly-effective group of individuals whose leadership has created an outstanding education system in Edinburg. They know and understand the importance that a well-rounded education makes in preparing youth to be the next generation of leaders.” The board was honored on November 5 in a special ceremony at RobertVela High School in Edinburg.With more than 500 supporters in attendance to cheer them on, the ECISD board members were recognized by state and local leaders for their commitment and service to their students, district and community. TASA’s executive director Dr. Johnny Veselka presented each trustee with a special plaque recognizing Edinburg as the 2013 Outstanding School Board in Texas. Since 1971, this prestigious program has honored school boards that have demonstrated dedication to student achievement and that make every effort to put students first. It’s not too early to begin the process of nominating an outstanding school board for this esteemed award.Any Texas superintendent who is a member of TASA and who has been serving in his/her current position since at least July 1, 2012, may nominate his or her board. School boards nominated must have served during the school year immediately preceding the awards program. Detailed information about the School Board Awards Program and selection criteria are available on TASA’s website at www.tasanet.org. n

Suzanne Marchman is Director of Communications and Media Relations,Texas Association of School Administrators.

WINTER 2013

TASA School Board Awards Program TASA created the School Board Awards Program in 1971 to recognize school boards whose dedication and ethical service have made a positive impact on the schoolchildren of Texas. The award criteria emphasize evidence of support for educational performance improvement.

2013 Honor Boards The five Honor Boards for 2013 are Aldine ISD, Edinburg CISD, Hillsboro ISD, Mesquite ISD, and Wortham ISD. During the 2013 TASA/TASB Convention held in Dallas, a committee of superintendents interviewed each of the five Honor Boards, and from those named Edinburg CISD the 2013 Outstanding School Board. See related article and photos, page 22.

The program allows each regional Education Service Center to submit up to two nominations for state competition, one from districts with fewer than 1,000 students and one from districts with more than 1,000 students. Of the regional nominees from across the state, five are named Honor Boards, and of those, one is named TASAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Outstanding School Board of the year. All regional nominees and Honor Boards are recognized at the annual TASA/ TASB Convention. The 2014 awards will be presented at the convention in Dallas, September 26-28, 2014. Hillsboro Independent School District Board of Trustees Dr. Chris Teague, President Lupe Mancha,Vice President Karen Smith, Secretary Norman Baker,Trustee Gregg Hill,Trustee John Sawyer,Trustee Jamie Siddons,Trustee Nominated by Buck Gilcrease, Superintendent

INSIGHT

Aldine Independent School District Board of Trustees Merlin D. Griggs, Sr., President Steve Mead,Vice President Dr.Viola M. Garcﾃｭa, Secretary Dr. Alton Smith, Assistant Secretary Rose ﾃ」alos,Trustee Rick Ogden,Trustee Jose Palacios, Jr.,Trustee Marine Jones, Former Trustee (retired January 2013) Nominated by Dr. Wanda Bamberg, Superintendent

Mesquite Independent School District Board of Trustees Robert Seward, President Phil Appenzeller,Vice President Christina Hall, Secretary Gary Bingham,Trustee Kevin Carbo,Trustee Archimedes Faulkner,Trustee Dr. Cary Tanamachi,Trustee Nominated by Dr. Linda Henrie, Superintendent

Wortham Independent School District Board of Trustees James Sessions, President Tadd Dunnahoe,Vice President Doug Miller, Secretary Brent Jones,Trustee Jeff Jones,Trustee Billy Pﾃｩrez,Trustee Sam Wright,Trustee Nominated by Dr. Bruce Tabor, Superintendent

WINTER 2013

The Leadership and Learning Center®

Align Instruction to TEKS and Prepare Teachers and Students for Success The Leadership and Learning Center’s Rigorous Curriculum Design process is extremely valuable and highly cost effective for any school or district creating new curriculum. Educators learn how to create instructional units of study aligned to the standards through a clear, step-by-step process that is easily replicated across the organization. This predictable process can be applied to one or more content areas and offers a cost-effective option versus “do-it-yourself” processes that can have unpredictable timelines and results.

Why Work with Us? If you’re ready to engage and implement real and lasting improvement in your educational practice, we are the partner for you. Our onsite Professional Development, implementation support, and coaching services empower your team with the practices and processes that deliver sustainable increases in student achievement. Let’s start today!

Contact Craig Hampton 512.925.9436

leadandlearn.com The Leadership and Learning Center® is a registered trademark of Advanced Learning Centers, Inc. © Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved. Printed in the U.S.A. 10/13 MS90536

craig.hampton@hmhco.com

Mastering the Art and Science of Leading by Elizabeth A. Clark he most important role of a campus leader is to select and hire the best teachers. The second most important role is to continuously develop those teachers to improve his or her craft.The core work of the teaching and learning enterprise is in the classroom.Thus, every classroom teacher needs to be masterful in his or her craft.What does that mean for the school leader (i.e. the principal)? This article examines the art and science of masterful teaching and how effective leaders must grow and develop teachers so that every single classroom is led by a highly skilled and extremely motivated teacher.

Masterful Teaching In the book, “Never Underestimate Your Teachers,” (2013) Robyn Jackson emphasizes that effective teaching requires both skill and will. That is, teachers must possess and apply deep pedagogical and content knowledge and demonstrate the ability and desire necessary to ensure that students learn. She describes in great detail what is involved in pedagogical content knowledge as well as how teacher attitude impacts learning outcomes. By studying Jackson’s numerous charts and illustrations, one begins to see that masterful teaching consists of an intricate mixture of skill and will. In order to cultivate these critical teacher attributes, principals need to diagnose where teachers are in their professional journey toward mastery and prescribe appropriately as they use coaching strategies to develop each and every teacher. One of the more interesting aspects of Jackson’s work is the development of what she calls the Will/Skill Matrix (2013, p.15). This particular chart provides clarity regarding the professional development needs of teachers when examining major attributes of masterful instruction. Jackson even provides a chart that principals can use which include aspects of effective teaching or considerations, key questions, and indicators of high skill and high will. If principals will use such information it would be more likely that they could effectively coach and guide teachers toward achieving mastery levels in their teaching. Another useful tool presented by Jackson (2013, p. 27) is a chart that differentiates between low-skill teachers and high-skill teachers. Principals need to be able to identify problems that teachers are experiencing and coach effectively to remedy the problems. While many principals can identify problems in the classroom, not all principals are adequately equipped in the art of coaching a low-skill or low-will teacher, experiencing instead a feeling of anxiety when anticipating conversations with teachers about instructional improvement. Such conversations require that principals ask the right questions, provide pertinent feedback, then direct teachers to the right resources or professional learning in order to provide proper support and intervention.The low-skill/high-skill chart and other tools presented by Jackson (2013) can be extremely helpful in building the capacity of the teaching staff to be more pedagogically skilled and motivated so that instruction is truly instrumental in achieving the desired student learning outcomes.

WINTER 2013

to deliver the curriculum using researchA new term that is being used to describe based best practices. Leaders need to know the ascending role of the principal is the standards and the pedagogy in order pedagogical centered leadership (Berry, 2012). In to engage teachers in meaningful dialogue view of Jackson’s (2013) description of what about the core technology of teaching and is involved in being a master teacher, it is learning as well as to help build the capacity not coincidental that leaders and researchers of the teaching staff.The term instructional are now calling for the principal to know leader is really being replaced with the the pedagogy or the craft of teaching and notion that it is not simply about teaching. learning. State accountability systems Rather, it is more about learning and the are predicated on performance-based pedagogy that produces required learning requirements. Principals as leaders of the outcomes. Do teachers actually know what system where the core work is done must the best practices are that produce optimal understand what it takes to move academic learning? If they do know this, do they performance to new heights of complexity consistently use these high-yield strategies? and rigor. A pedagogically centered leader Do they know the curricular standards well can develop teachers who also understand enough to design lessons and student tasks and can do what is required to dramatically they are aligned to the standards? How are improve teaching and learning. Leaders data used to guide instruction and provide accomplish this by establishing high timely interventions? If the teacher in the expectations and constructing systems that classroom is not equipped and cannot do promote learning. Such leaders have the all of the above with automaticity, then depth of understanding to mentor and guide the principal, as the leader of the teaching teachers to practice the craft at exemplary and learning system, must know how to intervene appropriately so that the teacher levels. becomes equipped. This is the new reality What we know is that the “principal is the that every principal must accept and become critical ingredient without which K-12 thoroughly versed in and skilled at doing. public schools cannot improve” (English, The principal can no longer simply focus 2012, p. 3). Current principal preparation on the administrative elements of managing programs need to change the emphasis a school. The primary focus must be on on management and administration to an managing the core technology/craft of emphasis on teaching and learning—the teaching and learning. central focus and requirement for improving the core work of schools. Even the term Crossroads of Leadership administrator conjures up the notion that Development the leader is about management first, when It is becoming more obvious than ever in reality, school improvement is about that in order to achieve the desired student “learning first, teaching second, and then learning that is being required with the everything else supporting those functions” new accountability standards, instructional (English, 2012, p.103). Thus, the emphasis improvements must be made. We literally has to be first and foremost on developing are standing at the crossroads. It will require pedagogical centered leaders, then to place more than simply changing schedules them in schools with the resources that are or the resources that are used. It requires necessary to provide quality educational transforming what happens in every single classroom, and it begins with every experiences for all students. teacher and principal. Schools must include The learning journey of the principal and teachers who are thoroughly grounded teacher must be concurrent and collaborative. in and knowledgeable of the pedagogical Both need to be well-grounded in the practices that cause learning to occur. In pedagogy.The teacher needs to be equipped essence, teachers are the leaders of learning.

Pedagogical Centered Leadership

INSIGHT

However, principals are the leaders of teacher leaders and must be equipped to know how to improve the learning within each classroom. This will require less emphasis on hierarchical structures and more emphasis on working within collegial and collaborative communities. Generally speaking, “poorly performing schools are usually places where not much learning is going on” (English, 2012, p. 104) and the antidote is not more management, but more focus on what produces learning. Thus, the imperative is a personal transformation of all those who work with students which is based on a more in-depth knowledge of what is required to systemically improve teaching and learning. Since we as a profession are responsible for planning and delivering work that students find engaging and will do, then we need to know and be able to do the kind of work that produces the necessary learning outcomes. Both teachers and principals must collectively work together to build systems that support a new learning platform. Professional learning communities promote such dialogue, but principals must become more intimately involved in coaching and mentoring the personal transformation of those who work with students. In order to accomplish this task, principals need to understand and focus on developing a set of performance-based requirements that will result in creating a school where teaching and learning is discussed, sought after, developed, nurtured, and perfected. This means that the principal not only knows about learning, they also know and understand the craft of teaching as a skilled professional leader.

Conclusion E. J. Hollins has written extensively about teacher and leadership preparation. Based on his work, there are some six organizing centers for a pedagogically centered leader: n

Knowledge of how humans grow and develop, which includes group-based development and cultural differences

in the home and family, which are used to inform learning; n

An intensive understanding about the learning process itself and how that understanding can be employed to enhance learning;

An extensive knowledge of discipline and domain-specific conceptual patterns and how they inform the discourse in those disciplines;

An understanding of how specific pedagogical practices are related to specific theoretical perspectives and how they are focused by and on a specific philosophical position to attain immediate and longer-term learning outcomes;

and mastery. Hollins captures the essence of what is meant by pedagogically centered leadership with this quote: An ability to maintain a strong professional identity, engage in self-directed professional growth and development, recognize characteristics and qualities of professional communities in different contexts, and work collaboratively with colleagues within a professional community to improve learning outcomesâ&#x20AC;? (2011, p. 397).

In conclusion, the fundamental issue is that schools have historically changed many things except the core instructional delivery system. If one really looked inside most classrooms today, one would find that instruction has really not changed that much. If we want different results, then that which produces n The use of a variety of assessment strategies to evaluate pedagogical the learning must change.The accountability practices, which includes the use of system is demanding that students learn at increasingly higher cognitive levels. Instrucauthentic assessment models; and tion has not caught up with that requirement. n How to connect and integrate all of In order to have students perform at higher the above to the creation of the core levels of cognition where problem solving curriculum standardsâ&#x20AC;Ś (2011, pp. and working with more complex materi395-407). als are required, then day-to-day instruction In view of the above mentioned require- must mirror those requirements.This means ments, most administrators have not been that teachers and those who lead must begin exposed to course work that would equip to orchestrate and embrace the transformathem to be strong pedagogical centered tion of every classroom if we want student leaders. This certainly provides the impetus learning to be significantly different and for principals and teachers to work collab- in alignment with what the new learning n oratively to develop pedagogical awareness requirements reflect.

Midwinter 14 Mobile

Elizabeth A. Clark, Ed.D., is Associate Superintendent of Curriculum and Instruction, Birdville ISD.

APP

Bibliography Berry, J. (2012). A continuing conversation: Educational administration programming as an instrument for education Reforms. Lanham, New York, Toronto, Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc. English, F. W., Papa, R., Mullen, C.A., and Creighton, T. (2012). Educational leadership at 2050: Conjectures, challenges, and promises. Lanham, NewYork,Toronto, Plymouth, UK: Rowman & Little field Publishers, Inc. Hollins, E. J. (2011, September/October). Teacher preparation for quality teaching. Journal of Teacher Education, 62(4), 395-407. Jackson, R. R. (2013). Never underestimate your teachers: Instructional leadership for excellence in every classroom.Alexandria,VA:ASCD.

Stay Connected 24/7 with the TASA Midwinter Conference!

The Midwinter 14 Mobile App provides easy-to-use, interactive capabilities to enhance your event experience: n

Stay informed with up-to-the-minute exhibitor, speaker, and session details

Organize your full schedule with one click

Preview exhibitors and interactively plan your exhibit hall visits

Receive important real-time communications from TASA

Follow and join in the conversation via Twitter

Rate the sessions you attend and comment on them, too

Share your event photos and experiences with the Photo Gallery

Find Austin,TX Local Places Download the Midwinter 14 Mobile App today!

Welcome to Subtext

™

The collaborative eReading program for K12 classrooms.

No matter what type of iPad® program is in place at your school, Subtext makes it easy to engage students and teachers directly in digital text. See what Subtext can do for your school this year. Contact us at support@subtext.com to set up a demo, call (800) 338-4204 for more information, or visit www.renlearn.com.

The Texas Superintendent’s Bullying Primer by David P. Thompson & Stacey L. Edmonson1 Introduction The tragedy of student bullying continues. As recently as late October 2013, an Illinois high school student committed suicide the day after watching a video about bullying at school, a video that depicted the bullied student in the video committing suicide as a result of being bullied (Johnston & Watkins, 2013). To combat increased and sometimes tragically ending incidents of bullying, many state legislatures have taken up this policy issue, and the Texas Legislature is no exception. In 2005, the legislature first required that a school district’s code of conduct prohibit bullying (Tex. Educ. Code §37.001[a][7]) and that a school district’s discipline management program include prevention of and education concerning bullying. In 2011, the legislature spoke further and required Texas school boards to, by not later than the 2012-2013 school year, adopt policies and procedures regarding bullying (Tex. Educ. Code § 37.0832 [c]). In addition, the United States Department of Education and the federal courts in Texas have commented on student bullying.This article will examine each of these issues in the following paragraphs.

How Is Bullying Defined? The Texas Legislature defines bullying as: “engaging in written or verbal expression, expression through electronic means, or physical conduct that occurs on school property, at a school-sponsored or school-related activity, or in a vehicle operated by the district and that: • has the effect or will have the effect of physically harming a student, damaging a student’s property, or placing a student in reasonable fear of harm to the student’s person or of damage to the student’s property; or • is sufficiently severe, persistent, and pervasive enough that the action or threat creates an intimidating, threatening, or abusive educational environment for a student” (Tex. Educ. Code § 37.0832 [a]). In addition, to be considered bullying, the conduct must exploit a power imbalance between the perpetrator and victim and must either substantially disrupt the school operation or interfere with the victim’s education (Tex. Educ. Code § 37.0832 [b]).

What about School District Policies & Procedures? Policies and procedures established by Texas school districts must: (1) prohibit bullying; (2) prohibit retaliation against any person “who in good faith provides information” regarding bullying incidents; (3) put in place procedures for the school district to notify the parents and/or guardians of both the victim and perpetrator of bullying in a reasonable amount of time when an incident has taken place; (4) establish actions that students should take to gain “assistance and intervention in response to” a bullying incident; (5) elaborate counseling options available to victims and perpetrators of and witnesses to bullying; (6) set out procedures for reporting, investigating, and resolving bullying incidents; (7) prohibit disciplining a victim of bullying who reasonably relies on self-defense in response to being bullied; and (8) ensure that the discipline of students with disabilities who are found to have bullied to comport with the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act and other federal laws impacting student discipline (Tex. Educ. Code § 37.0832 [c]).The district’s policy and procedures must be published annually in student and employee handbooks and the reporting procedures must be,“to the extent practicable,” posted on the district’s website. The legislature, however, remained silent on specifying bullying 1 This article is not to be construed as legal advice, which should be sought from the school district’s attorney when the district is faced with claims of bullying.

WINTER 2013

as either an offense requiring removal to a DAEP or expulsion, thereby leaving school districts discretion as to how bullying will be disciplined.

What about Transferring Students Involved in Bullying? Adding to its previous legislation extending transfer rights to school-district verified victims of bullying on parent/guardian request (Tex. Educ. Code § 25.0342 [b]), the 82nd Texas Legislature in 2011, through House Bill 1942, gave districts the discretion to transfer students who have engaged in bullying (Tex. Educ. Code § 25.0342 [b-1]). This legislation permits school districts to transfer the bullying perpetrator to another classroom on the same campus (without parent/legal guardian consultation) or to another campus in the school district “in consultation” with the parent/legal guardian. When identifying a bully, school districts are permitted to consider the alleged aggressor’s past behavior; moreover, the determination of the board or its designee as to whether the alleged victim was a victim of bullying is final and not appealable. A school district is not required to provide transportation to another campus in the district for verified victims who have received a transfer.

Has the United States Department of Education Weighed in on Bullying? While the Texas Legislature added both obligations and tools for school districts to address bullying, the United States Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights (OCR) weighed in on the issue with its release of a “Dear Colleague” letter (Ali, 2010) in October 2010. In this letter, the OCR “reminded” school officials subject to other anti-discrimination laws enforced by the OCR that, to the extent bullying is based on a victim’s membership in a class protected by these statutes (e.g., gender protected by Title IX; race, color, or national origin protected by Title VI; disability protected by Section 504), to that

INSIGHT

extent school officials’ responses to bullying are subject to the anti-discrimination (including harassment) provisions of these statutes and any accompanying regulations. To illustrate, citing its own sexual harassment guidance revised in 2001 (United States Department of Education, 2001), the OCR noted that schools subject to these statutes are “responsible for addressing harassment incidents about which [they know] or reasonably should have known,” effectively telling school districts that their negligent failure to address bullying with connotations of discrimination or harassment could lead to a finding that the educational institution is in violation of such statutes. This letter generated a great deal of concern, and in December 2010, Charlie Rose (2010), General Counsel for the National School Boards Association (NSBA), responded to the “Dear Colleague” letter by arguing, first and foremost, that OCR’s stated intent to hold educational institutions to a “knew or should have known” standard expands the scope of liability beyond that which the U.S. Supreme Court articulated with regard to student-to-student sexual harassment under Title IX in Davis v. Monroe Co. Bd. of Educ. (1999) (i.e., actual knowledge and deliberate indifference). Mr. Rose also chided the OCR for requiring institutions to take all measures to stop bullying, again expanding Supreme Court guidance that remedial actions must only be “not clearly unreasonable.” The NSBA letter expressed concern that OCR has rendered educational institutions more vulnerable to student bullying challenges beyond that which the U.S. Supreme Court envisioned in Davis. In its March 2011 response (Ali, 2011) to the NSBA’s letter, the OCR took the position that the “actual knowledge-deliberate indifference” standard elaborated in Davis only applies to cases where complainants seek monetary damages through the courts, and not to OCR’s administrative enforcement of its anti-discrimination statutes and regulations, where OCR argues that the “knew or should have known” standard should apply.

The United States DOE’s Office of Special Education & Rehabilitative Services (OSERS), in an August 2013 “Dear Colleague” letter (Musgrove & Yudin, 2013, p. 1), also made its stance known on bullying by first observing that the “bullying of a student with a disability that results in the student not receiving meaningful benefit constitutes a denial of a free appropriate public education (FAPE) under IDEA that must be remedied.” In its letter, OSERS addresses the provision of FAPE regarding two categories of students with disabilities: (1) students who are targets of bullying, and (2) students who engage in bullying. With regard to the former, OSERS asserts that schools have a duty to provide FAPE to bullied students with disabilities. Going further, OSERS maintains that schools should “convene the IEP team [the Admission, Review, & Dismissal (ARD) committee] to determine whether, as a result of the bullying, the student’s needs have changed” (p. 3) to the extent that the IEP is no longer reasonably calculated to provide the student a “meaningful educational benefit” (p. 3). If this is the case, the IEP team must determine what changes need to be made to the IEP and revise accordingly. Finally, OSERS cautions school districts to avoid changing a bullied student’s placement without good reason, particularly by placing a bullied student in a more restrictive placement to avoid contact with the bully. Any change in placement, of course, may not be unilaterally made by the school district, but as part of the ARD process. With regard to the disabled student who bullies, OSERS urges school districts to “review the student’s IEP to determine if additional supports and services are needed to address the inappropriate behavior…[and to examine] the learning environment in which the bullying occurred to determine if changes to the environment are warranted” (p. 3). Here, it is important to remember that, under Texas law, a student with a disability under IDEA who engages in bullying, harassment, and/or making hit lists may

not be disciplined for this conduct “until an admission, review, and dismissal committee meeting has been held to review the conduct” (Tex. Educ. Code § 37.001 [b-1]).

not prevail on his 14th Amendment due process claim that the defendants’ actions violated his rights to life and liberty. The court held that the due process clause protects individuals from the state only, and What Are Courts Saying about not from other private actors. The court Bullying Cases in Texas? rejected the estate’s 14th Amendment equal Texas case law regarding bullying has started protection claim, finding that the school to accumulate during the past two or so district did not treat claims of the student’s years, and this brief summary of five cases, bullying differently from bullying claims including three involving the suicides of brought by other students, nor did it treat bullying victims, may begin to illuminate bullying claims differently based on the important issues before the courts. In reverse genders of the perpetrators and the victims. chronological order (with the exception of Finally, the court dismissed the Title IX the last case), the first case is styled Estate of claim against the school district, finding no Carmichael v. Galbraith (2012), and involves evidence that the district discriminated in its a suit brought by the estate of a Joshua alleged response to the student because he Independent School District 13-year-old was male, or even that the bullying occurred middle school student who committed because the student was male. suicide in 2010 after being subjected to “relentless” bullying by classmates. The The second case also involves the suicide federal district court dismissed all claims of a middle school student, this time in the against the defendant district and teachers, Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School finding first that the deceased student could District, who allegedly was bullied both

verbally and physically, with the bullying carrying religious and sexual overtones. When the student committed suicide in September 2010, his estate brought suit against the school district and several school officials, asserting that the defendants’ inadequate response to the bullying incidents resulted in the death of their son and violated in relevant part his 14th Amendment due process and equal protection rights, as well as his rights under Title IX. In two decisions dismissing all but the Title IX claim (Estate of Brown v. Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District, 2012; Estate of Brown v. Ogletree, 2012), the federal district court again dismissed the due process claims against the defendants on the same grounds as noted in the first case, i.e., students cannot claim due process protection when injured/killed by a private actor (including oneself). With regard to the equal protection claim, the court also ruled similarly to the Estate of Carmichael case noted above by observing that the estate failed to adequately plead (1) that the district

Mathematics Grades 6-12

Choose Rigor. Achieve Readiness. SpringBoard’s 2014© Texas Edition is the College Board’s flexible curriculum framework for Mathematics.

• Rigorous instruction • Performance-based assessments • Exemplary professional development SpringBoard provides students with the knowledge and skills to meet the demands of the Texas Standards and delivers on the promise of college readiness. Learn more. Watch the overview videos online at collegeboard.org/springboard ©2013 The College Board. College Board, SpringBoard and the acorn logo are registered trademarks of the College Board.

146-595_SpringBoard_October_2013_Insertions_FNL.indd 1

10/10/13 11:10 AM

WINTER 2013

followed its bullying policies with regard to the other students while failing to follow them for the deceased student, and (2) that the district enforced its bullying policies differently for male victims than for female victims. Left standing (with no additional action to date) was the Title IX claim, with the district court finding sufficient pleadings that the school district had actual notice (through a complaint made to an assistant principal), that the district was deliberately indifferent to this knowledge (by doing nothing), that the bullying was based on sex (due to it being “overtly sexual or involv[ing] sexual innuendo”), that the sexbased bullying occurred in a context subject to the district’s control (on school premises), and that the bullying was sufficiently “severe, persistent, and objectively offensive” to deprive the student of his educational benefits. Key to this ruling was the finding that the bullying was “based on sex,” which is necessary to convert a bullying claim into a sexual harassment claim. The third bullying case involved a claim brought by the estate of a 10-year-old student with a disability who hanged himself in the nurse’s restroom in the Lewisville Independent School District after being subjected to, for lack of a better term, bullying based on his perceived sexual orientation (related to his speech impairment). The estate brought claims against the district and several school officials under the due process clause of the 14th Amendment, as well as under Section 504 and the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA). The federal district court dismissed all claims (Estate of Lance v. Kyer, 2012), beginning with the due process claim, again for the reason that the perpetrators of the bullying were private actors (students), and not the district, which does not have a constitutional due process duty to protect one student from another. The court also dismissed the Section 504 and ADA claims, essentially for the reason that there was no evidence of disability-based discrimination on the part of the defendants.

INSIGHT

stated an equal protection claim by alleging facts that the athletic director failed to admonish “similarly-situated” female student athletes for their “multi-toned” hairstyles. An equal protection claim also survived against an Anglo female high school girls’ softball coach who left with the softball team prior to the scheduled departure time, leaving behind another female AfricanAmerican student (the sister of the student discussed above) because she broke a team rule by signing out for lunch on the day of a game.The complaint survived because the student alleged facts that similarly situated female student-athletes were not disciplined for signing out for lunch on game days. Finally, the court declined to dismiss equal protection and Title VI race discrimination claims against the school district for peer race-based harassment against the children (three African-American female children from the same family). With regard to the equal protection claim against the district, the court observed that the plaintiffs alleged facts that the employee-based discrimination was the result of the board’s policy, custom, or practice of being deliberately indifferent to known incidents of race-based harassment. Finally, with regard to the Title VI studentto-student racial harassment claims (including claims that students displayed Finally, the last case involves race-based nooses in front of the plaintiffs), the court harassment, but is included in this section noted that the plaintiffs successfully alleged as illustrative of the analysis that a court facts that the school district, acting through might use in evaluating such claims. This its responsible school officials, actually knew case, styled Fennell v. Marion Indep. Sch. Dist. of and was deliberately indifferent to such (2013), concerns three African-American incidents. This case is still in litigation and students in the Marion Independent certainly bears watching. School District who alleged that they were subjected to race-based bullying dating back In summary, several trends can be gleaned to at least 2008, suffered at the hands of from the bullying cases decided to date. both students and educators.While the facts First, students seeking redress under the are too numerous to mention, the federal due process clause of the 14th Amendment district court declined to dismiss claims have been, and will likely continue to be, against the district’s athletic director under unsuccessful due to the general principle the Equal Protection Clause stemming that the due process clause does not impose from an incident where the athletic director a duty on school officials to protect one “admonished” an African-American female student from another (see, e.g., Doe v. student-athlete for her “ethnic” hairstyle. Covington Cty. Bd. of Educ., 2012). Second, The court found that the plaintiff adequately students seeking to hold school officials The fourth case involved an elementary school student in the Arlington Independent School District diagnosed with attention deficit hyperactivity disorder (ADHD) and a learning disability who claimed that he was verbally bullied by a female classmate. Complaining that the district’s only action when notified of the bullying was to move the classmate to another class, the student through his parent filed suit, alleging violations of Section 504, the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Equal Protection Clause, and Title IX. The federal district court dismissed the entire complaint (Williams-Grant v.Arlington Independent School District, 2012), finding initially that because there was no evidence that the district treated this student’s complaint differently from other “similarly situated” (i.e., other male and/or disabled) students, the student could not prevail on his equal protection claim. The ADA and Section 504 claims failed, again because the plaintiffs did not allege discrimination based on disability. Finally, with regard to the Title IX claim, the court observed that the student did not allege facts that he was bullied because he was male or that the school district’s response to the student constituted gender discrimination.

liable under the equal protection clause of the 14th Amendment must demonstrate that the school district treated their complaints of bullying differently from other similarly situated students, based on such factors as students’ gender, race, and/or disability; or the student must allege that the bullying was due to their membership in a protected class. Third, students seeking redress under disability-related statutes (e.g., Section 504 or the ADA) must allege disability-based discrimination and that school officials intentionally discriminated in their response to bullied students based on the disability of the students. Finally, students seeking to redress bullying through Title IX must allege that the bullying would not have occurred but for the gender of the student, or that the bullying had a sexual connotation; and that school officials demonstrated deliberate indifference to actual knowledge of bullying occurring in the school context. Based on the cases to date, several claims remain active

in the courts (Title IX, Title VI, and equal References protection); thus, school officials cannot turn a blind eye toward bullying any more Ali, R. (2010). Dear colleague letter: Harassment than they can turn a blind eye to student-toand bullying. Retrieved from http://www2. student sexual harassment. ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/ colleague-201010.pdf.

Conclusion

Claims of bullying in the 2000s and 2010s are similar in many ways to the onset of claims involving student-to-student sexual harassment that surfaced in the 1990s.While the claims are different, a school district and its officials are obligated to respond in a way that is not deliberately indifferent to the rights of victims of bullying. n David P. Thompson, Ph.D., is Professor, Department of Educational Leadership & Policy Studies, The University of Texas at San Antonio. Stacey L. Edmonson, Ed.D., is Professor & Chair, Department of Educational Leadership & Counseling, Sam Houston State University.

ANNOUNCING a Special Learning Opportunity for Teacher Leaders/Content Specialists at TASA’s 2014 Midwinter Conference!

Digital Content Leadership Academy January 27, 2014 • 8:30 a.m.-2 p.m. Austin Convention Center The academy is designed to empower teacher leaders and content specialists to join the state’s growing cadre of teachers and content experts proficient in digital content creation. Participating district teacher leaders/content specialists gain hands-on experience in creating, distributing, and using digital content as they walk through the basics of successful digital content implementation and build actual TASA on iTunes U® resource collections.

Ali, R. (2011). Letter to Francisco Negron. Retr ieved from http://www.nsba. org/SchoolLaw/Issues/Equity/ ED-Response-to-NSBA-GCs-Letter-toED-on-OCR-Bullying-Guidelines.pdf. Doe v. Covington Cty. Sch. Dist., 675 F.3d 849 (5th Cir. 2012). Estate of Brown v. Cypress-Fairbanks Independent School District, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 72347 (S.D.Tex. 2012). Estate of Brown v. Ogletree, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 21968 (S.D.Tex. 2012) Estate of Carmichael v. Galbraith, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 857 (N.D.Tex. 2012). Estate of Lance v. Kyer, 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 160580 (E.D.Tex. 2012). Fennell v. Marion Indep. Sch. Dist., 2013 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 109064 (W.D.Tex. 2013). Johnston, C., & Watkins, T. (2013, October 21). A day after a class on bullying, a suicide. CNN. Retrieved from http:// w w w. c n n . c o m / 2 0 1 3 / 1 0 / 1 8 / u s / illinois-suicide-sophomore/ Musgrove, M., & Yudin, M.K. (2013). Dear colleague letter: Bullying of students with disabilities. Retrieved from http:// www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/ memosdcltrs/bullyingdcl-8-20-13.pdf Rose, C. (2010). Re: “Dear colleague letter issued October 26, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.nsba.org/SchoolLaw/Issues/ Safety/NSBA-letter-to-Ed-12-07-10.pdf. Williams-Grant v. Arlington Indep. Sch. Dist., 2012 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 165277 (N.D. Tex. 2012).

Visit the TASA Midwinter Conference page on TASAnet for full academy and registration details!

WINTER 2013

‘‘

Join education’s most energetic and innovative leaders at SXSWedu to connect, collaborate, create and change how we teach and learn. 2013 Keynote: Bill Gates

The Wheeler Brothers at the 2013 Conference & Festival Party

’’

P H O T O S : J W WA LT H A L L

Thursday’s 2013 Closing BBQ

Make plans to register to attend SXSWedu 2014! Visit SXSWedu.com

2013 Registrants

TSPRA VOICE TASA joins TSPRA in supporting the critical role of public information and communications professionals in Texas public schools.

Regaining Trust and Voter Support for a Bond and TRE Election: How One Far West Texas District Did It. by Gustavo Reveles he Canutillo Independent School District in suburban El Paso County found itself in a difficult situation in the fall of 2010. Rapid growth and aging facilities forced it to seriously consider a bond election. But the impending budget slashing from the state legislature was also impacting its operational funding, which meant the district found itself also in need of a Tax Ratification Election (TRE). Now couple those conditions with the fact that voters in Canutillo had resoundingly defeated back-to-back TREs, the last one just that past spring. “We had already slashed 10 percent off of our budget by cutting programs, establishing furloughs and leaving open positions unfilled. Even after that, we were still hurting for money,” said Canutillo Associate Superintendent Annette Brigham. “Even with that sense of urgency, we knew we had a growing population and that our schools were not getting any younger,” she added. “We had a choice to make:Which one of these two elections was more important for us to take to the public?” In the end, Canutillo—with the help of a stakeholder’s committee made up of employees, parents, and business leaders—opted not for the bond OR the TREA, but for both. “We were certainly called crazy by many in the community who thought we were jeopardizing money for school programs (TRE) by also having a school bond,” Brigham said. “But administration, the stakeholders, and, thankfully, the board of trustees believed strongly that going out for both was the right thing to do. It was our only option.”

WINTER 2013

On May 14, 2011, voters in Canutillo approved both the TRE and the bond— branded as Decision Canutillo 2011—with overwhelming support and a larger-thannormal turnout at the polls.

member. “From then on, there was not a single member of the committee who did not realize that the district was hurting for money just to be on par with other districts in the region.”

Canutillo now found itself with the backing of influential members of the community who would be able to advocate for the bond and TRE in a way the district was not legally allowed to do. The committee made a recommendation to seek both the “Information,” said Martha Aguirre, bond and the TRE on the same election, Canutillo’s executive director of finance. and school board members followed their “We made it our mission to share our story recommendation. and our need with anyone who was willing to listen to us. In the end, we got through Campaign Trail Nothing about the campaign was easy. to them.” Although Canutillo had supporters in the form of the stakeholders committee, the vast Early Stages The district knew that in order to pass any majority of the voters were still skeptical. election, the trust of the voters needed The public information office developed restoring. In order to do this, a conscious an information campaign that allowed the effort was made to include the public in district to take its case to the public. In all, more than 70 meetings were set up. virtually every step of the process. How did it happen? What changed in less than a year to convince a skeptical voting populace that it should trust the district with more money than it had ever approved in the past?

A staff meeting was set up at each of Canutillo’s nine campuses to inform employees about the how and why Decision Canutillo 2011 was deemed necessary for the public to consider. These meetings served not only to inform employees— Committee members were given informa- many of who are also voters—but also to tion regarding the impact of budget cuts deputize. Employees were told what would (after-school and tutoring programs were happen if the bond passed and what could cut, and the wrestling team was dismantled). happen if the TRE failed. They also received demographic figures to show how fast and where the district was Concurrently, the district set up evening community meetings at each school to growing. inform parents and voters about Decision Lastly, committee members went on a Canutillo 2011. Again, the goal was to show comprehensive tour of facilities where they the dire need and let voters make up their not only saw the state of our campuses, but mind using the information the District was also came face-to-face with new home providing. construction they may have not been aware Meetings were also set up with newspaper of before. editorial boards, the Greater El Paso “It was eye-opening. Many of us did not Chamber of Commerce, churches, civic realize just how dire the situation was,” organizations, and virtually anyone who was said Penny Sexton, a business leader in deemed instrumental in trying to change the district and stakeholder committee the perception of the district with the public. The first step was establish a stakeholder’s committee, where parents and taxpayers would be given the right information regarding the needs of the district, both in facilities and student programing.

INSIGHT

Door Knocking Perhaps the most effective tool the district had, though, was the door-to-door canvasing the district organized each Saturday of the campaign. The district identified every voter who had voted in the last two TREs as well as in the last two school board elections using information from the El Paso County Elections Office. Canutillo concluded that these voters needed to be visited personally. A position-neutral flyer outlining the impact of the TRE and bond, as well as the tax relief the district was committing to enact if the proposals worked, was an effective way to reach those people who were not home on Saturday. Those who were home, however, received the information from passionate, caring school district employees, parents, and even students who believed in Canutillo so much that they spent their Saturday working on behalf of the district. “We didn’t reinvent the wheel. We knew this door-to-door canvassing was effective because we borrowed it from the political campaigns of people who effectively ran for mayor and congress in El Paso,” said Brigham, the assistant superintendent. “Once we got our foot in the door, we were able to show them the information we had. They could clearly see we were not asking for money that we didn’t need.”

School Board Role The Canutillo school board played an integral part in the election process. Where school administrators were limited in what they could say publicly about the election, the elected school board was free to advocate one way or another. The president of the school board hosted two breakfast meetings with constituents called “Pan Dulce Con El Presidente” (Pastries with the President) in which people were invited to stop by for a doughnut and

coffee and to hear about the bond and TRE election. “We were not trying to hide anything. We were very much up front about the election and about what our rationale was for it,” said Canutillo Trustee Sergio Coronado, who served as president of the board during the time of the election. “We had heard that keeping a low profile was the best approach, but we knew that was not the case for us.”

Success at the Polls

Canutillo a higher profile in the community In the end, the TRE passed with 57 percent as a can-do district,” Brigham said. “More of the vote and the Bond with 53 percent. importantly, however, our open and The turnout for the Canutillo election was information-driven approach helped us 17 percent, compared with a county-wide regain the trust of our community. n average of 4 percent. A much larger school district passed a much larger bond election on that day. The front page of the newspaper, however, prominently featured a large picture of Canutillo celebrating its win.

The school board was also allowed to interact more freely with other political “We did things differently and they paid leaders who lent their support to the “Yes” off for us. Not just in the polls by having both elections approved, but also by giving vote in favor of the campaign.

Gustavo Reveles is the Public Information Officer of the Canutillo Independent School District and the Far West Texas Vice President for TSPRA.

half page ad.ai 1 8/2/2013 7:50:17 AM

• Faster time to completion buildings can be manufactured and installed in under 90 days

ADVANCED MODULAR BUILDINGS for

EDUCATION FACILITIES

• Energy efficient and green building options • Multiple interior and exterior finish options • Modular and Portable Classrooms, Classroom Complexes and Campuses, Dormitories, Science & Computer Labs, Communications Labs, Restroom Buildings, Administrative Offices, Multi-Purpose Rooms, Cafeterias

Palomar Modular Buildings DeSoto, Texas Toll-Free: 866.312.4032 www.palomarmodularbuildings.com WINTER 2013

IMPROVED Academic P e Attendance rformance & Be Student He havior alth

The answer is simple. Significant research shows a link between students who eat breakfast and improved academic performance, attendance and behavior. Dairy MAX provides grants, expertise and solutions to enhance and expand school breakfast programs and support student health. • Breakfast in the Classroom • Grab ‘n’ Go Breakfast

• Second Chance Breakfast • Universal Free Breakfast

Dairy MAX is a long-time supporter of child nutrition programs. Contact your Dairy MAX representative at www.DairyMax.org

2014-15 Executive Committee Elections TASA Operating Procedures: Each nomination to the Executive Committee shall be supported by signatures of TASA members in the region, totaling a number equal to 15% of the active members in the region, but no less than five signatures.The required number shall be based on the total number of active members in the region at the end (05.31.2013) of the 2012-13 membership year. A petition may be initiated by the candidate or any TASA member in the region.

Petitions shall be in the hands of the TASA executive director not later than February 15, 2014. Each member presenting a nomination must state that the nominee is a paid-up member of the Association for the current year and that permission of the proposed nominee has been secured to offer his/her name as a candidate for election to the Executive Committee. Any active TASA member in the region, other than a paid staff

member of the Association, is eligible to sign a petition on behalf of a nominee. Eligibility Status/Petition Requirements: Current Executive Committee members in even-numbered districts are listed below with their eligibility status. Members are eligible to serve two consecutive two-year terms. Petition requirements are based on 15% (but no fewer than 5) of regional active members, 2012-13 final count.

Petition Requirements & Eligibility Region

Active Members

Signatures Required

Current Member & District

2 57

Paul Clore*, Gregory-Portland ISD

177

Mary Patricia Hanks, Friendswood ISD

111

Eddie K. Coulson, College Station ISD

Rex Burks, Simms ISD

266

Alfred L. Ray, Duncanville ISD

146

John Craft, Killeen ISD

Jay Baccus, Anson ISD

Robert McLain, Channing ISD

18 67

Kevin Allen*, Iraan-Sheffield ISD

Kevin Brown, Alamo Heights ISD

* Not eligible for re-election

Does your front office operate more like an emergency triage unit than a center for higher learning? Learn How to Work Less, Produce More, and Still Get the Job Done in a Sensible School Week with Malachi Pancoast, President, The Breakthrough Coach. It’s one of the most practical – and liberating – programs you will ever attend. UPCOMING PROGRAMS IN YOUR AREA: • January 16 & 17, 2014 - Austin, TX • June 16 & 17, 2014 - Houston, TX • June 19 & 20, 2014 - Fort Worth, TX

Management Development for Instructional Leaders (904) 280-3052

To register, visit http://www.the-breakthrough-coach.com/pages/calendar.php

TBC10.2013_TASA_7.25x4.75c.indd 1

10/4/13 9:21 AM

ad_loudcloud_insight_winter_13.pdf

loudcloudsystems.com @loudcloudsys LoudCloud Systems

11/26/13

8:46 AM

Stop by Booth #437 for a demo & a chance to win exciting prizes!

CMY

At LoudCloud, we fundamentally believe that understanding behaviors is an essential element in guiding teaching and learning. Our K-12 solutions are designed to support educators while delivering personalized paths for students.

PRESIDENT’S CIRCLE

Corporate Partners

Apple Chevron College Board Common Sense Media Dell Northwest Evaluation Association–NWEA Pearson Schoolwires SHW Group SMART Technologies PLATINUM

Amplify CompassLearning Discovery Education Edgenuity Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Indeco Sales, Inc. K12 Insight McGraw-Hill Education Organizational Health Scholastic Schoology Scientific Learning WIN Learning

TASA is grateful to our corporate partners for their support.

Each level of the Corporate Partner Program is designed to offer our partners quality exposure to association members. Partners at the President’s Circle, Platinum, and Gold levels may customize special events and opportunities.

GOLD

Creating & Managing Wealth, LLC Health Matters High STEPS Huckabee Learning Together Company LoudCloud Milliken Design, Inc. PBK SILVER

Cisco JASON Learning LTS Education Systems Reasoning Mind Renaissance Learning SchoolDude TCG Consulting BRONZE

http://www.tasanet.org/Page/233

Balfour FirstSouthwest GCA Services Group Linebarger Goggan Blair & Sampson, LLP Living Tree NextEra Energy Solutions Silverback Learning Solutions Southern Management ABM Teachscape

Presorted Standard U.S. Postage PAID Austin, TX Permit No. 1941

Texas Association of School Administrators 406 East 11th Street Austin, TX 78701-2617

IMAGINE

BUYING AND SELLING TEXTBOOKS WITH EASE.

IMPROVE

YOUR PROCESS WITH THE BUYBOARD®. The BuyBoard is your one-stop shop for purchasing non-stateadopted instructional materials (IM) and technology—already competitively procured and formatted for EMAT. The BuyBoard purchasing cooperative enables school districts to save money on the products and services they need, while streamlining the purchasing process. Get free access today!

buyboard.com 800.695.2919

TASA proudly endorses